Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

→

Archive 30

I have a question about the reason you gave for deleting Aggressive street walking. Please note I don't disagree with the deletion at all!! I am just puzzled about whether being previously speedy deleted is considered a repost or not for the purposes of speedy deletion criteria. According to the section on reposts in this,Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion it doesn't seem so to me, but maybe there is something I don't know? Just curious --Slp1 14:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The criteria with which I decided to speedily delete the above article was A4. The article had been recreated numerous times and the text was identical in each case. The article was also undergoing the AfD process and had attracted universal 'delete' decisions from all interested editors. In addition to this, the article was a non-notable {{db-vanity}} publication on the part of its authors and it was their persistence that caused it to go to AfD in the first place. Due process was followed, don't worry! (aeropagitica) 18:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! I wasn't worried, just curious about how the decision gets made it cases like that. Thanks again!--Slp1 18:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate you offering to help my with Wikipedia. I'm in EST (GMT-5) so it may be difficult to ask you questions later on in the day (for me). I was maily wondering how I could get started in getting involved with Wikipedia. I would like to contribute, but I'm not entire sure how to go about doing that. —Scotty|Knows 19:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for getting back to me! Firstly, you can look at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia for ideas about becoming involved. There's plenty to do here! You can also join a programme such as Esperanza to talk with and relate to other editors. I became more involved with Wikipedia through editing pages about which I knew something, then following links to other pages, etc. My first welcome message alerted me to the existence of the Talk pages and usernames, which then linked through to the project areas such as XfD and admin-related noticeboards. Regards, (aeropagitica) 21:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I don't think I meet the requirements for Esperanza yet (150 edits) but I'll be sure to join when I can. The guide to contributing is really helpful, though. Thanks again, —Scotty|Knows 01:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, i have a question about where i would fine a page where i can see all the links to unexisting articles . Such a page would be extremely useful when it comes to know what else is left to do and to speed up the progression of wikipedia . If such a page doesn't exist yet , i guess that would be a wonderful idea for a project. Z E U S 01:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

You can try:

• Wikipedia:Requested articles
• Wikipedia:Most wanted articles
• Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hot
• Wikipedia:Articles for creation

for starters. This question wasn't admin-specific as it doesn't require the use of any admin powers. Any editor should be able to answer this one! Regards, (aeropagitica) 01:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I would be glad if you adopted me. My interests include technology, anime, and photography. I can edit almost any article for grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors, as I am very fluent in English. I also would like to revert vandalism if I can catch it, and get the articles which need to be semi-protected to become so. So...that's about it. Merry Christmas! --Keo Takamine 04:10, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, for copyediting Wikipedia articles, you can look at the Style guide for detailed instructions. This sets out pretty much all of the criteria for content and presentation of articles. If you want to revert vandalism as it happens then you can assist in the patrol of the new pages and recent changes pages. You would also do well to study the criteria for speedy deletion in order to see what type of articles can be marked for speedy deletion. To tell vandalising editors that their efforts are not appreciated, take a look at the templates for use on user Talk pages. Please ask if you have any questions, this may well appear very confusing on a first look! Take your time in reading and watch what other people do when they are on patrol. The speedy deletion category page contains a live list of pages that editors have considered unacceptable. Look at them to get a feel for which contributions may be marked up as such. Sometimes people make mistakes and articles can be expanded and rescued with a little research. See if you can spot some! Regards and Merry Christmas, (aeropagitica) 20:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know that I spent about half an hour or so cleaning up the archives at the naming conventions talk page. Hooray! I'm sure it's tiny compared to what some people take on all the time, but it's the biggest thing I've done yet, and I am fairly proud. I wonder if anyone will ever read them...Let me know what you think. I also got Vandal Fighter working on my Mac, and I've been keeping an eye on things, reverting some garbage, warning some vandals. It's satisfying! It's often hard to get to revert before someone else has. What a wonderful community I've stumbled upon. Thanks for your support, and happy holidays (merry Christmas?)! See you sometime after the 27th. Your adopted Wikipedian (or at least one of them), Goyston 22:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for the support on my recent RfA. The final tally was 63/3/2, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I'll be tentative with the new buttons for a while, and certainly welcome any and all feedback on how I might be able to use them to help the project. All the best, and thanks again! — Agathoclea 12:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

