Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	This comment was hilarious. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:14, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. For more LOLcats, see cats in popular culture... Warden (talk) 20:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi: I have just seen that you had Orville (cat) userfied. I created an article on the art fair yesterday - with about a line and a half on the Orvillecopter. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well done. Great minds think alike, eh? Warden (talk) 20:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was kind of a low blow, Colonel--or an attempt at one, since I don't think it really landed anywhere. Drmies (talk) 21:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable to see even a true scholar such as LH under attack, this place gets more surreal by the day. FeydHuxtable (talk) 21:36, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Be that as it may, this reminds me that Orville appeared in Time Out yesterday. He shall rise again! Did one of you mopperaars take a picture while he was on display? Warden (talk) 12:41, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm--haven't heard mopperaar in three decades or more. Nice old-fashioned word, Colonel, and a nice find. No, I was not around when the cat flew: I'm just another poor expatriate. Speaking of deletions, Chonga could do with your help. Drmies (talk) 18:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Colonel Warden/Orville (cat), a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Colonel Warden/Orville (cat) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Colonel Warden/Orville (cat) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, it looks like this IP is running roughshod over some of your recent edits. I've reported to AIV and will go through the changes to correct, as warranted. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 00:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. To double-check, the articles that they vandalised were:

1. Albannach (band) ‎Y
2. Albannach (restaurant) ‎Y
3. Andrew Soltis Y
4. Eight-thousander ‎Y
5. Exploding animal ‎Y
6. Ferret legging ‎Y
7. Luck of Edenhall ‎Y
8. Mazumbai warty frog ‎Y
9. Music of World War I Y
10. Nice guy Y
11. Royal Gibraltar Yacht Club ‎Y
12. Richard ‎Y
13. Stonewalling ‎Y
14. Talk:Ferret legging/GA2 ‎Y
15. Talk:Music of World War I ‎Y
16. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oddjob's hat Y

Their MO seems to have been to look at my last 500 edits and then pick some at random to undo. They all seemed to have been cleaned up now - thanks again. Warden (talk) 11:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Similar activity by 82.26.134.207 and 86.31.81.81 has been reverted. Warden (talk) 13:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was nothing; I was just cleaning up after the vandal who was after your heels for whatever reason. Thanks! bibliomaniac15 19:29, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, regarding the article killer toys, I have overhauled it and have provided a more limited list with all entries backed by reliable sources. I've commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killer toys. I hope you will take a look at the new list and my comment. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Natural Color System. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You said, ""Purple should please provide an example of a contradiction as currently their !vote contains no evidence to support that vehement assertion and so seems quite misleading."

1. It's not "vehement"
2. An example of such a contradiction was mentioned in the AfD nomination

My vote is not misleading, and I will not retract it pbp 19:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you've indicated a possibility of merging, if you need a userfied or e-mailed copy of the deleted article to salvage some content for a merge, just let me know. Salvidrim! ✉ 00:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Article Rescue Squadron and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks,--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 22:10, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Please see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Colonel Warden. You have new messages at Talk:The Chicago Pizza Pie Factory#Restaurant chain.
Message added by Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Thank you for your support and kind comment in my RfA, Colonel Warden. It was a pleasant surprise. Regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• You're welcome. I was not familiar with your work here but browsed your contributions for a month and formed the impression that you were strong-willed but also communicated and consulted well. The leavening of humour and wit is most welcome too. Warden (talk) 20:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, it did not end particularly well, but I thank you for taking the time to do your own analysis and for your willingness to see past much of the "smoke" that was generated. Votes like yours meant a lot to me. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good day! Help correct translation in this article? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of honest politicians 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/List of honest politicians 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. ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 23:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• You need to tone it down. You know perfectly well that I don't even vote in half the things ARS tags for rescue, and probably in a third of the ones I do vote in, I vote something other than delete. And most of the other people who have voted in this discussion have even less contact with the ARS than I do. Your page is going to be deleted because it's even more subjective and POV-pushing than the political criminals page that was recently deleted. Frankly, you should have stopped work on the honest politicians page once you knew that political criminals was going down to delete (which was fairly evident DAYS before the close), because there is no possible way that honest politicians could be kept while political criminals was deleted. Shame on you. pbp 20:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• PBP, as a friend and fellow sports editor, I would suggest that everyone needs to "tone it down" in this discussion. It's blazingly apparent that much of the underlying animus in the AfD discussion has little to do with the present AfD and more with the history of interaction among several of the AfD participants. I would urge you, the Colonel and everyone else to strike whatever personal comments appear here and in the AfD as evidence of everyone's good faith and desire to address this AfD in the best interests of the project. Best regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Warden, would you be willing to consider the suggestions I have made in the AfD discussion to restructure this list and better define the list's criteria for inclusion? If so, I'm prepared to register a "keep" !vote subject to those caveats. Regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, I am willing. We can't lightly make big changes while the AFD is running though. Warden (talk) 12:52, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Understood, Colonel. I am voting to "keep" subject to those caveats. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

