Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:39, 15 April 2010

Template:Archive box collapsible

This is not OK....

I will protest release of unblocking of you in the future. You got a conditional unblock to work in your userspace only for the duration (48 hours). Despite this - i see that not even 24 hours later - you broke this. And has continued to do so later, including several edits in article space --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry Kim, the last unblock was under the provision i did not edit articles under the probation, i assumed this unblock was under the same terms. If i have broken this agreement it was not intentional at all. And that diff from article space is an article i had just put into main space, i saw the typo and fixed it straight away, is that so wrong? mark nutley (talk) 21:14, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

You are not supposed to touch article space at all (or any talk-space except your own). Simple as that. And that is not the only edit you've made in article space during the period. This is certainly not a move from your user space. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 21:18, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Fair enough kim, the Cao Yong article would more than likely have been deleted by now if i had not helped out on it. It is a very interesting tale which i came across on recent change patrol, rather than prod it for deletion i figured i could help it survive. It is no-were near the probation area and i actually thought i was doing some good. Do what you think is right, i know i have kept my word which was to not edit any articles in the probation area, and i am sorry if you think what i have done is wrong. mark nutley (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

BTW it was a move from my user space

That unblock really was intended for the sole and express purpose of letting you work in your userspace, as indicated by my unblocking comment (Unblocked to work in userspace) and notation to your block log, (to work on userspace drafts). I apologize for not noticing and mentioning this when you comment at Alex Harvey's talk page. No real harm done, I suppose, and the block would have expired by now anyway ... but please be more careful. Thanks, - 2/0 (cont.) 22:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually I saw the Cao Yong edit and I felt it was borderline given the conditions of the unblock, though I didn't say anything because it was unrelated. Since then you've gotten involved a bit in the CC articles, which I agree (with Kim) is inappropriate. In the future, be more careful when extended a courtesy like this. ATren (talk) 22:14, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

At everyone, i am truly sorry for this misunderstanding. I thought this unblock was the same as the last one, which was not to edit articles in the probation area. And yes i know i did that twice but it was me who actually put that article under the probation :-). Again i am sorry for making this mistake, it was unintentional, i do not want people to think my word is not good. mark nutley (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

KENNEDY NEWTON

What makes you think that it is vandalism? Theresa Knott | token threats 00:09, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Asking what is the cure for a headache and flu, seems like vandalism to me mark nutley (talk) 00:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Generally speaking, asking a question at a desk for asking questions isn't usually considered vandalism. I have reverted you. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:15, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

No worrys, i`m new to RC patrol, i`ll pay closer attention. Sorry about that mark nutley (talk) 00:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Notification of declined speedy deletion nomination

Hi Marknutley, just dropping by to let you know that I've removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on Little Parents, Big Charlie. Please see the rationale given here. Feel free to PROD if you still think the article should be deleted however. Cheers, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 13:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC) (edit conflict) :No worrys mate, i used a db-nocontext instead, i have to get used tot all these tags for RC patrol :) mark nutley (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Eclipse Entertainment

This is not, in any shape or form, a no-context CSD. Can you tell what the article is about? Yes. So it has context. Ironholds (talk) 13:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thought that tag was for content. not context. Still getting used to the tags for rc patrol, soty to have wasted you time mark nutley (talk) 13:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair does; ditto with Little Parents, Big Charlie. Note that the content tag is for no content, not just a short article. Ironholds (talk) 13:55, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Julian Limoti page

Sorry I changed your tag. No hard feelings? *_____^ Salvio ( ) 21:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Not at all,  :) mark nutley (talk) 21:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Copy of my comments at WP:PERM I've added the flag. I'm going to AGF on this as you have been blocked only 6 weeks ago for edit warring. However I don't see why we should hinder those who want to fix up content by denying them tools to do so. I would note that if you use rollback for edit warring it'll be removed and probably not regranted. Pedro :  Chat  07:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, rest assured it will not be used for edit warring, i have learnt my lesson with respect to that :-) mark nutley (talk) 10:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The Real Global Warming Disaster as a good article nominee

Hi Mark Nutley,

I have nominated The Real Global Warming Disaster as a good article nominee. As someone who has not contributed to the article (or at least has made a very insignificant contribution), but who would I assume have an interest in this subject, I am writing to ask you if you would be willing to review it. Thanks in advance for your help, and at the same time I'll understand if you're too busy. All the best, Jprw (talk) 08:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Mark -- thanks for your comments. Could you visit the good article review page and post them there? I'm trying to compile pro/anti comments to get a fair picture. Cheers, Jprw (talk) 13:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