You gave Gigasker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) a final warning. He seems to carry on creating articles as this AIV report indicates. I believe this is outside the scope of WP:AIV but needs attention. Agathoclea 22:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism isn't outside the scope of AIV; this editor received their final warning on the tenth of December and their edit log shows a last creation/edit on the seventh. If I see it again then I will act upon it but I don't see another reason for warning or blocking tonight. Thanks for the heads up, though! Regards, (aeropagitica) 23:23, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I have asked the reporter for the names of articles created recently. They apparently are already deleted. Agathoclea 23:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

this article, which you also deleted on the 6th was recreated today Agathoclea 00:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello aeropagitica! I noticed you recently deleted this nonsense and feel that there are quite a few more contributions of this user's that should be speedily deleted if you see this. Could you take a look at them please? Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 09:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: He continued to create nonsense pages/vandalize after his final warning according to this addition.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 09:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted/deleted the vandalism in this users' contributions and now indef-blocked them as a vandal-only account. Thanks for the heads-up! Happy New Year! (aeropagitica) 09:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. (aeropagitica) 19:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR.Articles should use the same dialect throughout. Each article should have uniform spelling and not a haphazard mix of different spellings. Since the article is referenced by AKC and the The Doberman Pinscher Club of America it is NOT vandalizing! 63.3.11.2 19:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your response to my "adoptme" flag. Yes, I would you like to be adopted. I'm not sure yet what my interests will be. I use WP quite a bit and registered to correct a small (linking) error in an article. Right now, I working through the various guides. Mainly, I was just looking for someone to help if I found some process or rule not completely clear. I'm in GMT+5, but the time difference shouldn't be a problem as there will be no urgent questions. --KaryAnca 00:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

That's no problem at all! You can come and ask questions here on my Talk page and I will respond with best speed. You can also ask questions at the New contributors' help page; the Help desk and the Village pump. If you are interested in policies and guidelines then I may also be able to help. I'll look forward to hearing from you! Regards, (aeropagitica) 18:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the note on my talk page. I would like to be adopted, and I'm interested in technology as a subject and performing maitenance on articles. I also am good at small corrections like typos, which I think is called copy-editing. I also would prefer working in a collaboration instead of on my own. Also, I live in GMT -5 (EST), just to tell you, as you told me in your note on my talk page. Thanks! Rubikfreak 01:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for getting back to me! Firstly, you can look at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia for ideas about becoming involved. There's plenty to do here! You can also join a programme such as Esperanza to talk with and relate to other editors. Wikiprojects are collaborations of editors with mutual interests in a particular topic. To see all of them, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. You can also look at the list of portals, introductory pages for given topics. There should be at least one entry in each that will match your interests! Regards, (aeropagitica) 19:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Forgive me if I have errored, but I was simply letting my fellow members of WikiProject North Dakota know about the RfA. --MatthewUND^(talk) 10:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Then let them find out the same way that everyone else does. Canvassing to get your friends/colleagues to support you is very poor practice. Both BlackJack and Berig were recently warned about this. Do you read other RfA discussions? (aeropagitica) 11:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Let's cool it guys and gals! Things are getting a little heated up here, so perhaps Matthew and (aeropagitica) ought to disengage for a while?

Maybe this discussion can recommence when the two of you are willing to be completely WP:CIVIL to one another. In the meanwhile, check out WP:DR (Dispute Resolution).

Anthonycfc 21:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Erm, I *have* disengaged! I haven't even cast a vote in the RfA, merely pointed out factual information with reference to the guidelines for such events. I didn't use any swearwords or bite anyone! I haven't got a dispute with any other editor, either :-) Regards, (aeropagitica) 22:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for the kind words you left on my talk page, aeropagitica. BTW, I'm not sure what Anthony is talking about...I was never truly mad at anyone but myself (for making this stupid mistake). See you around and Happy New Year! --MatthewUND^(talk) 23:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

		The Minor Barnstar
		For your vast array of minor edits - based on this diff, I award you the Minor Barnstar. Your edits may be marked as minor, but their effect certainly isn't. Cheers and regards, Anthonycfc 21:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Could you please block User:Seandidilly as he as repeatedly vandalized Sasuke Uchiha, one of the edits you yourself reverted. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 02:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like I was beaten to the block. (aeropagitica) 02:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanx anyway :) --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 02:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for signing my autograph book! | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 12:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I am doing research in prep for the welcomebot trail in order to establish some facts on new user trends. Please can you have a look at Category:WelcomeBotResearch. I would appreciate your involvement. Also so as to assist, please can you sub your welcome template with {{welcome123}} which includes that category. Thanks. frummer 22:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi there; I was about to chide you for deleting this article while I was in the process of tagging it, but as I see that was deleted in four versions in rapid succession by four different admins, I won't bother!--Anthony.bradbury 23:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, ok! We had this conversation before - I am patrolling newbie changes to Wikipedia this evening. (aeropagitica) 23:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Good evening and thank you for responding to my adoption request. I am currently located in Maine which is -5 GMT or Eastern Standard Time. My interests are copy-editing, and proofreading. I have a few articles in mind that I would like to create, but I am reading material about article creation before I start in too heavily. There is quite a bit to balance when composing new articles. Cheers! Ventric 01:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks for taking up my offer! Let me know if you have any questions about proof-reading or article creation/editing. I will do my best to answer them for you! Regards, (aeropagitica) 01:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance on my talk page for 3RR requests. I understood the information needed....it was the formatting, or reformatting I didn't quite get. Particularly, how you paste a contributor's edit and then relabel or revise the link to label it as a revert. I think the solution there is in help information under "links", so I'll check it out. Thanks again! NickBurns 16:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Good evening! Considering you are an admin, I was wondering if you would be willing to clear the queue of users waiting for users waiting for approval for using AutoWikiBrowser.