occono (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks but I'm allergic to cats. I will find it a good home. Warden (talk) 21:18, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this MfD, and I am appalled by what you did. Why did you nominate it for deletion when it was in the middle of a full lock? You never bothered to even tag the article that an MfD was going on. And how did you find your way there, anyway? pbp 04:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I would've said delete had I noticed it. That is ridiculous. People just argue over who they like the best to put on that list. This isn't a fan site. Dream Focus 11:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The page exists on Meta and on a whole bunch of Wikis, and Warden should've done his homework to figure it. The point is it's bad form to not tag the project, or to mention that its up for MfD on the talk page of the project. Dream, you argued when that stupid Rescue list template was nominated for deletion. pbp 02:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Of course anything that is nominated for deletion, should have a notice placed on it. Ridiculous that that isn't automatic. Still, that is a pretty pointless and bias list you have there. Should've been deleted. Wikipedia is not a fansite. Dream Focus 02:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you think it should be deleted, man up and start a discussion on Meta (obviously, re-nomming here now would be disruptive). Alternately, you could participate in the discussions on WP:VA and WP:VA/E to stop the list from being bias (FYI, bias is a noun, not an adjective). But if you're just going to continue your brinkmanship without actually doing anything... pbp 03:40, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Why would I want to waste time arguing over something so insignificant? Most people won't even ever notice it exist. They should just rename it "what a handful of people have decided are the best articles on Wikipedia" to make it clearer what it is. Calling it Wikipedia:Vital articles is rather misleading. I have a list of my favorite Wikipedia articles on my user page User:Dream_Focus#Articles_I_find_of_interest, but I never tried to claim they were anything other than my personal favorites, or put the list anywhere other than its proper place on my own user page. Dream Focus 19:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• I took an interest because the page was listed at centralised discussion by user:NickPenguin. Twinkle was unable to add a template to the page because it had been protected by user:Bbb23 to stop edit-warring by user:Purplebackpack89 and others. I'm not sure what they were disputing then but the issue now seems to be whether the horse is vital or not. Lame. Warden (talk) 11:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, Warden, I think the list of 1,000 is a fun exercise in prioritizing 1,000 important and representative topics from human history, culture and endeavors. Given your eclectic academic interests, I'm mildly surprised that you're not interested in participating. The discussion could use someone with your background. To each their own, I suppose. As for the horse, I'm pretty sure with your grasp of history that you do understand the importance of equus ferus caballus in the development of human civilization. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. It involves the discussion above partially. Dream Focus 19:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a courtesy, your name has been mentioned by two users here on AN/I. I don't believe your comment is necessary, but you have been mentioned :) gwickwire^talk_editing 20:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I notice DreamFocus kinda notified you above.. Sorry :) Just making sure you knew (and that's kind of hidden so..) gwickwire^talk_editing 20:16, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks to you both but that discussion seems to be closed. I do have a nice quip which is a shame to waste though: "purple is the new black". Geddit? Warden (talk) 09:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! I added a pic of one of our old friends predecessors to an article only a couple of weeks back. FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it ought to go up for DYK? It really needs a picture!

