[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

User talk:Cindamuse/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

[edit]

Thanks for your help on the proposed CFEBA Wikipedia entry

[edit]

Thanks for your help on the proposed CFEBA Wikipedia entry!

CStrotherCstrother (talk) 22:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir John York

[edit]

Sir may be used in article titles as a disambiguator when a name is ambiguous and one of those who used it was knighted, e.g. Sir Arthur Dean. From Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)#British nobility. This is why I named the article that way. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Charles! Sir is removed as consistent with the goals of the WikiProject Peerage for knights. York was generally recognized as Merchant of the Mint, so I made the change accordingly. Sir can be used in wikilinks to the article, but the article should not be named using the prefix. It's all a matter of style and consistency. No harm; no foul if you have a specific desire to maintain the Sir in the title. I'm just trying to be consistent. I'm not personally invested and won't be upset if you want to revert the move/redirect. On another note, can you add inline links to the articles you are creating? It would greatly help in reviewing the article. Thanks. Have a great day... Cindamuse (talk) 07:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll comment that Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography is a recent start-up, and its views on adapted articles (of which this posting was one) are not yet formulated. I would say, though, that inline referencing of each para of an adaptation looks like make-work, and there are more important matters to get to, early. When the article begins to have additions of other material, then I'd agree that to avoid confusion inline para references to the original start to serve a purpose. You can of course give your input to the project: we are aiming to post many thousands of new articles here from the DNB, as it gets posted to Wikisource. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just my opinion here, which you are free to relay to others. I appreciate the work that you are doing. My comments here are not personally directed toward you, but rather, an attempt to address the process of the DNB WikiProject. You have my respect. I think the DNB work is an asset to Wikipedia, but there is a creation of quite a bit of extra work, having to go back and audit and reformat according to the Manual of Style, along with ensuring compliance with standard citation styles. At a bare minimum, a reference grouping should be created. It appears that the process of the DNB WikiProject is a hindrance to the flow of quality management, requiring editors to continue assessing and auditing the article. This essentially equates to walking behind the horse in the parade with shovel in hand. There are bare components to an appropriate article, of which the current process is lacking. In my opinion, it would be a benefit if editors participating in the DNB WikiProject would add articles that meet the minimum requirement for inclusion, expected of all editors, rather than just slapping something up on Wikipedia and moving on to the next article. Please feel free to relay my comments. Thanks. Best wishes, Cindamuse (talk) 09:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • A review of the DNB WikiProject page, provides a bit of clarity. There is apparently an appropriate process in place. What I have come across during NPP is a lack of adherence to the guidelines presented by the WikiProject for creating new articles. The only guideline followed consistently is the fifth one, "Add the {{DNB}} attribution template at the end [of the article]." Encouraging participants in the WikiProject to follow the guidelines would be a benefit for other editors involved in reviewing the article after creation. It will really cut down on the unnecessary duplication of efforts. Thanks. Cindamuse (talk) 10:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not following your view of "minimum requirement". The WikiProject is well-attended, and has numerous experienced Wikipedians signed up. We have say 10,000 articles to create, and some division of labour is to be expected. The MoS being advisory rather than mandatory, I feel we are talking past each other to some extent. Compliance to the MoS is mentioned in Wikipedia:Merging encyclopedias, but it is just one of the issues facing those serious about adapting public domain reference material. Past efforts (1911 Britannica) have done far less in this direction, and we are trying to define a practical scheme for the most ambitious such project yet, building on all the experience available. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • No worries, Charles, I'm just expressing my opinions. You are free to disagree. I won't twist your arm. ; ) I think if the project participants simply followed the stated guidelines presented on the project page, the process will run smoother for everyone involved. When all is said and done, it's all good. You're doing great work. Thanks. Cindamuse (talk) 13:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The October 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive is about to begin!

[edit]

Get ready.

The October 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive is about to begin. Prep your keyboards, as the drive aims to wikify over 2,000 articles this month. We're going to need all the firepower we can get, so please get your friends to join up as well. In case you didn't know, wikification is fairly simple: just add wiki markup, links, and similar ". Thanks for joining; we're looking forward to an exciting time this month!

