User talk:Stifle/Archive 12

Hi, I've never come across your name at AE, certainly not in the context of an ARBPIA-related report. Are you familiar with WP:ARBPIA#Editors_reminded? I could of course be wrong, but it sounds as though you may not have read the Remedy formulated there. It specifically enjoins editors to assume good faith, write with a neutral point of view, remain civil, and avoid personal attacks. I don't see how any of the comments Unomi directed at me can possible not be considered blatant breaches of what #Editors_reminded considers appropriate behavior. Can you elaborate, here or at AE, just how you feel Unomi's attacks are consistent with #Editors_reminded?—Biosketch (talk) 11:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Just because you open an SPI case, which only merit is its questionable entertainment value, doesn't mean that WP:SPI automatically classifies as ARBPIA territory. I would suggest that you reconsider the words you have chosen on AE, I can assure you that I find nothing "cunning" about casting aspersions of that nature. Please find somewhere else to indulge in your victimization fantasies. That you would file an SPI based on use of exclamation marks and smileys ( which happen to exhibit markedly different styles ) is disturbing and sad, if you weren't doing such a great job of displaying the frailty of your connection to reality I might have considered taking formal action against you for employing such disruptive attempts at gaming the system. un☯mi 12:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the message I was trying to convey to User:Stifle, the validity of which your comment above has helped establish, is that your approach to editors with whom you have disagreements is hostile and aggressive and altogether inconsistent with the spirit of this project. There'd be no reason for you to take the SPI as personally as you have if you were as convinced of its futility as you claim you are. The vindictive anti-Zionist outbursts you attacked me with mean you lack the capacity to assume good faith, write with a neutral point of view, remain civil, and avoid personal attacks. Had your attacks been unrelated to the I/P conflict, I'd probably have ignored them as meaningless; but your sinister association of me with the negative stereotypes you believe to apply to Zionists both makes the attacks pertinent to ARBPIA and, in my opinion, makes them sanctionable.—Biosketch (talk) 13:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have sanctioned users under ARBPIA, which you would have noticed if you searched WP:ARBPIA for my name. I expressed my opinion at WP:AE that the comments reach the level of a breach of the letter of the ruling, but not one that would occasion a sanction greater than an admonishment. Stifle (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll acknowledge that, I don't really have the desire to spend much further time on this, but should someone take Biosketch to task for the rather appalling misrepresentation of what I have written and offensive, to put it lightly, attribution of beliefs to me, then I would find it welcome. un☯mi 14:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Unomi, if you specify which beliefs I've attributed to you unfairly, I'll be more than happy to know you dissociate yourself from them and to withdraw the attribution of them to you. What I don't understand is your resistance to retracting the one comment I objected to on your Talk page, which was the catalyst for all this.—Biosketch (talk) 14:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you should take the time to re-read it. I wrote that within the "Pro-Zionist Brigade" ( a pretty clear indicator of sardonic humor ) there could be found a high degree of self-deception. I don't see why I should retract it WHEN YOU SO VERY CLEARLY AND REPEATEDLY ARE MAKING THAT VERY CASE FOR ME, YOU NUTJOB person acting in a manner that I find indistinguishable from that which I associate with nutjobs. un☯mi 14:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Gentlemen, please take your dispute off my talk page. Stifle (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

You forgot to add OTRS tag to [[:File:Catalog back page.JPG]. Can you please do that? --Sreejith K (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I did not forget; rather, it was not appropriate that one should be added. The OTRS discussion did not lead to the grant of permission (because the author could not be found). The only claim to PD status is that given on the page. If you wish to nominate it for deletion because of this, you are free to do so. Stifle (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Stifle. I was wondering if you could have another look over Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Celebrity Cricket League. It probably sounds arrogant considering that it was 4:1 in favour of deletion, but I really don't think there was a consensus to delete. I think I clearly showed that the tournament meets GNG (and CLUB, though I'm still not sure why that was used as a rationale), while the delete voters did not refute this and mainly used "just not notable"-type arguments. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 04:00, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