Amandajm (talk) 14:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it seems suitable for DYK. I have added an image. Warden (talk) 15:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have put it up for DYK. Thanks for the image. I don't think it's clear enough for the front page though! Cheers! Amandajm (talk) 01:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• A picture is worth 1000 words and so it seems good that we have one where possible. I may visit the exhibition to see the ring for myself but it's not clear whether photography is permitted and it's usually not easy if the exhibit is in a glass case. It may be possible to do more with the image that we have. I cropped it and autoadjusted the brightness and contrast but have no special competence in this. Here's the original:

Warden (talk) 10:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can send more info and images if you want as I did the original research which the press releases come from. You are also welcome to visit and if you want to contact us here at the Vyne to arrange it you can. I can also provide a couple more references for you but had trouble updating the page myself.

The original Chaloner Chute info is from Chute's History of The Vyne 1888. Paul Corbey Finney wrote an article ' Senicianus Ring' - this is what it was known as before 'The Vyne' Ring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archer2711 (talk • contribs) 10:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Colonel Warden. You are invited to join WikiProject Breakfast, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of breakfast-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:30, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Warden,

Thank you for you effort on the Altaic Languages Talk page. The gang controlling that page is lovely to deal with, aren't they.

Are you available to continuing working on this? I've figured out what I was doing wrong, and how to do things right as the next steps.

My previous account has been banned through some Wikipedia administrative perversity. So just respond here.

Thanks, formerly AltaicNPOV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.26.150 (talk) 04:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a big deal but we might as well get it right. As the article is locked for a week please focus upon getting a proper account as you will not be taken seriously until you do. The account name should not promote a particular agenda or cause as single-purpose accounts are not much respected either. Warden (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK if you have any time to follow up that would be great. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.28.171 (talk) 06:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tweed Run London 2013.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just dropping you a quick note about a new Wikipedian in Residence job that's opened up at the National Library of Scotland. There're more details at the WP Scotland noticeboard. Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a participant in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinaman (porcelain), please see Talk:Chinaman (porcelain)#Merge discussion.--Yaksar (let's chat) 10:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you nominated this for DYK. One of the DYK requirements is that an article must have a minimum of 1500 prose characters, but this only has 1357. Whoever reviews your nomination will point out that it's not eligible until it's been further expanded. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 05:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the warning. I have added a paragraph to the article, which should suffice, and will continue to develop it. Warden (talk) 12:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#RFC-birth date format conformity when used to disambiguate so I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Birth date format conformity .28second round.29.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:04, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Warden,

Thank you very much for the barnstar! It is good to hear that my hatnotes are appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 01:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• There are more!? I shall look out for them... Warden (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you give such a jokey "speedy keep" rationale? If you think it's keepable, be serious. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• It's a laughing gnome. Warden (talk) 07:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I think you're being a little too hostile in the other AFDs of mine you're participating in. Making snide jokey remarks is no better. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Nothing personal - see another fresh AFD where I give DGG's nomination a rough ride — volenti non fit injuria. As for gnomes, they were a hit for David Bowie, who was all over the media recently, and they are now being featured in this year's Chelsea Flower Show. Synchronicity... Warden (talk) 18:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	For your great work on List of roads in Ipoh, Very impressed! :) – →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 16:42, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. It took a fair bit of effort but there's still quite a lot more to be done. I tend to lose momentum once the AFD is resolved but your barnstar will give me a second wind. Warden (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Foster's Release, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "Foster's Release" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 18:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to split them, through I don't think the sources are very clear on the difference. That's the reason I merged those topics: a number of sources seem to consider those two terms interchangeable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you intend to !vote "Oppose" rather than "Keep"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:01, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• My fingers are too used to typing that string :). I have amended my !vote - thanks for pointing it out. Warden (talk) 09:09, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I've changed the * at the start of your post to a #. If you really intended a *, feel free to revert me. Peridon (talk) 09:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• It only matters if there are more opposes but that's fine. Warden (talk) 09:48, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, that's what I guessed. :-) Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:48, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My alarm bell started ringing when I observed you discussing me with Viriditas. Did you know that he was recently blocked for such behaviour?