Regards,

Mono (talk · contribs) and WikiCopter (talk · contribs)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 05:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Do not waste my time

[edit]

Do not waste my time about deleting images please i have better things to do find out the copyright details.!YB 09:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Satellite (US band)

[edit]

Howdy, I wanted to let you know I removed the speedy deletion request from Satellite (US band). Although not immediately apparent that it will pass muster under WP:BAND, it does make some reasonable claims of notability. I have no opinion on a future afd. Thanks for your work on Wikipedia and let me know if you have any questions or concerns. --TeaDrinker (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Respectfully, I'm curious. What reasonable claims of notability do you see in the article? You mentioned in your edit summary, a "specific association with Mitch Allan" as the claim of notability. Is this your frame of reference? If so, just to clarify, WP:BAND only supports notability when a band "contains two or more independently notable musicians". While the band meets zero criteria of WP:BAND, the article additionally lacks reliable, independent sources. I fully respect your decision, but I question the rationale. Can you enlighten me? Thank you. Cindamuse (talk) 20:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BAND allows for bands formed by notable members of other bands to make subsequent bands notable. Since Mitch Allan is notable and Steven McMorran came from The Age of Information, this criteria could potentially be met. It may not be, of course, but A7 only applies to clear cut cases. There are even cases which I would personally !vote delete, but would remove the speedy since it might benefit from a discussion. Thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 22:02, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for responding. I don't find the rationale that WP:BAND allows for bands formed by notable members of other bands to make subsequent bands notable. Could it be that you read this in an essay or opinion piece somewhere? Steve McMorran fails notability on his own merits, so that doesn't really factor. According to guidelines, this article fails to indicate notability, which presents a clear cut case qualifying for deletion under Wikipedia's A7 CSD criteria. This leaves me puzzled and shaking my head. That said, I sincerely appreciate the feedback just the same. It's all good. Have a great day... Cindamuse (talk) 22:42, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brot Monroe

[edit]

But why was the Brot Monroe article redirected, "Monroe" is the correct spelling. Why was has it been deleted.--Nk3play2 my buzz 00:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The article was presented for deletion due to lack of notability established through significant coverage, presented by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The result of the discussion was to redirect to All My Children. The article that you added, while comprehensive, did not add significantly more information than what was offered in the previous article that was deleted. The article that was created today, was only supported by one reference, which was actually about the actor that portrays the character of Brot Monroe. My suggestion would be to userfy the article and work on finding reliable sources and adding to the character's history. I would think that you might be able to find some information in SOD or SOW. Let me know if you need help. Cindamuse (talk) 00:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The October 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive has begun!

[edit]

Get going.

The October 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive has begun. Please start wikifying, as the drive aims to wikify over 2,000 articles this month. We're going to need all the firepower we can get, so please invite your friends to join up as well (anyone can join, even after the drive has begun). In case you didn't know, wikification is fairly simple: just add wiki markup, links, and similar code. Thanks for joining; we're looking forward to an exciting time this month! All the instructions are on the drive page, so please begin logging your scores.

Regards,

Mono (talk · contribs) and WikiCopter (talk · contribs)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The October 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive at 03:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion

[edit]
GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks to all who participated! Several of our top editors were called away to real life concerns during the month (be careful out there, people!). This meant that once again, we did not meet all our lofty targets, but we did come close.

Stats

  • Out of 76 registered editors, 45 actively participated.
  • We nearly wiped out the 2008 articles from the backlog—there were only 13 remaining when the drive closed.
  • We reduced the backlog by 725 articles (11.5%), so it was another successful drive.
  • A total of 59 barnstars will be awarded to 40 editors—well done, and congratulations to all.

Barnstars
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you edited in the July 2010 GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive, you may have earned rollover words, which counted towards this month's barnstars (except for the leaderboard awards). Any unused word credits will be held over for the next drive, as long as you participated in the September drive. Over the course of the next week or two, we will be handing out the barnstars. Click here to see a list of barnstar winners.

  • We will be holding our next drive in November. You can sign up here.

A huge "thank you" to all editors who helped clear the backlog and to others who helped out behind-the-scenes. See you at the next drive, and until then, please continue to help us work through the backlog. Happy editing!