No worrys mate, but i can`t see it here ? Am i looking in the wrong place? mark nutley (talk) 13:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Good != Featured. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dharmapala of Sri Lanka

Hello Marknutley, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dharmapala of Sri Lanka, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Peer Review

Do you mean WP:Peer review? If so, you should follow the procedures at that page to list it for review. I would also recommend exploring WP:GAN. WP:GAC, WP:WIAFA, the pages linked from those two, and WP:MOS are good for getting an idea of what the article needs to be like to pass FAC. You'll also find some good models at WP:FA under the appropriate category. From a quick look at the article, I'd say you should work on expanding it using reliable secondary sources. You'll also want to improve the pages compliance with the Manual of Style - citations need consistent formatting, article must adhere to WP:NPOV...all those details that can sink a nomination. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 20:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, looks like i have some reading to do :) mark nutley (talk) 20:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Pakistanis in Saudi Arabia

Hello Marknutley, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Pakistanis in Saudi Arabia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article is not about a person (or any of the other things that A7 applies to). You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Theleftorium 20:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Good article nominations#Talk:The Real Global Warming Disaster/GA1

Hi, I'd like to draw your attention to this discussion that I've just initiated. Pyrotec (talk) 20:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you seem to be one of at least three editors, asked to review it (I've found another two so far). Unfortunately, from what you have added to the review so far, I'm not convinced that it is going to be a "fair review". That may seem unfair, and perhaps it is, but you choose to write the words that you put into the review: and that is what my judgement is based on. I have the review on my watch list, as will others: but you still have the chance to do a good review. Pyrotec (talk) 20:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

You have taken on the role of Reviewer, that is what you did when to opened the review (see WP:GAN and Misplaced Pages:Reviewing good articles). You may not like what William M. Connolley added to the review, but he is entitled to add comments, the same as anyone else. You, as Reviewer, do not need to take notice of what anyone else adds to the review (including me). However, your decision (if you get it wrong) can be challenged (at WP:GAR); and overturned, if uphelp. That is not intended as a threat - you just don't appear to know the process and you seem to have dropped yourself into the "fire". I do suggest that you get help from someone that knows the process - I'm hardly likely to be seen as unbiased. Pyrotec (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I have removed my review until i have read up on how to actually do it properly mark nutley (talk) 21:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Mark, I just wanted to say thank you for your level-headed responses and ultimate decision to study up on GAC before taking on your first review. Assessing articles for GA is a very gratifying process, but it does take some time to get used to the criteria, editor/nominator expectations, and all that good stuff. Hopefully you'll want to give it a try sometime in the future. :) If you have any questions, let me know. María (habla conmigo) 22:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I've pre-empted your review and marked the nomination as GA not issued. (You and/or the nominator can object at WP:GAR, but I hope not). I wish you well with your own article and any GAN nominations and/or reviews that you may choose to do in the future. In my oppionion, this is not a review that you (with I think no experience of the process) should have been asked to do - expecially by the Nominator. Pyrotec (talk) 08:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Rebel Magazine

Hi! I declined the G11 for Rebel Magazine, because I don't think the article is exclusively promotional despite the evident conflict of interest. You may want to consider taking it to AfD instead. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 07:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Na, let her try and save it. I`ll look it over again in a few days and see how it looks mark nutley (talk) 07:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Nguyen

I want to delete those incorrect infomation from the Nguyen article.

This surname is not originally Chinese. So, there is no point to put some Chinese legends here. Plus, there is no way to prove the correctness of some unknown legends. People might have some misunderstandings that 40% Vietnamese are Chinese which is not true. Nguyen is a Vietnamese surname, NO Chinese.