Would you like to retract that wacky statement, or should I take this straight to ANI, where I will ask for you to be schooled in the appropriate method of canvassing users for Xfd (a method you refuse to acknowledge), and where I will take you to task for making crazy statements like this one? Viriditas (talk) 20:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The discussion in question was closed earlier today and may no longer be changed. Regarding your block (15:23, 13 May 2013), I was going by the edit summary which said, "feuding with another editor, persistently making unsubstantiated accusations, and other disruptive editing". I am not familiar with the details of your case. Were you exonerated? Warden (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia isn't a court of law and I don't agree with the edit summary of that block log. But assume it is true for the sake of argument; what does it have to do with the deletion discussion and your comment? Viriditas (talk) 22:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Idiom dictionary at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• Might want to check WT:DYK too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:45, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Colonel Warden, please explain. Idiom_dictionary Tony (talk) 10:49, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I have commented at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Idiom dictionary. Warden (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:06, 23 May 2013 (UTC) [reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Colonel Warden! The Surfers Paradise Meter Maids is great - I've never been up to Queensland, (or at least, not on the coast), so I haven't seen them, but I remember them hitting the news a few times. And it does look like Akubra could do with some work - I'll see if I can help. In regards to the RfA, I had no problems at all with your vote - I agree that we should be wary of giving one side in a dispute an advantage, and it was a good reminder never, under any circumstances, to use the tools while involved. So I felt that you were completely right to raise the issue.

I'll see what I can did up for Akubra, and I might be able to find something for the Meter Maids - I have access to the databases of Australian media, so there might be something to help develop it some more. - Bilby (talk) 07:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you liked it. Akubra is on my watchlist too now. See you around... Warden (talk) 08:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Allen3 ^talk 11:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... when I read your comment at WP:TFAR! Bencherlite^Talk 14:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Glad you liked it. There's many a true word spoken in jest, eh? Warden (talk) 14:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Nice work in expanding the Workmanship article and in the addition of sources to qualify the topic's notability. A fine example of workmanship in progress. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. I plan to read Pye's The Nature and Art of Workmanship, as it sounds excellent and so may help both the article and my work. Warden (talk) 11:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I touched upon the topic while doing a source search/review. Workmanship is actually quite significant; within the notion of workmanship in general, there is always the potential for improvements and advances, which when realized then also becomes workmanship. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A most well deserved barn star Colonel! Thanks so much for saving the article from deletion. Can't believe deletionists wanted to destroy it, it deserves to be a core article in any encyclopedia, and is especially important for us as it has such a strong bearing on the motivation of editors.

I know a little bit about this topic, as my mistress Simone Weil said that understanding the spiritual aspects of work is key to a rejuvenation of society, and that elucidating the nature of workmanship is the one great philosophical task left to the West (she thinks everything else worthwhile was done by Greeks).

So, I took the liberty of expanding. Obviously, no objection to you completely reverting my work if you intended to take the article in a different direction.

Here's an interesting quote on the subject from Alexandre Kojève. Im not sure about including it in the article as that might be rather elitist, he's sometimes even harder to understand than Hegel. (although most of this quote is already in a web article in one of the citations) But I rather think this gets to the heart of the matter about why workmanship is so important.

FeydHuxtable (talk) 15:03, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• You are too modest. You've done a great job of putting flesh on the bones of that topic — something which I considered, but couldn't manage at the time. You deserve a barnstar too so let's see what I can work up. Warden (talk) 15:09, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edits here, no idea why you thought overwriting an article on the TV show with one on a pub was a good idea, that's basic stuff. GiantSnowman 08:17, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded at length at the AFD. Warden (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I've found an 1878 book online with a lot about the tavern so I've been adding lurid detail (and another image) to the article. Now, at DYK someone is questioning your hook so you could try something like

• that the riff-raff and scum of the town who frequented the Dog and Duck (pictured) caused it to lose its licence?

and that is well-cited online. I'm not sure of DYK etiquette so I haven't butted in there myself. Thincat (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just seen I've duplicated your content about the sign in the hospital wall. Anyway, there's a picture now. Please sort my stuff out if you like or I'll do something tomorrow. Perhaps the article needs a lead and the sections reorganising somehow. BTW at the AFD I was sorely tempted to !vote

