User talk:The Determinator

Hello CapMan07008. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Madlamark skole, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Doesn't seem to exist in Norwegian, at least not at the link in the speedy nomination. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 16:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it must've been deleted. I remember checking it. Thanks for letting me know. The Determinator p t c 17:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I know what happened! :) It's here: no:Madlamark Skole (with capital 'S') I will remark it. with CSD this time with capital s. Thanks. The Determinator p t c 17:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

OK that makes sense. Tis gone. ϢereSpielChequers 17:13, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Francis Bacon with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rinkle gorge (talk) 03:55, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I reverted the vandalism using wp:igloo and you reverted mine, lol... This is when we are fighting vandalism too hard. The Determinator p t c 03:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for patrolling new pages, a tedious but essential task. When you find a foreign-language article like Faarax Gaarane Faatule, WP:CSD#G1 is not the right tag to use: the definition of that specifically "excludes poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism and hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material." There is advice on what to do at WP:NPP#Dealing with foreign language new pages. This was a difficult one because it was in a language (Somali) that Google Translate can't yet cope with, but it was reasonably clear that it was an NN autobio, and I deleted it under WP:CSD#A7. There is a useful set of templates, some of them bilingual, at WP:PNT/T, that can be used to point foreign-language contributors to their native WP. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Lana Del Rey, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The name of the place is....-Babylon-5-> 14:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you post the link to the diff for which you are giving me such a harsh warning. Thank you. The Determinator p t c 14:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem, it was a | BLP violation. It read in part:

Del Rey was born Elizabeth Grant in New York City and grew up in LANAREYDELMAR IS A [** READACTED**] (MEMES DESCRIBE HER PERFECTLY!!!)

+

It was unreferenced and without a reference , it could have been construed as an attack The name of the place is....-Babylon-5-> 14:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like KoshVorlon mistakenly restored a vandal edit The Determinator reverted, I think trying to remove it himself in an edit conflict. KoshVorlon then apparently got confused and thought The Determinator was the vandal in the first place, posting this warning here, just as you identified his edit as vandalism when it was just a mistake. The only thing The Determinator failed to do initially was revert all of the vandalism, because the all-caps statement was posted by the editor before the last one he initially reverted. Probably means we all need to slow down a bit and doublecheck what we're editing and the article's edit history to see who is actually responsible for what, and you should certainly do that when you are asked to explain a vandalism warning. Also, a note to KoshVorlon: when reverting obvious vandalism, don't treat it as if it were just an ordinary unsourced statement about a living person in your edit summary ("REMOVE BLP" also doesn't mean anything; BLP = "biography of living person", so the article is a BLP, not sentences within it). An all-caps sentence calling the article's subject a "stalker bitch" is obviously nothing other than juvenile attack vandalism and not something that can be sourced. postdlf (talk) 14:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I took me a few minutes but I figured it out. It was just some friendly fire The Determinator p t c 15:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey there, nice new username ;). I am just letting you know that I am interested in helping you in administrative-related areas (CSD, AIV) when I am done with my break (which will end on June 16, a week from now). Perhaps I should create an "adoption high school" ;). Anyways I promise that I will help you with CSD and AIV as soon as my break is over. Regards, →Bmusician 12:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I matched my usernames with my signature. I know it caused some confusion here and there. So I changed it to simplify things. The Determinator p t c 18:44, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Determinator, I've been back from my break for a few days already, can we get started with CSD? ;) →Bmusician 15:19, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm ready! Thanks again for willing to help me. I have been CSDing (it's a verb now, lol..) for a while. If you can you can glance at that and give me some feedback on the ones where I've gone wrong. Or, we can do it your way, since you are more experienced. Either way I await further instructions. The Determinator p t c 15:27, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi there! We have something in common. BTW, I have declined this as being director of Royal_Rangers is enough to get Importance and thus PRODed it. Thanks! →TSU ^tp* 15:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. The Determinator p t c 21:03, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I wanted to let you know I challenged your CSD nomination at Johnathan Coleman. In regards to criteria A7, playing Div 1 football is a clear claim of importance sufficient to survive criteria A7. As for the G11, its a closer question, but I think there is sufficient encyclopedic content that the article would not need to be fundamentally rewritten to fix the problem, and is thus not eligible under criteria G11. The subject may well fail the notability guidelines, but that is a matter for a WP:PROD or WP:AFD nomination, which you may want to consider making. Monty₈₄₅ 19:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I appreciate that. The Determinator p t c 19:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I removed the Speedy from the above article. The author had added some reasonable claims of importance to the article. I am not a regular at New Pages, but I am pretty sure you should allow a bit more time before tagging an article wit ha Speedy. Two minutes is on the short side and in some cases the author is about to add more information. AIRcorn (talk) 03:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I didn't tag it with speedy, User:Blanchardb did. Thanks. The Determinator p t c 12:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that. AIRcorn (talk) 22:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I've declined the speedy here; note that US federal government works are automatically public domain, so it's not a copyright violation :). Ironholds (talk) 05:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. The Determinator p t c 17:26, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I hope you are not discouraged by the outcome of your current request for adminship. Inexperience is something that can be overcome over time.

