User talk:Moonriddengirl

edit count | edit summary usage Welcome. To leave a message for me, please press the plus sign at the top of the page. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil comments here, unless you specify that you would rather I respond at your talk page. If I've left a note for you to which I think you may respond, I'm watching your page. Typically, I do not watch pages where I've left simple policy clarifications. If you want to discuss a note with me further and aren't sure if I'm watching your page, please feel free to open a new discussion with me here. If you have a question about an album assessment I have made, please look first at the album assessment guidelines. It may answer your question. If it doesn't or if you'd like me to reassess, please let me know. If you have questions about a page I have deleted or a template warning I have left on your user page, let me know civilly, and I will respond to you in the same way. I will not respond to a personal attack, except perhaps with another warning. Personal attacks are against Wikipedia policy, and those who issue them may be blocked. You may read more about my personal policies with regards to deletion here. CSD templates Here's something where I could use some help from you, Moonriddengirl, if you're interested. I just noticed a comment from Ozzieboy at WT:Criteria for speedy deletion/Templates (general), with a suggested change (inserting something along the lines of "or duplicate pages" or "a page which is an exact duplicate of another page" (latter is my version)) which seems reasonable to me. However, it also seems reasonable to me that if such a change is to be done, the policy (CSD) should be modified first, then the template, and I just replied so. Anyway, if you'd like to help, you can assist in reaching consensus on this, for example perhaps by proposing the suggested change at CSD yourself if you agree with it, or by replying to Ozzieboy with a reason why it wouldn't be a good idea, or some other action. I don't have strong feelings about including the suggestion or not; I just want to make sure that all concerns have been addressed reasonably. (Perhaps just doing nothing is OK too now that I've replied to Ozzieboy's message, anyway.) Thanks. --Coppertwig (talk) 18:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC) DONE: all the draft templates have been created. See my message at WT:Criteria for speedy deletion#Suggested new wordings for CSD templates. It would be helpful if you would look them over -- perhaps just checking that the wording is reasonable and/or is what was agreed on; I haven't checked them against any changes that have happened meanwhile in the CSD's, for example. I may have made mistakes copying the wording, too. I may be checking some of the programming-type details and hope that Happy-melon will check them over too. Thanks. --Coppertwig (talk) 01:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC) Yay! Go you! :D It's shut off time for me for tonight, but I will get on them tomorrow. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks for your support. :-) Another thing to check: suggested deletion log summary wordings, which I've just written. These will automatically go in the deletion logs. See WT:CSD#Section break 2 and the tables in the subpages (this time it's the tables to be proofread/edited, not the templates yet). --Coppertwig (talk) 01:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC) They look good to me (I tweaked some of the article ones), but I have to say that I use ^demon's script for deletion logs, so I'm not familiar with what stuff says *now*. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC) Happy-melon has written deletion summaries into the templates which don't necessarily correspond with what's in the tables. Thanks for your tweaks, but I think I'll leave things as they are: that is, if you want your tweaks to go into the templates you may have to do that yourself and/or discuss it with Happy-melon. It doesn't matter much to me exactly what the deletion logs say; that is, either your versions or Happy-melon's are fine. Happy-melon seems to lean towards very short deletion log summaries. --Coppertwig (talk) 02:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Just saying hello, as I just noticed we both seem to be online at the same time – or were; I have to go soon. By the way, I recently noticed (again?) a bunch of templates such as Template:db-xfd and Template:db-empty etc. that we also need to go over new wording for. More on that later. --Coppertwig (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Please see discussion at WT:Criteria for speedy deletion#Ready for implementation, although we aren't really ready for implementation. :-) --Coppertwig (talk) 23:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Never ending, huh? :) I'll go take a look at the conversation. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Yeah, I had no idea how long all this would take! It's satisfying, though. You might be interested in these discussions at the pump: Tightening the screws and Reducing barriers to entry --Coppertwig (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC) ←I've looked at (and contributed to) one; I'll look at the other in a minute. As opposed to the new templates, I'm not sure how best I can help out. Is there anything specific I can or should do? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC) It would be helpful if you would look at the new templates, i.e. {{Db-xfd/new}} {{Db-blankcsd/new}} {{Db-disambig/new}} {{Db-blanktalk/new}} {{Db-copypaste/new}} {{Db-move/new}} {{Db-movedab/new}} and consider whether they represent policy adequately, or whether some of them should be deleted or have their wording changed to correspond more closely to policy (or whether policy needs to be changed to reflect actual template usage). I'm somewhat concerned that G6 is vague and that some of these templates invoke G6 with wording which does not appear at all in the G6 policy. I've tried to make the situation clearer by inserting "Asserted to be non-controversial maintenance" and am not sure if this gets the point across that the other words are not a quote of G6. Maybe you can think of better wording. Also perhaps comment on the redirects and deletions suggested by Happy-melon. Thanks. (Note that due to a quirk in how the templates are implemented, A3 may need to be mentioned twice in blankcsd. It may not be worth the trouble to change that.) --Coppertwig (talk) 14:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC) Jon Courtney Moonriddengirl -- you elected to keep this page; You've been had, convinced by a weak argument for notability by two self-confessed camp followers of this person, who now use wikipedia as an advertising medium. Let me ask you, have you ever heard of Jon Courtney?. All you have done is started now is an editing war when, with a simple merge you could have avoided thisJustpassinby (talk) 15:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC). On the contrary, any editors who decide to edit war are doing so of their own volition and will be subject to the results of that. We don't side-step consensus just because of the fear of tendentious editing. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Hi. Thanks for your earlier note. I've put a new note about all this at the WP:AN/I noticeboard as there have been further complications! Bondegezou (talk) 15:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC) Further dubious editing continues... I've also reported possible sockpuppetry at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Justpassinby (2nd). Bondegezou (talk) 17:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC) You know and I know that the 'concensus' method of article deletion is flawed and should be replaced with a debate based decision. My only beef with Jon Courtney is that he is not notable enough to merit a seperate entry in Wiki. Nothing that has been said has changed my view of this, and for you to say that you hadn't heard of him prior to this dispute and then to write such an ill sourced, ill-informed and lengthy article is simply taking the p*ss (spelled out, is abuse of your admin privileges). I can maintain the neutrality of the article by countering all your positively biased writing with my own negatively biased writing - there's enough sources out there. One thing is for sure - there's no point in taking the article to any further dispute given how you have already acted.Justpassinby (talk) 08:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Justpassinby" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justpassinby (talk • contribs) 11:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC) The consensus method of article deletion has flaws, yes. But if you think consensus is counting noses, you've misunderstood it. It is based on debate, but you were the only person arguing that the material had no place on Wikipedia in the AfD. Other editors also cited guidelines in setting out why it did. For your benefit and that of other editors who felt the article should not stand alone, I linked to Help:Merge, which sets out the proper procedure for proposing a merge. I find it perplexing that you consider the article ill-sourced, given that every line I added is attributed to a reliable source. And given further that you were yourself objecting to the poor sourcing of the article, I am entirely flummoxed that you regard my efforts to improve it by ensuring that it meets WP:V as admin abuse. (You'll find steps for following up on that here, as detailed on my userpage.) It was your own note on my userpage about the risk of edit warring that inspired me to make sure that wouldn't happen by bringing the article in line with policies and guidelines. I agreed that the material that existed at that time was positively biased ("credited with the ability to write well for contrasting male and female lead vocals") and poorly sourced. I'm not sure how you find efforts to fix that abusive. I have no issues with your using proper sources to keep this and its related articles neutral, but negatively biased writing is no more appropriate than positively biased writing. (And if you perceive bias in any article, you should consider seeking additional opinions, perhaps at WP:NPOVN.) If you think the Jon Courtney article shouldn't be here, propose a merge. Disrupting the article to make a point isn't going to help make your case or convince anyone that you're operating in good faith. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC) Duplicating response to above, since above was duplicated here. :) Oh, P.S., if you disagree that the closure of an AfD was done properly, you should follow the procedure set out at deletion review. I presume you know about that, since it's mentioned at the top of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Courtney and you've obviously read it. But perhaps you overlooked it. If you go that avenue, you will need to be prepared to explain how the closure misinterpreted the process. It is not for simply arguing with the debate's outcome or re-opening the debate, but for suggesting that the debate should have closed differently based on existing material within it. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC) duplicating again. Rather not. Can we simply have this conversation in one place? :) If there's one thing Wikipedia has taught me it is that there is little use debating issues with an administrator who has written an article that she has elected to keep, despite obvious opposition. We are arguing understanding of semantics with this article, and the real issue is getting lost in their interpretation. For someone who claims to have never heard of this subject, I would ask you what qualification do you have to write a biography? You have never met him, don't know him, you possibly wouldn't like his music if you heard it. However, in order to prove your point and to exemplify your status on Wiki, your are determined to go ahead and twist what little you know or can find on the web about this subject, in order to write an article that belongs in 'Teen' magazine. I'm