User talk:Courcelles/Archive 85

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 80 ← Archive 83 Archive 84 Archive 85 Archive 86 Archive 87 → Archive 90

sorry about fake checkuser rights

sorry about me adding the details about check-user even if i weren't.Urmate #a small guy (talk) 09:55, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

No harm done, I think we can just write it off to a little silliness. Courcelles 00:05, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Donors Forum of Chicago

I see you deleted Donors Forum of Chicago for copyright. I seem to recall trimming/paraphrasing that article some time ago. Was there a better version in the history? Speciate (talk) 23:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Nope, as far as I could tell it was turtles (or in this case, copyvios) all the way down - different copyvios from different areas of their website in different versions of the article, but pretty much all copyvios all the way back to the article's creation. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 23:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Ah, and I usually spot those. Oh well. Speciate (talk) 23:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Yep, Fluffernutter is right. Courcelles 00:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Harold Fortuin

I noticed that you closed the discussion on this AFD as "no consensus" (a wise choice) but it appears that the "proposed for deletion" notice remains on the article. Just checking. Scot Johnston (talk) 02:21, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Looks like an AFD closing script fail, as it closed the discussion, and tagged the talk page for documentation, but didn't remove the tag from the article. Done now, though, if it happens again, you can do it yourself, as the actual closing of the discussion is what matters, detagging the article and tagging the talk page is paperwork, important paperwork to be sure, but not material to the discussion's outcome. Courcelles 14:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

International Conference on Systems Biology

Hello, it seems you deleted the page on ICSB for lack of notability. There must be a misunderstanding. The ICSB is the largest conference on systems biology. It has been organized every year since 2001. The last one in Edinburgh gathered more than 1200 attendees. Now, the misunderstanding may comes from the fact that over the last two years, a rogue company started to create fake conferences with the same name. The executive board of the International Society for Systems Biology is currently threatening them of a legal action. Anyway, is there a possibility to "undelete" the page? Nicolas Le Novere (talk) 22:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request

Glad you showed up as I couldn't revert again. Can you revert Victor Lord Jr. back to the redirect. He is a non notable character and that has been in the series for four days. Thanks.RaintheOne BAM 00:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

  • An admin can't both protect and revert without a damned good reason, Rain. Anyway, reverting after a request like this one would be meatpuppetry. Courcelles 00:50, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I didn't actually know you could not perform both actions. :) For future reference, is there anything that can be done about IP hopping? (I'm not sure if it counts as socking if they just use the IP once and move on.)RaintheOne BAM 01:09, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
If the IP's are close, we can consider rangeblocking, but this guy is hopping over too much of the IP spectrum to rangeblock, so the only other tool left is to semi-protect the page. Courcelles 01:11, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

List of historic places in Christchurch

Thanks for your help on that one! Schwede66 01:02, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

  • No problem! Some of the finishing/cleaning work looks easier to do once, so if you want to do it over on dewp, and then have it imported here, that can be arranged. Courcelles 01:12, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Email. Urgent.

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

  • And you have a long reply. Courcelles 02:44, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Townalso

Hi, it seems you blocked User:Townalso indefinitely for long term abuse, but I only see three contributions, and all of them today. Was it intentional? Falcon8765 (TALK) 05:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Very much so. Though, in this case, {{checkuserblock-account}} may have been a better log reason. Courcelles 05:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Alright, just wasn't clear what the problem was. Thanks for the explanation Falcon8765 (TALK) 05:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Mail...

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 20:12, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Though, not from me. Just relaying a message. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 20:12, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't see anything. Resend? Courcelles 21:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Alec Michod

I missed this AFD, but I think this may have been wrongly decided. Michod's book, THE WHITE CITY, was reviewed in Publishers' Weekly, Booklist, Kirkus, The Globe and Mail, Chicago History Journal, and The Village Voice. The subject is also a frequent contributor to The Believer, a prominent magazine it the literary community.