My suggestion is that you explore more thoroughly the other aspects of the deletion process, such as WP:PROD and WP:AFD. Go through some topics of interest, add or improve on some text, or even write new articles (which helps better your understanding at NPP). - Mailer Diablo 16:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

No I'm not discouraged at all. Wiki is fun. I do appreciate all the comments, guidance and help. The Determinator p t c 16:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, The Determinator. I've closed your RFA as unsuccessful per WP:SNOW and more specifically, WP:NOTNOW. It is clear that it will not succeed, and because of that, I don't think there is any virtue to be had in whacking you over the head with the same comments every day for the next week. Well done for running though, and I hope you found the feedback useful. Remember there's always Wikipedia:Editor review if you'd like further feedback from the community. WilliamH (talk) 20:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Sorry for the bed news you have got.but as far as my knowledge is concerned regarding your user contribution, I suggest that you should try again in 6 months.By the way, See the references on Mayank_bhardwaj, It made me laughing till i rolled on floor.Max Viwe | Viwe The Max 20:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I did see "refs" before tagging. I got some good feedback from there, although most of it was just generic. I think it was worth it. I will retry in a few months. The Determinator p t c 20:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Since the RfA is closed, I will say it here. You looked at the wrong section of my criteria page.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 21:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Okay. I was a little shocked, but once I looked at the correct section it makes a little more sense. Thanks for clarifying. The Determinator p t c 22:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, The Determinator. You have new messages at WP:PERM/C.
Message added 11:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 11:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. Please familiarise yourself with our criteria for speedy deletion before controlling new articles or content - in particular you may wish to learn the difference between WP:A7 and attack pages - this means reading what you tag. If you need any help understanding our policies, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Happy patrolling! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for continuing to create new articles despite your recent unsuccessful RfA. It's a great thing whenever an admin hopeful is unfortunately shot down but continues to contribute just as s/he did before (coughHistory2007cough). I am sorry for opposing you at your RfA, and I would like to thank you for your kind and polite response. That really went a long way for me, you have no idea. Next time you decide you want to submit an RfA, please let me know and I would be more than happy to offer a Strong support or even nominate you if you wish. You probably won't remember me telling you this, but I will. If I don't appear to have any edits for a while, shoot me an e-mail; it won't bother me a bit. Again, thanks for being such a great editor!

<barnstar moved to the Awards Page>

Rotorcowboy ^talk
_contribs 03:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I do this to contribute something to the world not to gain something back for me. I will contact you in about 1500 to 2000 edits asking you to nominate me. Thanks again. The Determinator p t c 17:09, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Determinator! There are 2 reasons why your talk page is still on my watchlist, 1) You are an amazing adoptee at BM's school and 2) Because of your ability which will lead you in becoming a great admin one day.