Coordinator: ɳorɑfʈ Talk! Co-coordinators: Diannaa (Talk) and S Masters (talk). Newsletter by Diannaa (Talk) and The UtahraptorTalk to me/Contributions.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 07:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

A misunderstanding

[edit]

Hi, Cindamuse. Well, we've been arguing over the deletion of tritagonist through templates for some time. So, I thought: 'something's strange about this.', since the wikipedia article on edit wars tells people to come to a compromise. And I have. I'm not going to touch the article anymore, however, I would like to ask you to further explain the problems of the article, so that I could improve my editing.  :) I am a violinist ♫ talk to me here! 12:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi there, a soft redirect was made on the article in compliance with WP:WINAD. While there are oftentimes articles on Wikipedia, as well as entries in Wiktionary, Wikipedia articles require additional encyclopedic information. The article provided no additional content beyond the definition, supported solely by dictionary.com. The options here included revising the content into an encyclopedic article, proposing it for deletion, replacing it with a soft redirect, or merging it with another article. With a revision not forthcoming, the soft redirect is deemed a much less jarring choice than a merge or deletion. Hope this helps. Please don't hesitate to ask, if you have other questions. Have a great day. Cindamuse (talk) 13:19, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE barnstar

[edit]
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your copyediting efforts during the Guild of Copy Editors' September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, editing two articles with a combined total of 1,812 words (25,663 with rollover), I have great pleasure in presenting you with this barnstar. On behalf of the Guild, thank you for your participation, and see you at the next drive. – S Masters (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IRILL - Speedy Delete?

[edit]

Dear Cindamuse, could you give some more insight into why you nominated IRILL for a speedy delete? Based on what I've been able to find, it appears to be a legitimate free software organization. The acronym "IRILL" is French. See:

How would you feel if I removed the CSD tag and filled out the article a bit? Saebvn (talk) 22:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • By all means, feel free to remove the CSD tag and go to town on the article. It was initially flagged due to a lack of indication of notability. The subject may be notable, but the article fails to clearly state why the subject is notable beyond any other software company. I've spoke with the author and s/he has mentioned additional information that is not yet in the article. I think some work on the article would be great. Hopefully you will be able to find some secondary, reliable sources to support the article as well. Best wishes, Cindamuse (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

[edit]

The Enough Moment: Fighting To End Africa's Worse Human Rights Crimes

[edit]

Hi, Thank you for your help! I will be adding text asap. Do have a questions about another wiki profile page i am working on, entitled "Lisa J. Shannon". Wondering how to resolve issue noted on tag at that site. Thank you! Nell 19:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Edits to Not On Our Watch

[edit]

Very Sorry - have been working on new page for The Enough Moment today and confused previous book's page, Not On Our Watch, with new page.

Vandalism most definitely not intended.

Would appreciate your removing vandalism note in history section.

Thank you,

Nell 01:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Funbox Media

[edit]

Can you upload it for me please.A Candela (talk) 14:38, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

it is a video game company http://spong.com/company/4679/Funbox-Media?cid=4679&Funbox-Media A Candela (talk) 14:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Still not sure what you need to have uploaded. This article was flagged to be deleted due to a lack of indication pertaining to notability. Articles are required to clearly indicate why a subject is notable. There mere existence of a company or organization is not sufficient to establish notability. You can find more information here. Unfortunately, the link provided reveals a copyright violation and requires deletion of the article. Cindamuse (talk) 15:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zushi Games is now funbox media http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zushi_Games A Candela (talk) 15:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Big Problem! Please respond ASAP: The Enough Moment: Fighting to End Africa's Worst Human Rights Crimes

[edit]

Saw page titled The Enough Moment a short time ago, which is about the same book for which I was creating a page. Mine was entitled, The Enough Moment: Fighting to End Africa's Worst Human Rights Crimes, which is complete book title.

I made edits to The Enough Moment page, though did not change the title.

Then I removed all content from The Enough Moment: Fighting to End Africa's Worst Human Rights Crimes page and added a speedy deletion tag and sent note to person who originally added that tag.

Suddenly, I cannot access The Enough Moment page. I see your "redirect" edit, but that seems to have taken place yesterday, so am confused.

Can we please resurrect The Enough Moment page????

Thank you, Nell 14:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Think this is sorted out now.

Can delete pg. I created.

The Enough Moment (original post about the book) remains. TU

Nell 14:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

No, do not want this pg. reinstated. Want the original The Enough Moment to exist

[edit]

Nell 15:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think u have to do anything now. The pg. I want deleted now has speedy delete tag on it, so we seem to be all set. Thank you! I know, confusing.