Surely WP:AUTHOR does not insist that we not list first novelists? Or that we only write about best selling writers? MarkBernstein (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

  • WP:AUTHOR is actually fairly strict, and is a somewhat high bar to notability. The only thing I see that would even be possible here is criteria 3, "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Does his book come anywhere near that standard, or is it just run-of-the-mill successful? Courcelles 14:28, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I've noted multiple independent periodical reviews above. Compare other writers who have written significant first books: Hannu_Rajaniemi, Julie_Orringer, Amy_Bloom. Plenty more where these came from. The imprimatur St. Martin's Press is a further argument, much as the star of a major Hollywood picture is notable. WP:AUTHOR, surely, is strict to avoid listing every marginal, self-published and small-press book, not to ensure that the encyclopedia lists every Japanese porn-film star and every pro athlete but only best-selling writers? MarkBernstein (talk) 15:41, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

  • But you're arguing for the notability of the book, not the author here. We can't really build a biography from reviews of a book, and that's what WP:AUTHOR is designed to keep us from doing, not to restrict it to bestselling authors, but to restrict it to people we have a chance of building an article that is about a person, not about a book. Courcelles 04:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

May I have the text of the former Alec Michod page then, with an eye to writing a page for The White City? Happy to provide email if you like. MarkBernstein (talk) 16:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

User_talk:Chase_me_ladies,_I'm_the_Cavalry#GaryNiger_and_Gary-Niger

Can you please take some time to examine the concerns expressed at User_talk:Chase_me_ladies,_I'm_the_Cavalry#GaryNiger_and_Gary-Niger. Both Cavalry and I feel that an uninvolved sysop should offer a third opinion. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 01:30, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Good idea, wrong person to ask -- I'm not uninvolved. Courcelles 01:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
    • Sorry. I forgot to check. I'll go bother someone else. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 02:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Please consider un(semi-)protecting the discussion page for the September 11 article.

Talk:September_11_attacks (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Please un(semi-)protect the discussion page for the September 11 article. The talk page hasn't recently been vandalized, and the edit wars seem to have been mediated. (And besides, they were done by named users, not IPs.) (This is not a request to unprotect the article itself, just the Talk page). Given that the article is semi-protected, the Talk page should be the right place to request changes to the article by IP users. Thanks, 173.206.132.10 (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I'm not going to do that. As the logs of the talk page show, the discussion page here is a heavy target for problems, problems that are greatly reduced by having the talk page semi-protected. Courcelles 18:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
    • I did actually look at the logs, and at the history pages before making this request. It took me several hours to figure out how to request a simple edit to the article page, because the discussion page was locked. What I saw in my research, was that the edits that were so bad they were actually deleted instead of just reverted, came from:
      • GORE TEX 555
      • Surreal64 XXX
      • (Username or IP removed)
      • Udehishigi Juji Gatame
      • Our Benefactors
      • 76.68.55.226
      • AlGoreCreated the Internet
      • CQC-The Boss
      • LiquidOcelot's Arm
      • 174.89.56.99
Since most of those were named userids, and since the latest set of discussion seemed to be interested in improving the quality of the article, and since all I could find on unprotecting said to ask the administrator who protected it, I thought it would be ok to ask. I'm sorry if I just stirred up bad memories.
If the discussion page itself can't be unlocked, would it be possible to create an unlocked discussion page for the discussion page, where IP users could make requests to have things added to the semi-locked discussion page? (I haven't found the help page yet that says anything on how to do that, but I'm hoping that because you're an administrator who knows a lot about protecting pages, that maybe you'll know how to do that.) Thanks,
173.206.132.10 (talk) 05:03, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
(By the way, for some period of time, this page too, refused to let me edit it. I don't know if there's a bug, but I didn't see anything in the logs about you protecting it today.)173.206.132.10 (talk) 05:03, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
They were name accounts, but they were new name accounts. Semi-protection also prevents editing by accounts less than four days old, and most of those were sockpuppets who continuously try and disrupt the 9/11 article. An unlocked page is sometimes done for user talk pages, but I've never heard of it being done for article talk pages, perhaps because protecting them for any length of time is so very uncommon, and usually only done in light of heavy and persistent sockpuppet attacks. And I fear the creation of one would simply let the sockpuppets have a target again, so it might be a self-defeating proposition. Courcelles 17:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Help!