• As per my /FAQs, I consider all my deletion decisions carefully before closing. I could not reasonably close that AFD as keep. Stifle (talk) 18:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

You placed two requests for citations on Hallelujah (Messiah Part II #44). Did you see the request on the talk for a separate article on the Hallelujah? BECAUSE it is so often performed by itself, and people don't know it is part of Messiah. For the "brilliant" please look up D major, the key of trumpet celebration, quote: "In the Baroque period, D major was regarded as "the key of glory"". Then remove the tags, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• It seems you've already removed the tags. I won't re-add them if you are so passionate about it. But I did know that one was part of the other. Stifle (talk) 15:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

That article should be deleted as well as it was moved during the creation of the Xbox 720 AfD.∞陣内Jinnai 17:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

A notification that the Templates for Discussion discussion (oy, repetition) has been taken to a deletion review discussion. The Article Rescue Squadron was notified, and as notifications to previous involved parties isn't normal practise, I and a few ARS members agreed that, in the interests of transparency and fairness, we should let everyone know...hence this talkpage message ;).

If anyone has an issue with me sending these out, do drop me a note on my talkpage. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 10:30, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm just bringing this to your attention. While you deleted the article after the AFD debate was concluded, you left the page in place where the article was moved to. If the result was delete, doesn't that mean Queensland 1982 Airport robberies gets deleted? Someone moved the page after the deletion discussion started.- William 00:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Did you notice that a number of users rallied at an external mailing list have contributed to this discussion and carefully weighted the strengths of all arguments made? —Ruud 03:10, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Did you see my talk page FAQ? Specifically the second section. But yes, I did note that there was a number of new users, but there was not a consensus to delete taking all into account. Stifle (talk) 16:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't consider you FAQ to be relevant. This was at best a borderline case between delete and no consunsus, so I would have expected a closing rationale. Would you still care to add one? —Ruud 03:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

My FAQ points out that I carefully consider all closures and waive any requirement to discuss with me if you wish to raise a deletion review. I'm not trying to be obstructive, but I've already given you the rationale you were looking for and I don't see what adding it to the AFD page would do. Stifle (talk) 09:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The article Household Name Records discography probably should have been included in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Household Name Records. Any chance you'd agree to delete discography as well?--GrapedApe (talk) 17:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Can't really do that as it wasn't explicitly included, but I've PRODded it. Stifle (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.--GrapedApe (talk) 17:18, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads up, I didn't notice Georgetown University Alumni & Student Federal Credit Union was up for AfD until you soft deleted it today, so I'm requesting undeletion, since I feel it has some notable qualities and high profile sources. Feel free to comment!-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞ 19:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll work to shore up the article's notability this week.-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞ 20:59, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Secure error messages in software systems. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Pnm (talk) 04:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Stifle

Almost a month ago, I nominated these files for deletion but I must have done something wrong. I am unable to determine what.

File:Consumerization Report 2011 - Chart 1.jpg

File:Consumerization Report 2011 - Chart 2.jpg

File:Consumerization Report 2011 - Chart 3.jpg

Can you please take a look and tell me where I went wrong?

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Fleet Command (talk) 15:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

• You haven't done anything wrong, but Commons is hopelessly short of sysops so the backlog on deletion requests is nearly three months. Stifle (talk) 12:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Stifle. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:09, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

• I decline. Stifle (talk) 10:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello,
Last year based on an AfD conclusion you have deleted the Celebrity Cricket League article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Celebrity_Cricket_League). Now the article was re-created and the current AfD decision is Keep. So, could you please merge back the contents from the earlier delteed article to this new article since I put lot of information about its launch and its first edition in that article.
Anish Viswa 01:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

• The previous history of the article can be found using the History function at the top of the page. You can find the previous versions there and merge them yourself. Stifle (talk) 10:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Stifle,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

• I do not think I am interested in this. Good luck with your process. Stifle (talk) 10:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Wishing Stifle a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 00:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

:) Thank you. Stifle (talk) 13:33, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Stifle. I’m new to Wikipedia, so I apologize if my questions are ignorant or if the answers could have been found elsewhere.