Your services there would be greatly appreciated.

Happy Hogmanay!
Anthonycfc 22:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

~~Eugene2x ^{Sign here} ☺ ~~ 01:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would like to be adopted, if you don't mind. My main interests are video games but I've also joined the Series of Unfortunate Events project. I made my first article but it got merged. :( I don't really understand how to determine if an image is fair use or not. Mrmoocow 06:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for your response! Images are quite tricky things to get to grips with, so I would suggest looking at Wikipedia:Image use policy in the first instance. That has a section on fair use considerations. Don't take your article being merged as a knock-back - Wikipedia grows and changes on a minute-by-minute basis, so many articles are created, merged and deleted. What matters is that you have made an effective contribution to the project. That's why we're all here, right? Happy New Year! (aeropagitica) 04:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It's belated, but a happy new year to you! Cheers! Ventric 05:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a Happy 2007 to you, too! I was planning on messaging all of my adoptees later on today to ask them how they're all getting on and if they have any questions that require a second opinion or issues that they need to talk over. I'm here to help! (aeropagitica) 05:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

About that, do you have any other, more instantaneous communication? IM perhaps? I find talk pages to be quite -- bothersome to monitor. If not, that is okay. P.S. It's 12:37a.m. here, shouldn't you be in bed already? Ventric 05:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking about using IM or something but I haven't fully investigated that yet. I'm normally up at this time on a working day as I start at 0630, usually. That being said, I couldn't sleep last night so I have been up for twenty hours now! If it's after midnight where you are, shouldn't YOU be in bed, now? ;-) (aeropagitica) 05:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

:) Syrthiss 15:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could delete the article The Llama Song for me? I was going to post a proposed deletion for it but found out that it had already been agreed way back last march that it should be deleted. I see no reason why this wasn't taken care of already. Thanks. b_cubed 16:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Loath though I am to take issue with an action of someone probably much better acquainted than I with the martial arts, I think I ought to observe that your closing this as unlikely to achieve consensus was, I'd submit, emphatically contrary to RfA decision process policy, which provides, in pertient part, that only bureaucrats may close or de-list a nomination as a definitive promotion or non-promotion and that non-bureaucrats...are never empowered to decide on whether consensus has been achieved or is likely to be achieved. Whilst such policy may be unwise (for various reasons, I think it may be), it nevertheless appears to command the support of the community and ought not, I imagine, to be contravened (although, to be sure, the broader issue ought probably to be raised at RfA talk), IAR and SNOW, each of which is ostensibly understood by the community as inapplicable for RfA closings, notwithstanding (although I do recognize that there have been several such contraventions of late, such that RfA practice may have developed beyond RfA policy).

Because it is eminently plain that no consensus to promote would have been achieved, I'll not, even as I think your closing to be against policy and even as I very strongly disfavor our closing RfAs early to save [a] candidate's feelings, revert you, but I wonder whether you might do well in the future to avoid closing even those RfAs that will surely fail prior to a consensus's developing for the proposition that such closures by not bureaucrats are in order. If, btw, I've overlooked something here (which, of course, is eminently possible), I'd appreciate your dropping me a note in order that I might castigate myself appropriately and apologize straightaway. Cheers, Joe 20:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I see that you have indeed suggested in passing that WP:SNOW may be invoked by non-bureaucrats to close RfAs that will surely not succeed; while I'd probably not object to our applying SNOW in such a fashion and indeed would probably support our changing the front matter in order that it should comport with such application (of course, I don't know, as evidenced by the recent edit-warring over how to tag SNOW, that there'll ever be a consensus of the community writ large for the application of SNOW to, well, anything), I can't conceive of an interpretation of the RfA decision process policy that would permit such non-bureaucrat early closure. Joe 21:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I haven't closed any RfAs where the consensus hasn't been in doubt. The RfAs that I do close all consist of editors who have several hundred edits or less and have been active for either a) a short time or b) been around for a while but not made any significant contributions. In these cases I have reviewed the evidence in their edit histories and looked at the opinions cast in their RfA and have then chosen to close it before the five day deadline using Occam's Razor - there's no need to multiply examples for each editor to read the same advice over and over. Crawfordknights, Memmke, Rat235478683 and Fu kinell are all recent examples of my decisions. You can also level your your enquiry at Nishkid64, Rje and Steel359, who have all performed the same action for the same reason. I participate in equivocal RfAs in the same manner as other editors and admins, giving my opinion based upon evidence and leaving the matter to a Bureaucrat in order to finish the process. Regards, (aeropagitica) 00:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)