You can protect pages using Twinkle? How can I do it? StormContent (talk) 21:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

First, you're going to have to pass WP:RFA. ;) Twinkle eases the button mashing for a lot of admin chores, but you still have to be an admin first. Courcelles 22:14, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
(e/c) Hi StormContent. No, only administrators can protect articles. If you want to request page protection, please see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Please note for future reference that the {{helpme}} template is for your talk page to draw people who monitor the helpme category there to answer a general question. A question directed at a specific user, as above, informs the user as soon as they log in of its presence by the unmistakable orange banner saying "you have new messages" that happens when an edit is made to anyone's talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:16, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
The best way for me to become an admin is just waiting. StormContent (talk) 13:32, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI

You may interested in having a look at User talk:Ron Ritzman#Edit conflict?. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 06:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Whatever Ron wants to do is fine with me. Courcelles 17:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Important.

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- MelbourneStar☆ (talk to me) 13:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Country data Canada

Your changes to Template:Country data Canada have resulted in the current name of the Canadian Forces Air Command (informally known as the Canadian Air Force) being listed as the Royal Canadian Air Force. Please would you fix the template. Thanks. Greenshed (talk) 18:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

  • What's the problem, they call themselves the Royal Canadian Air Force now, there was a name-change earlier this month. There was a discussion on WT:MILHIST. Courcelles 18:49, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
    • My apologies - I stand corrected. Greenshed (talk) 21:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
      • Would you be able to create an {{air force-1975}} which would yield Canadian Forces Air Command? This could be used in biographical articles for those who served between 1975 to 2011 such as Ken Pennie. The RCN may benefit from a similar Canadian Forces Maritime Command option. Thanks. Greenshed (talk) 21:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
        • If you can tell me how to do it, perhaps. But I'm not sure what you want, and if it's a new template, you'd be better off making it yourself. Courcelles 01:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
          • At little reseach indicates that the flag was introduced in 1985 although the Canadian Forces Air Command dates from 1975. Having had a good look at the flag template system, while I can see that a couple of lines would need to be added to Template:Country data Canada I cannot work out where the alias (?) text comes from (perhaps some other transcluded template). In this case WP is the free encyclopedia which anyone with an advanced knowledge of WPML can edit. Greenshed (talk) 19:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
            • Yeah, at this point, you need a template guru, which for something this complicated is not me. :) Courcelles 19:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Deleted page request

Something to Remember (Jo Stafford album) It was a self nom for deletion. Would appreciate a copy of at least the album track listing and any refs. Thanks, We hope (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

See your e-mail inbox. Courcelles 00:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Just got it--thanks much! We hope (talk) 00:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Remember the proposed interaction ban between Roscelese and Haymaker?

You are one third of the admins overseeing same? I have had to advertise for a volunteer for the position of the remaining third sysop. Hopefully you are still willing to participate? Cheers, LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Still perfectly willing, and have been quietly monitoring. My run of everyone I asked turning me down continued, though. Courcelles 20:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Banana dance (wiki software)

We wanted to comment on your choice to delete the "Banana Dance (wiki software)" article. We believe that this was an error. Banana Dance is a free open-source project. It's true that the software is relatively new, but we also believe that the the reason it was deleted (no sources or something along those lines) is unfair. The program has reached a good audience since it was released and it is gaining in fame and notability. There may not have been sources where you looked, but I assure you if you search the web you will find credible sources for Banana Dance. The software has been reviewed on a number of credible websites to date. I beg you to re-consider the deletion of the Banana Dance article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Dance_(wiki_software) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.128.218.153 (talk) 22:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles/Archive_85&oldid=1171650528"