[edit]

Nell 15:30, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

  • I hope it works out well. I have some suggestions. It is important that you sign your comments and posts with four tildes, i.e., ~~~~. This enables editors to identify you and communicate with you easily. It also helps to wikilink the articles of which you are speaking. It was kinda confusing trying to differentiate between the articles mentioned above. Then, of course, I had to reboot my computer and couldn't respond quickly. Sorry about that. You did good on the speedy deletion template you added after blanking the page. If you need anymore help, barring of course my need to reboot, please feel free to ask. Cindamuse (talk) 15:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References, Footnotes, External links, and other things that go bump in the night

[edit]

It seems that we disagree on whether URLs placed in the "External links" section count as references. I think I understand your perspective but I don't think I agree as I see ELs and references - even malformatted or half-assed ones - as distinct. ElKevbo (talk) 18:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Mr. Superlove single

[edit]

Hello Cindamuse, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mr. Superlove single, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Is a plausible, useful redirect or is not a redirect at all. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the notice. I'm very familiar with the CSD criteria and respect your opinion. That said, the decision to forgo deletion is subjective. Making a decision to delete a redirect, based on whether or not it is "plausible or useful" is based on personal opinion. It is not based on an understanding or lack thereof regarding deletion policy. What is "plausible or useful" to one person, may not equate to the next. Others may disagree with your choice here, you just got to it first. Regardless, keep up the good work, your contributions are appreciated. Cindamuse (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits (Gandi)

[edit]

Hi,

Thanks for the information. The "vandalism" was not referring to your modifications/edits. (Thanks for the several grammatical corrections, by the way!).

The vandalism was via an edit someone else at 17:36 on 6 october. Unfortunately I didn't see the option to revert back, so then fumbled around trying to put the page back the way it was by comparing the revision diffs... basically got a little muddled :(

Regards,

Lelandv (talk) 03:32, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lelandv (talk • contribs) 03:25, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Delta High School (Clarksburg, California)
Andy Park (musician)
If We Are the Body
Wimborne St Giles
As the Music Plays
Call + Response
CompassionArt (album)
Iyaz
East Union High School
Seven Places
Nike (mythology)
Green Party (Colombia)
Marion Harding High School (Ohio)
Charles M. Blalack Middle School
Haggard Middle School
Jimmy Kébé
Clear Lake High School (Clear Lake, Iowa)
Cropley Ashley-Cooper, 6th Earl of Shaftesbury
God of This City
Cleanup
Skillet (band)
Oxley High School
Thousand Foot Krutch discography
Merge
Meaning of life
Hierarchical clustering
Time signature
Add Sources
Thousand Foot Krutch
Chennai Public School
Red (band)
Wikify
Michael Roizen
Tefal
Private university
Expand
Will Hopoate
Ghana
Trent Hodkinson

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Monikura Tikinau

[edit]

Why is my change to his name vandalism his name is Monikura not Manikura so i redirected Manikura and moved it to Monikura i was just correcting it not vandalismYoundbuckerz 05:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

  • It is inappropriate to copy/paste from one article in order to create a second article with a title that you deem more suitable (or correct). In the future, the proper action would be to use the move feature, rather than copying the work from another article. Use of the move feature accounts for the talkpage and history of the original article. If you have concerns over the title of the page, I would suggest bringing it up on the talkpage of the article. Thanks. Cindamuse (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi Cindamuse, please let me know if i have sufficiently remedied the issue with Erickson Retirement Communities. i re-worded the article materially, and i added the about us page as a source for the article. thank you for the guidance as i get acclimated here! CB (talk) 18:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User Inka 888/5,000 edits

[edit]

Want to explain why you think it's a test page? --Inka888Come yell at me! 03:16, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keon K. Hampton

[edit]

Hello, I've changed your BLP prod to a db-band at Keon K. Hampton, as it asserts no notability. Thanks, Top Jim (talk) 19:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links -- Ubuntu

[edit]

You have censored a section of an article as an apparent sockpuppet of Walter Gorlitz.

You have indicated your justification is to prevent a violation of the External links guidelines; nevertheless you have censored text, not external links. This is exactly the behavior of Walter Gorlitz.