• Merge all to Dogs and Ducks

but I wasn't quite brave enough! Thincat (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. The page still needs lots of work but I am too busy currently to give this topic my full attention and just had to get it to DYK before the 5 day window closed. The hook comes from the words of Alderman Crosby, "a house in which gangs of both whores and rogues were constantly associated", and I've put a quote in now. I especially framed the hook to start with the words "rogues and whores" because I reckon this will bring in the crowds. I'm not sure that riff-raff would be so attractive as Americans might not understand it. Warden (talk) 05:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, now I understand the rush. "Rogues and whores" is better and they seem to have both in America. I'll do a bit more on the article but just revert anything that's no good. Thincat (talk) 07:33, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In case you had lost all hope, Dog and Duck (tavern) is now on its way to DYK in queue 6.[1] I'm really pleased it has got the top picture spot because the image shows up very well even at small scale. Thincat (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I've been keeping an eye on its progress - thanks for helping expedite this. I agree that getting top billing is good - I was disappointed that Surfers Paradise Meter Maids didn't have its image displayed as I expected that to be a big draw. I have a bit more content to add to the article so I'll try to squeeze that in soon. Warden (talk) 13:51, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources. Where are they? Are you expecting them to add themselves? That clearly didn't work last time, since in the four years since the first AFD, not a single one's been added. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I added the following assistance to the article's talk page. If you want to cite sources for particular facts, then you'll find plenty there. Guidance on citations is at WP:CITE. If you're expecting me to do the work for you, note that, in the recent similar case of missed connection, I exerted myself to improve the article and didn't get so much as a thank-you from anyone. See the magic word. Warden (talk) 07:28, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you say you prefer British/L-style punctuation because of accuracy. Have you ever seen American style cause an error or other problem? This question is not rhetorical. It would be relevant to the discussion at hand. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A misquotation is an error. Such errors may have further consequences where rigour is important, such as law or computing. Warden (talk) 19:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Have you ever seen American punctuation cause a misquotation? Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:12, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "What hath God wrought"! Warden (talk) 21:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do wish you hadn't rewritten this article. If we'd deleted the old one first, then you could just have easily have posted your new content then. As it is now it's proving impossible to prune the over-detailed joke garbage about tapirs. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• As I understand it, the whimsical content about seals and goats has been put up and deleted before so deletion seems ineffective in achieving your goal. Warden (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. With regards to your oppose in Kelapstick's RFA, when you said "slight" were you referring to quality or quantity?--Rockfang (talk) 18:44, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Both. I have added more specific detail. Warden (talk) 09:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen your comments here about articles I have created. If you feel that any articles I have created are non-notable I suggest you take them to AFD. Regards, GiantSnowman 14:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the benefit of my talk-page stalkers, this refers to pages such as Adam Mitchell (footballer born 1994). This is a footballer who seems to have a page by dint of playing a few minutes as a substitute in one game: "He won a call-up to the first team for the final game of the 2012-13 season, appearing as a late substitute against Spurs." That seems to be a plausible case of BLP1E but I know better than to waste my time arguing with football fans. And the existence of the page doesn't bother me at all. The point, of course, is that editors who create such pages should not argue for the deletion of pages about even more notable people. See WP:SAUCE.

But really we British shouldn't bicker at a time like this. Did you see Andy Murray's triumph just now? Tennis is the game of the moment!

Warden (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchell is notable, whether you like it or not - just as Garvey is notable, whether I like it or not. And yes, I saw the tennis, wonderful stuff. GiantSnowman 18:17, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• FYI, I consider your closure at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate Garvey (2nd nomination) to be improper because it doesn't meet the criteria for non-admin closure pbp 03:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Close reverted. Let's let someone who is a) uninvolved and b) an admin close this one. GiantSnowman 08:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And the consequence was ... another nomination and DRV. And the world said, "Obvious Trolling is Obvious". Warden (talk) 10:09, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added that fine source to Money as Debt. Keen eyes, thank you. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 16:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• You're welcome. I must watch the film now myself, to see what all the fuss is about... Warden (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...at the reliable sources noticeboard where you might wish to share an opinion. Thanks. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 04:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot she dyed! NorthernThunder (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Colonel Warden. You are invited to join WikiProject Invention, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of inventions and invention-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out this very short form to receive your free access to Cochrane Collaboration's library of medical reviews: Link to form.

If you have any questions, just ask me. Cheers, Ocaasi 13:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've been smeared in an edit summary for the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rampage killers deletion discussion, apparently based upon your membership in a WikiProject: diff page. It seemed fair to notify you about this. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Rocky_IV#Merge_for_Ivan_Drago_into_Rocky_IV An AFD you participated in that just got closed today, is now at a merge discussion. Dream Focus 19:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]