Anyhow, adding 2000-5000 odd edits to your count is going to make zero difference in your RFA. Your RfA2 would also fail unless you show good understanding of wiki policies like rectifying your CSD problem; having 95% + success ratio, and showing good judgement skills (Afd, ANI, etc.) But the biggest factor is experience. At least wait for 6 months before starting rfa2 and in your case (more problematic one) I advise to wait for good (avoiding conflicts, not doing CSDs hastily, not misbehaving and always assuming good faith) 10 months. I don't wish to discourage you, but this is where the standards of our community are right now (too high). 10-12 month gap with good edits is enough to get the confidence of the community. You are a good asset to us but just needs little brush up to be ready for admin rights. At the end of the day, it is totally your call that when will you go for RfA, but give a thought to my words and look at unsuccessful and successful RfAs this year and compare it to previous year's (2006-2009) RfAs (look at edits and contributions of editors this year and previous years, also see the number of successful rfas). I m sure that you are smart enough to get the difference and understand my point. Best wishes, →TSU ^tp* 06:39, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for believing in me, and for your feedback. I totally agree with you. A great basketball player once said something similar. (See below). I have a question for you, Is there tool that I can use to quickly calculate my CSD percentage? Which, I think it's above 90%, but I'm not sure. I will take part in more discussions like AfD to illustrate my understanding of the policies. The Determinator p t c 10:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

 "You can practice shooting eight hours a day, but if your technique is wrong,
 then all you become is very good at shooting the wrong way.
 Get the fundamentals down and the level of everything you do will rise.”
 ~Micheal Jordan

Precisely, your CSD success ratio is 88.73% right now per your CSD log. There is no tool for calculating it and I did it manually (total number of Success full CSDs*100/total number of Attempted CSDs). And one more thing, if you remove an entry from your log which was declined, then it looks as if you want to hide that mistake, so please avoid it in future.

I agree with what MJ said. I personally have 1 motto for my self in real life which was stated by a baseball player (don't know that he was talking about his game or other but it inspires me); Keep Swinging

I now see that your CSD tagging is vastly improved as most of them are turning out to be right lately. Keep this tempo up and I may come up with your RfA2 in 6-9 months :) Thanks and Keep Swinging! →TSU ^tp* 14:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, The Determinator. You have new messages at Bmusician's talk page.
Message added 09:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

→Bmusician 09:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

hi the determinator thanks for the cookies lol. from the looks of it you spend a lot of time on wikipedia lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovingwikipedia! (talk • contribs) 20:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Dr. Aamir Liaquat Hussain.pdf. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

This represents an invalid speedy deletion nomination. The criteria for speedy deletion are fairly clearly spelled out: if an article does not fit one of the categories, it is not a candidate for speedy deletion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Can't you wait 2 minutes?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:12, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aalim Online is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aalim Online until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. BenTels (talk) 13:18, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi there,

Listen, a thought occurred to me. You seem to be trying to write an article about this controversy that lead to the death of the doctor rather than about the show. So why don't you rename the article and actually write about this controversy? You probably have enough sources to get a good ways with that... -- BenTels (talk) 06:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, I'm been trying to write about the show. The controversy is just one thing that happened on the show. Worst case scenario I'll have an admin userfy the article so I can take my time to finish it. In the mean time, we can redirect Aalim Online to Aamir Liaquat Hussain -The Determinator p t c 12:06, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

• • Sure -- your preference of course. -- BenTels (talk) 19:46, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference.

• Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent.
• If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
• Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences
• Show off your Credo access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Credo_userbox}} on your userpage
• If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 17:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

All editors who were approved for a Credo account and filled out the survey giving their username and email address were emailed Credo account access information. Please check your email.

• If you didn't receive an email, or didn't fill out the survey, please email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com
• If you tried out Credo and no longer want access, email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com

If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. I hope you enjoy your account! User:Ocaasi 15:39, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 3064 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our Help Desk. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. PS: we have a great AFC helper script at WP:AFCH! News Good article nominee 04 Aug 2012 – Parental brain (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Carina1205 (t · c); see discussion AFCH script improvements 1.16 to 1.17 Batman still works!

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation. If you do not wish to receive anymore messages from this WikiProject, please remove your username from this page.
Happy reviewing! TheSpecialUser ^TSU

• Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 09:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 22, 2012 – November 21, 2012.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

EdwardsBot (talk) 00:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)