not going to go through any dispute resolution as that is pointless. You, as an admin, are omnipotent and can basically get away with writing any rubbish on Wikipedia. The fact that you haven't been challenged yet is simply a reflection on the unimportance of the subject and the perceived lack of integrity of your articles. Carry on. I will remember to sign this (another of your pet(ty) hates) just so that the other fan bondegezou doesnt get all uppity again, and I'll put a copy on your talk pageJustpassinby (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC) History Merge I can't believe I'm in an argument about this. Non-notable article - deleted. End of story. Black Kite 00:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Sorry - that was rather intemperate of me, and somewhat caused by IRL events. Though honestly, I don't see the necessity for GFDL compliance here - you basically have a NN artcle which is included (via a simple sentence) in another article - what is the necessity for GFDL? Frankly, I prefer to delete such articles, as such redlinks lying about are a magnet for recreation. LGRCitroilles would no doubt argue with me, but hey. Black Kite 01:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC) And now I've just seen your reply to me. Tell you what; I'll recreate the article as a redirect, and look it over tomorrow. Fair?? Black Kite 01:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC) No, you're right, I'm rubbish at history merges :) I think I got one right once, but it was a lot time ago... Black Kite 01:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Honorverse Hi Thanks again for your comments. I'm a bit confused now as to what to do. I've had this put on my talk page: Grayson Space Navy During the AfD of High Admiral (Honorverse), you offered (twice) to undo your merge of the material to Grayson Space Navy if the result of the AfD was delete — it was; please consider using this link to do so. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC) I'm happy to do it, but is that what I should do or?--Doug Weller (talk) 08:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC) FYI, User:Dougweller has undone his merge of material from High Admiral (Honorverse) to Grayson Space Navy. (We've met before, but I don't recall the circumstances; hi!) Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Hi. :D Thanks for your assistance. The matter seems to be handled now, with everything where it ought to be and nothing where it oughtn't. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC) I'm still trying to figure out what happened. I saw you restored the tags I put there; was that due to my (now deleted) edit being in the middle of things? Also, what links to it is now showing tons of links, but I remove the link from {{Honorverse}} which is where most of them were coming from. What's with that? Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Yes, your edit was to a page that had the GFDL violating material attached. To preclude the possibility of the material being later restored, given that I could easily replace your tags (no real fear of GFDL issue, but I credited you anyway :D), the best procedure seemed to be to delete the additions entirely. I don't know what's with the links. I'll go take a look and see if I can figure it out. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC) I'm not going to be able to figure out much, I'm afraid. The links seem obviously related to the template from which you removed the page a few hours ago. I have been told in the past that transclusion can take a while to catch up. I do not know if this is true or, if true, why. :) I'd say check back tomorrow, and if the problem persists we can take it up at the help desk or village pump technical. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC) But, but, but… <joke>that cost me an edit-count!</joke> Yes, my real concern is stuff being stealthily resurrected down the road. The link thing is probably some sort of caching issue; see if it just goes away. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC) above edit-conflicted with your reply; I've seen this sort of thing before but it didn't persist for long; database just got thrashed; check tomorrow. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC) LOL! :D Okay, tomorrow. I'm pretty useless with the technical side of things. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Well, you seem to have the history merge down. Ask if you ever think I might be of help. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks. I surely will. Ditto. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC) The pages that link to… question seems to have sorted itself. Also, you may wish to see this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grayson Space Navy. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC) An edit-war about music genres Hi Moonriddengirl. I would like the assistance of a cool-headed admin. As much as I swore that I would never get involved in edit wars about music genres, here I am at Glassjaw. I was drawn in (and requested page protection) when some anon IPs were warring back and forth and clogging the page history. Someone had gone to the effort of finding sources for genres but User:Mrbelial, who is likely also User:189.24.99.171 and User:189.24.85.13 (among others) keeps deleting sourced material. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. When we pointed out WP:V, the user expressed an opinion about music magazines, but since then has simply kept reverting without discussing. I have warned the user that one could be blocked for edit warring even without breaking 3RR, and have suggested dispute resolution repeatedly to no avail. If you have a moment to look at this, offer any advice, I would appreciate it very much. I had considered a 3RR report but I don't think the user technically went beyond 3RR. I considered RfC or 3rd-opinion, but that seems unnecessary because all other editors already at the page seem to disagree with Mrbelial. I considered a report to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts but the user is not communicating at all at this point. Thanks for any suggestions, --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 17:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC) I'll head over and see if I can assist in just a second. I'm framing a note for WP:BLPN. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC) It seems obvious that this editor is resisting efforts at dispute resolution, given that multiple notes have been left unanswered on his or her user page trying to encourage that. I have left a warning about edit warring and will keep an eye on the article to be sure that edit warring does not continue. I will not edit or revert anything myself, in order to maintain my neutrality, which does mean that if the page winds up needing protection, it might not be in the form you prefer. Since several editors have tried approaching this editor, you might consider Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct. Meanwhile, if you have good reason to believe that this user is currently (or if s/he resumes) avoiding 3RR under multiple identities, may I suggest you consider pursuing a sock puppetry investigation? And my apologies for any unnecessary wikilinks; I am in the habit of double bracketing almost everything. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks for taking the time to have a look, and making those additional suggestions; that's very helpful. Cheers, --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 18:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC) One more note: you also might want to consider simply requesting page protection yourself. Technically, such edits should be reportable to the 3RR noticeboard, but I've seen that they aren't always addressed. I've seen them reported at WP:ANI with varying types of response. I suppose it depends on whether the admins who respond there perceive the editor as a good faith, valuable contributor who is caught up in a content dispute or a tendentious editor. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC) OldAfD By the way, and I hope you don't mind, after you accidentally did this, I did this. Those pesky redirects! :) --Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 18:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Don't mind? I'm grateful. Thanks much! :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Re: Random stranger approval Hey, thanks! Glad to be able to help out! —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 21:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Re: Post on my talk page Well, I really didn't ever use CSD categories before I got huggle, and I saw the tag for "re-creation", and the obvious happened. Thanks for letting me know about that, So should I use db-importance or db-attack or whatever I would use if I had never seen the article before? J.delanoygabsadds 21:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC) OK, thanks. J.delanoygabsadds 21:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Little help? Can you please block User:Cjohn17? Look at Jeremiah Wright if you need evidence. J.delanoygabsadds 21:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Well, that was odd. Done. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks. I was getting a little sick of staying on that article waiting for him to vandalize it again... J.delanoygabsadds 21:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC) No problem. I've been there. :) I started off in recent change patrol. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Also, can you get rid of User:82.17.187.68? See Nexon Corporation... Thanks, and sorry for bugging you. J.delanoygabsadds 22:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Already handled. :) I've been off-wiki a bit. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Card Greetings from Kitty53 Happy St. Patrick's Day! -- Kitty53 (talk) 20:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC) Happy St. Patrick's Day!Kitty53 (talk) 20:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC) Syrym removed with no explanation/no indication of who did it Just curious if you know why a page that the Wikipedia community determined to "Keep" has now been deleted? I couldn't find any information on who deleted the article, but I saw that you had previously commented on it and thought you might have some insight. It seems that people make certain determinations on Wikipedia, especially when it comes to music, based on taste and not facts. For example, someone has included Rod Stewart on a list of hard rock musicians, though Stewart has never recorded anything even vaguely approximating hard rock. I happen to think Syrym is not only a good band, but that they have legitimacy based on both who they are and the bands their members have previously (or currently) been associated with. If you've got any insight into this situation, I'd be grateful for the knowledge. I thought this was supposed to be an encyclopedic volume, not a popularity contest. Crunch23 (talk) 01:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC) That's a slightly tricky one. Ordinarily, an article that has survived AfD as keep can't be speedied for notability concerns, but this one has a complication in that the AfD was essentially withdrawn by the nominator. Depending on whose viewing it, that may or may not be considered a factor. The deletion log says it was deleted as "not yet notable" by DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). (I see he left behind the talk page.) The next step would be to civilly approach it with him, point out the AfD and the band's connection with point 6 of the notability guidelines for musicians & ensembles at WP:MUSIC. (As I said in the AfD, a redirect may be more appropriate until Syrym meets notability guidelines for other concerns.) If the admin disagrees with you that the article should be restored, you have the option to invite wider community review into whether the article meets WP:CSD#A7 at WP:DRV. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC) My talk page Thanks for reverting on my talk. Could you please, pretty please protect my user page? As this campaign would not stop. Thanks, M.K. (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC) If a brief block becomes necessary, that may be an avenue to take, but user talk pages are important for allowing others to contact you. In such cases, blocking the other party is the preferred response. I'm about to address this issue at ANI. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Ok, thank you again. M.K. (talk) 15:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Hey, thank you for patrolling my user page. It is good to know that somebody is covering your back :) M.K. (talk) 09:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC) It's on my watch list and will be until I'm reasonably sure that this user understands that harassment is not allowed. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Re: Hello. I'm sorry. I was nervous.. I be blue in the face. Really I'm sorry, serio..So please block me t because I earn on penalty. And I wrote message to Renata. Alden or talk with Alden 15:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Can't you just stop? That would be so much better all around. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Eh..Sometimes I'm nervous..And just..I'm moody, so you no block me? Please, I understood my mistake.. Alden oder talk with Alden 15:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC) If you've understood how your behavior is problematic with Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines and you've stopped, there's no reason to block you. Blocks are not for punishment, but to stop disruption. Sometimes they may be necessary to reinforce that the rules and guidelines matter. Lots of people become emotional when working on Wikipedia; sometimes it's unavoidable. There are tips at "dispute resolution" for staying cool. Less seriously, but possibly also helpful, there are essays like Wikipedia:No angry mastodons. It's always better to work within guidelines to resolve differences. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks and sorry by trouble. And do you speak polish? Alden oder talk with Alden 15:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC) No, unfortunately the only languages I've studied other than my native tongue are no longer spoken in the modern world. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Re: Kudos and YB Sometimes it's not easy to stay cool, when faced with a torrent of hate and personal attacks - but I've got practice :> And academic standards (unlike some of my anonymous flame-loving opponents). If you have time and will, neutral editor's comments would be appreciated at: Talk:Battle of Murowana Oszmianka; Talk:Vilnija#NPOV_dispute and Talk:Armia_Krajowa#Crimes_involving_Armia_Krajowa. Thanks for you comment,--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC) Oh, goodness. Three of them no less. :) I'll take a look and see if there's anything I can offer. I often find it difficult wading it to the middle of these sorts of dispute, because they are generally well developed by the time I get there. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC) History merge Hi. I don't know if you are familiar with History merging, but I recommended it in the AfD for List of radio stations in Albuquerque as it is a good way to consolidate the history of a page which has been copy-pasted to another page, when the merged-to page does not contain significant edit history which overlaps the history of the merged-from page. I think this would be appropriate in the case of List of radio stations in Albuquerque which was copy-pasted into Media of Albuquerque. J-stan did this at the closure of the similar AfD for List of radio stations in Shreveport. P.S. Thank you very much for restoring the California radio lists to my userspace. I do plan on working these into more comprehensive "Media" lists/articles, and am satisfied with the outcome of these more recent AfDs on citywide/regional radio station lists. DHowell (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Hi. I'm glad that the restored articles are working out for you. :) I do know about history merging, and closed an AfD around the same time as that one similarly. In this case, GFDL compliance is satisfied by the notes placed in the edit summaries of the articles, here and here, and by putting the redirected List of radio stations in Albuquerque in Category:Redirects from merges. That will ensure that the article is never deleted so that its history remains visible. I handled it as a full content paste merger. History merges are usually done to repair cut and paste moves, which is when the entire article has been relocated rather than placed into an existing article, as this was. I have done them as a more complete form of merger, though. If you would prefer a history merge, I have no objection to performing one. Just let me know. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC) But the article Media of Albuquerque actually did not exist until Bearcat created it two minutes before he copied the radio station list into it. So it is in essence a copy-and-paste relocation (with added content) rather than a merger into a pre-existing page. While there were two edits before the information was copied over, these edits don't overlap the edits of the original list article so this should not be too confusing (no more so than the results of any history merge are), so I'd prefer a history merge as I think that it would make the origins of the page clearer, and would also be consistent with the history merge already done at Media of Shreveport, where Bearcat did the same thing (created the page with TV stations and then copied in the radio station list minutes later). On the other hand, if Media of Albuquerque had been a pre-existing page with significant edit history, I'd agree that a history merge would be inappropriate. DHowell (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC) I'll do a history merge, then, as you prefer. It's not a question that doing a history merge would be inappropriate. I didn't feel it necessary, since the merge procedure covers retaining history, but there's no real reason not to do one. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC) WP:MUSIC proposal As someone who has previously been involved in WP:MUSIC policy discussion. I would much appreciate your input on this proposal if possible. --neonwhite user page talk 02:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Chalmerica enterprises Hi, I'm turning to you as you deleted a false article (Steven Wolfe) created twice by Chalmerica enterprises, this user keeps posting hoaxes on the Kennisis Lake‎ article, would it be possible to act on this repeated vandalism? There is not much I can do anymore at that point - Wikigi | talk to me | 07:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Hi. The user has been indefinitely blocked as a vandalism only account. Thanks for letting me know he or she was persisting. You can also report straightforward vandalism like that to WP:AIV for swifter resolution. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Stale deletion discussion Could you take a look at the Afd for C & C Market Research? I can't close it, for obvious reasons, but it looks like it's gone stale. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Sure. I'll go take a look. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC) C & C Market Research OHTHANKGAWD!!! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC) LOL! That is not the response I usually get when I delete an article. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC) It was deleted as advertising, then resurrected based on promises of improvement, which almost immediately disappeared in favor of the advertising again. The editor was obnoxious, but clever, so he couldn't easily be dismissed, and required repeated explanations, which he simply ignored. I was chanting, "Die, die, DIE!!!" Ask Orange Mike. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Flowforth Productions User: Flowforth I have just signed up and submitted three page suggestions: Flowforth Productions Luna Trick Daniel Staniforth Flowforth Productions was flagged for possible conflict of interest and use of the word "innovative." I am just trying to get the info on Wikipedia - you may edit accordingly to suit your guidelines. Please let me know if there is anything specific that I should do to achieve this. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowforth (talk • contribs) May 20 2008 (UTC) Hello. I have responded at the drawing board. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Block me Why did you block me on twenty four hours? I'm waiting for your answer on my talk page. Alden or talk with Alden 20:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Replied at talk page, as requested. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC) So why M.K. didn't blocked? He deleted my message on his talk, Greets;] Alden or talk with Alden 20:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Question from Tony Mitra Hi. Thought I'd ask another question here. On Santidev Ghosh's I wanted to make a few comments on the discussion page. But I could not find a way to start it. There is no "edit" link where I could make a comment. Silly question, but can you help? thanks again. Tony Tonymitra (talk) 01:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Absolutely. :) I'll go take a look. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Okay. To edit that talk page, you click the tab third in which says "edit this page" or hit "+". + automatically creates a new section. Following this link should get you there quickly. If it doesn't, please let me know. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Better Courts for Missouri Sure, no problem. I thought you had wanted me to do it (sorry, I'm busy and can't always count on a large block of time at the computer ...) Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Relisting AfD's Thanks for the head's up on that. I think this was my first relist, although I did do a lot of AfD stuff before my wiki break last year and I might have tried one back then; I just don't remember. Either way it slipped my mind and I appreciate you catching it.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 18:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Santidev Ghosh/Ghose Spelling Hi. Troubling you again. I got a note from one of the nephew's of Mr. Ghosh, stating that the spelling of the first name has many English variations, but the person Santidev actually use a unique version of his last name, i.e. Ghose and not Ghosh. I tried changing the name on the page heading, but could not. I left a comment on the discussion page on Santidev Ghosh. I did alter the main text to include the Ghose variant to the name, and made it Ghose in the bio data box. Can you advise the best course of action at this point regarding the spelling of the last name on the main page heading? Thanks in advanceTonymitra (talk) 21:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Hi. :) I've actually already responded to this question at the article's talk page, which leads me to suspect that I should tell you about watching pages. There is a tab at the top of Wikipedia pages that is labeled "watch". If you click on this, it adds the page to your watchlist. It does not keep track of every change to the page for you, but it will list the most recent change. To view your watchlist, you go the personal menu at the top corner of your page. There's your name, "my talk", "my preferences" and then "my watchlist". If you click that, the most recent changes to articles in your watchlist will be displayed for you. With regards to changing the name, as I said at the article's talk page, that is done by a page move. However, I would like to discuss with you there whether you are certain the move is appropriate. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Lernen I think I helped a suspected sockpuppet file a 3RR report. :-( Oh, well, I'm learning.  :-) --Coppertwig (talk) 12:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)