I would like to re-start a page for the “Midwest Bisexual Lesbian Gay Transgender Ally College Conference,” which was deleted in February 2009. I have spent quite a bit of time researching the conference and collecting dozens of links to - what I hope are - notable sources, which is what the entry seemed to lack when it was deleted. I hope to add a significant amount of content to the information that was contained in the previous version, as well as significant sourcing for that new content.

I was hoping you could tell me how I might go about this in the proper manner. Best, EricaShekell (talk) 23:15, 09 March 2012 (UTC)

You are entitled to just recreate the article if you get over the reasons why it was deleted. Alternatively, I can userfy the deleted article for you, allowing you to work on it in your own time before moving it to mainspace when you are ready. Stifle (talk) 13:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

If the article's not worthy of being kept, why should you suggest otherwise because I've been initiating discussion on the merits against keeping it? At this point I'm glad you didn't close it because that would have been ripe for overturning at DRV.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't close it as keep because I knew that irrespective of what I wrote it would be dragged to DRV (and I suspect you will do so anyhow), and I didn't need the drama.

There is a distinction between "initiating discussion" and "harassing and arguing with everyone who doesn't agree with you", and you were well into the latter territory. Stifle (talk) 11:29, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Stifle (talk) 14:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

 approved. Welcome to the team, we will be sending users over to UTRS instead of unblock-en-l soon. The Helpful One 01:08, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what an OTRS complaint is (I figure it's important), but how do I view it?--Львівське (говорити) 22:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

See WP:OTRS for information on what an OTRS complaint is. Unfortunately they cannot be viewed other than by privileged users. Stifle (talk) 22:55, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

So how do you recommend the article be fixed in the meantime? There's a dispute resolution and a BLP/N case open on it, the BLP went quiet and the DR was put on pause until the former got resolved, so things are sitting in limbo at the moment.--Львівське (говорити) 22:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

If the BLPN is stalled, then people should continue editing the article in accordance with BLP rules, in particular removing any sentence without a high-quality reference. Stifle (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Stifle, today I've cleaned up the article, removed unsourced content and more importanly added several new sources including the LA Times, NY Times, NY Post, Black Women in American History etc. Could you please have a second look and see how you feel about your keep/delete vote? Thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

• Deletion of this article would be far from uncontroversial, so the prod has been removed. It does not fail WP:V, it just fails having any editors who actually work on it.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 01:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

• I removed the PROD from this article, as deletion of this 6,000+ seat stadium would not be uncontroversial.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 01:51, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't you take time to look at the articles before prodding them for deletion? You seemed to have gone through quite a number of them rather quickly. The start of the Dennis Miller Live article mentions all the notable awards the show has won, which would disqualify it for a prod. So you obviously aren't reading these things before tagging them. Dream Focus 04:10, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I have not used a bot. I have opened old unreferenced categories in tabs, reviewing for articles that lack sources, and PRODding where it seems reasonable. WP:V places the burden of proof on those seeking to add or retain content. Thank you for referencing Dennis Miller Live. Stifle (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Stifle. Just now I've added references and removed your Prod tags from Cantref Llŷn, Dancing on Ice (Netherlands and Belgium), Comedia (Spanish play), Equivalents of Duke outside Europe, and I, Max. Needless to say, I'm finding your rationale of Unreferenced for over five years, fails WP:V quite unimpressive. It seems weird that I need to come to your talk page to say this, but I'm hoping you're not planning to continue like this. It would be constructive if you did a quick search for sources; these were not hard to find. From what I've seen, the articles you're prodding do not look like hoaxes. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

There is a requirement that all Wikipedia articles be verifiable, and the policy states that the burden of finding sources lies on those seeking to retain or add the article. I never said anything was a hoax. Additionally, a lack of sources for over five years may point towards non-notability. Feel free to reference articles. Stifle (talk) 12:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I am not "planning to continue like this", but every once in a while I do review various categories of articles for compliance with policies, and take appropriate action when they do not meet them. Stifle (talk) 12:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