There are multiple links in this article you did not censor, and the links you censored have been part of the article for over three years. They are not spam links, they link to official links for this operating system. Only you and Walter Gorlitz have been this aggressive about these links, suggesting sockpuppetry. Perspectoff (talk) 05:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, I am working on recent changes and came across inappropriate links added to the prose of the Ubuntu (operating system) article. Please see WP:ELNO. Inappropriate links are not exclusive of an External links section. The guidelines apply to all content. I also noted on your userpage that you are the current editor for Ubuntu Doctors Guild, which indicates a conflict of interest. Inclusion of links to the Ubuntu organization indicates that you are not able to edit this particular article from a neutral position. Please refrain from adding inappropriate links to articles. If you have a concern about sockpuppetry, you can report your concern here. Thank you. Cindamuse (talk) 05:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hah. Cindamuse. He thinks you're me! I wish! You're much smarter than I am. I suggested that he report us to a sockpuppet investigation just to clear our names.
For clarification: the previous unsigned threat was from User:Perspectoff who has been violating several Wikipedia policies. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He's doing it wrong. He reported me to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring for breaking WP:3RR with three edits: one over a week ago and now two this evening. That's where he accused you of being a sockpuppet and added your edits to mine. Ironically, it's immediately below my report of him and his four edits. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's baaack: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Walter Görlitz. There are also suggestions that he has two sockpuppets of his own. Do you know how to start an investigation? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I thought I saw you initiate a sock investigation about a week ago. Am I wrong? It's pretty straight forward if you want to start one, but I wouldn't recommend it right now. It may appear as just a way to get back at him for starting an investigation of his own. I would just let it run its course and focus elsewhere. I haven't really kept up with or watched the Ubuntu article since Perspectoff was blocked. However, I wouldn't hesitate to post a warning if I saw something out of line. All in all, I think Perspectoff has enough other editors that are watching him now as well. And in my opinion, Rmcfanatic may be a sock. I just shake my head in amazement. BTW, I'm a chick living in Washington state. Moved up from Vegas last year and California before that. Washington is home. Cindamuse (talk) 15:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't start an SPI mostly because it's not that straightforward (at least for me) but it seems that neither of the users I was concerned about have been back, I'm not particularly worried about it. As for the SPI against us, it was deleted for lack of evidence. I suspected Vegas because of your association with Annie. Welcome to the PNW. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I was thinking about the one against us. I knew it would run its course due to lack of evidence. I kept watching it, in case I needed to provide some feedback, but really knew that the resulting conclusion would speak for itself. Yes, Annie and I were roommates and business partners in Vegas. Prior to that, I ran the business office in Washington. Then last year, I had to move back to Washington to take care of my aging parents. It was not an amicable split between Annie and me. I still know where all the bodies are buried, and it makes Oz and Annie quake in their boots. LOL Cindamuse (talk) 13:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ACA Siren List Article

[edit]

I was not trying to be too harsh in my message on the edit for the List of Sirens page. I have seen various spam edits on other articles or edits done by people who simply hadn't done the research. That is what I was trying to mention earlier. I understand anyone can edit the article, and I do encourage those who know the proper facts to edit the article, incase there was anything I didn't know or missed. --JustInn014 (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the clarification. Keep in mind that it is not required that editors have a sure or complete knowledge of the subject of an article in order to perform edits. What is necessary is an understanding of policy and guidelines, along with a desire to make edits in good faith. Best wishes, Cindamuse (talk) 07:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

[edit]

Confirmation

[edit]

Hi Cindamuse, thanks for the introduction. I am trying to add a few more pictures of heating element installations to the section of Electric Systems on this page. Can you maybe confirm me so i can do so?

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanbench (talk • contribs) 16:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Welcome! You'll need at least ten edits before the system will confirm your username account. This is an automatic system response, rather than an action performed by another editor. Cindamuse (talk) 16:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My username

[edit]

I've had this username since November 2006. It's never been a problem before... Wikipediatastic (talk) 11:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It probably hasn't been noticed due to the sporadic editing. I'm working on new articles and see that most of your work has been on articles already established, so it's easy to slip through the cracks. You can find the applicable username policy and additional information here. BTW, good work on the ViiV Healthcare article. Best wishes, Cindamuse (talk) 11:32, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I applied for a new username but a couple of people think I should be ok with carrying on with my current name. [1]

What do you think?

The ViiV Healthcare article is now pretty much referenced up. I'll maybe add some more information later but I hope someone else will come along and add some stuff too. Wikipediatastic (talk) 16:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Singapore First Aid Training Centre

[edit]

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I deleted Singapore First Aid Training Centre, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. GedUK  11:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Was that the one where the author was recruiting for new employees? I'm thinking it was. When you read through the article, the motive of the author in adding the article to Wikipedia becomes quite clearly advertising and promotional in nature. That said, the end result is the same. Oftentimes, articles meet more than one deletion criteria. No harm; no foul. Eeny meeny miney moe. Either way, it's got to go. LOL Cindamuse (talk) 12:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2 weeks

[edit]

With luck most fly by random additions to indonesian project are dumped by once only eds - the only consistent ones at the moment are the one line soccer bios and giant soccer tables with no refs - either way the jump the gun point is appreciated - cheers SatuSuro 12:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shakur (musician)

[edit]
Hello, Cindamuse. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JamesBWatson (talk) 17:11, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cindamuse/Archive_5&oldid=1089759716"