This article is about Nguyen, a Vietnamese surname. So, there is no point to put some notable Ruan people here. List the notable Ruan people in a Ruan article, please. Notable Ruan people has nothing to do with Nguyen article. Ducdung (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC+8)

Speedy deletion declined: Faye Fang Keaw

Hello Marknutley. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Faye Fang Keaw, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. The article's claim of four albums and "songs that have topped the Thai charts" is enough - to pass A7 claims don't have to be sourced. I have added a "primarysources" tag. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

PS - looking at the history I see you were not the original tagger. The CSDHelper script I used was not intelligent enough to tell that. I have let him know. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 11:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Conor kavanagh CSD/AFD

Hi, just to let you know I've sent Conor kavanagh to AFD if you're interested (discussion here). The creator of the article had removed the CSD tag you'd placed himself, but it wouldn't qualify as A7 anyway; playing for Leeds United is an assertion of importance. Regards, --BelovedFreak 12:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Decline Speedy on Owen Thomas (Playwright)

I have declined speedy deletion by WP:CSD#A7 on Owen Thomas (Playwright). This is because the article does indicate why its subject is important or significant, this is a lower standard than notability and does not need references. I have replaced with WP:BLPPROD thanks for highlighting the article though. Polargeo (talk) 10:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I have also declined Hussein Dabbas for similar reasons. Polargeo (talk) 12:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Please self-revert on WUWT

This will be the last time i courtesy notice you, you are supposed to keep watch on 1RR yourself. is not an acceptable way around it, in fact it could be considered WP:GAMING. If you've gone off-line during this, then i'm afraid that i am going to use the enforcement board - since you we're aware that you may have broken 1RR. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 17:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually i was unsure which is why i posted. This is pathetic, i fix the article, which you should have done instead of slapping tags on it and not i have to revert the fix, how stupid is that? mark nutley (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

You're also on civility parole. Do you consider the above civil? William M. Connolley (talk) 17:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Sorry - but while things may be "stupid" - it is the position into which you've put yourself. Good advice here: If you are in any way uncertain about whether your actions will break your restrictions - then don't do it, and ask someone first. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 17:36, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

@WMC yes it is civil, care to point out how it is not? @ Kim, good advice indeed, cheers mark nutley (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

recent events

First, do not abuse the vandalism charge -- that is reserved for destructive edits with clear intent, and is almost never leveled at long term users.

Second, how is this a BLP vio? I don't think there is any argument that it is, but I'm wondering what your thinking was.

As for the edit by WMC, it was clearly wrong, maybe actionable. I'm raising it now and may file a request. ATren (talk) 00:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Calling an identifiable living person a right-wing(nut) is a blp violation it is typical of the ha hom attacks made against people skeptical of AGW. What make`s me think it is? the fact that your not meant to insult identifiable living people makes me think it is a blp violation mark nutley (talk) 06:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I missed the edit summary. Sorry. ATren (talk) 10:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfinished business

William M. Connolley (talk) 07:54, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh well, I tried. William M. Connolley (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

What is that diff supposed to show? mark nutley (talk) 13:05, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

The wrong thing. Sorry. Try William M. Connolley (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok mark nutley (talk) 13:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Miracles (Insane Clown Posse song)

I've placed a hangon tag on the article.--SKATER 22:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for letting me know mark nutley (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

CSD

Hey there deletion tagger - I just zapped an inappropriate article you found :) - 2/0 (cont.) 21:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Yippee i made a contribution :-) mark nutley (talk) 10:15, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Your message

I do not completely understand your message. I have read the link you suggested, "FAQ/Business", and believe this fulfills all the main points. I have left a response message on the discussion page. Russian Standard Corporation is a very big company, and owns one of the leading consumer brands in Russia and even exports to over 70 countries. I was told that it deserves to be in Misplaced Pages, and looking at your "FAQ", I believe that this is the case. This is a bit stressful for me. Can we at least proceed slowly? CrystalQuartz (talk) 21:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I see 2/0 has helped you out a bit, if you need some more advice feel free to ask and i`ll try and help mark nutley (talk) 10:16, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Seriously...

My request that you justify the inclusion of that comment has gone unanswered for five days. Please self-revert until such time as you can at least be bothered to answer the question of what that trivia is doing in the article. Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 17:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Guettarda, but i have been busy. I had not noticed your question. I have responded on the article talk page mark nutley (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't

Don't engage WMC on talk pages. Cla is working on RC, he will respond to WMC if there are issues. Spend your time tracking down sources. Really, you should re-read the advice Lar gave you a few days ago. No good will come of you getting into it again with WMC. ATren (talk) 02:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, however if it is an article i am working on i will have to talk to him such as the hockey stick article, i shall keep interaction to the minimum however, thanks mark nutley (talk) 06:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

You don't have to respond to him on the hockey stick book article talk page. It's on my watchlist. Cla68 (talk) 07:07, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks guys mark nutley (talk) 07:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It's good to see you chaps finally coming out into the open and admitting you're a team. Full points for honesty, well done Cla and ATren! William M. Connolley (talk) 07:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)