P.P.S. On reflection, I probably overdid things. Stifle (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, Stifle. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

What was going through your mind when you did this? You are supposed to add new sections at the bottom of the page and there is no way that you are authorized to just blank the whole page! There is important stuff on there that I want to take up with Ncboy2010, so I will restore the previous version and add all the recent notices back at the bottom. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 12:25, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry, I really don't understand, you are an administrator to boot? CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 12:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry about that, I was trying to add a new section and I must have screwed it up. Please accept my apologies for this honest mistake. Stifle (talk) 12:46, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries, this user needs keeping an eye on as they are going bananas with HotCat, doing a lot of rapid-fire editing and adding links all over the place to DABs, and not heeding the subsequent bot messages. See this section to see why I was a bit miffed to find that the page had disappeared. I accept that we all have stumbly fingers or hazy editing sessions ;-) All the best! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 12:56, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm contacting everyone that participated in the last one, which ended earlier this month, to inform them of the new one. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aziz Shavershian (2nd nomination) Dream Focus 13:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

A while ago, I made fake The Amazing Race results pages on userpages. These were deleted. So, in the question of fairness, I'm requesting that the fake TAR results pages on User:TAR2C are deleted. Thank you! 70.68.97.58 (talk) 06:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Most of these are fairly old drafts or copies of existing pages.

• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race: Unfinished Business Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 15 Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 16 Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 17 Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 1 Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 2 Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 3 Test
• User:Christianity922/The Amazing Race 4 Test
• User:CrazyLegsKC/TAR5
• User:Kartoffel07/AmazingRaceTest
• User:Kartoffel07/sandbox

Shadow2 (talk) 10:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

• Probably should be MFDed. Stifle (talk) 12:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You were the image reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Starvin' Marvin (South Park)/archive2 which was promoted to FA on 15 September 2009. This included a review of the infobox image File:Ep 109 starvinmarvin.gif. I am in a debate at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 April 15#File:Pilot .28The Cosby Show.29 monopoly lesson.png, which is a debate over the infobox image for a television episode. The reviewer believes that the image currently violates WP:NFCC. I was hoping you might weigh in on this debate.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey there :). You're being contacted because you're an edit filter manager, At the moment, we're developing Version 5 of the Article Feedback Tool, which you may or may not have heard about. If you haven't; for the first time, this will involve a free-text box where readers can submit comments :). Obviously, there's going to be junk, and we want to minimise that junk. To do so, we're working the Abuse Filter into the tool.

For this to work, we need people to write and maintain filters. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the discussion here and the attached docs, and comment and contribute! Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, I noticed you opened a discussion a couple of years ago proposing the merger of Trinity College, Dublin and University of Dublin; I've done so again as the two articles are, for all intents and purposes, the exact same. You may wish to give your opinion. Cheers --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 17:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I hate to bother you but there are only a handful of people who are familiar with the process. Can you have a look at THIS for me? Your help would be appreciated. It is related to a link for online-scratch-card to use in an article. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Many, many moons ago, you salted Jono Lester as a repeatedly created non-notable bio. It's back at Jono lester. It's has a WP:BLPPROD on it at the moment, one of those grey areas in that it does have a ref, but to his own website, so not reliable to our standards. I have no idea if his recent races have raised him up above the motorsport notability bar, but I thought I'd let you know if you want to deal with it, because it shouldn't stay at the incorrectly capitalised location. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 12:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for dropping me a note. I'll wait until the BLPPROD expires or is properly removed and see from there. Stifle (talk) 17:52, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Patrick Murray (politician) is back. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

As someone who commented on the first AfD I am informing you that the article is up for deletion again. --Biker Biker (talk) 12:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The main conversation regarding Wikipedia:Contact us/draft1 and related pages is centralized at Wikipedia talk:Contact us, so I don't know how many people will see your comment where it is now. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:37, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For all your hard work, contributions and administration of the Wikipedia project in the MediaWiki namespace. Cheers. --Hu12 (talk) 01:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you! Stifle (talk) 13:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)