User talk:Kim Dent-Brown

Kim Dent-Brown - Talk page Startseite Talk Editing activity Barnstarium Editing tools Userboxen Userspace sitemap Old talk archives can be seen here You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise.

From: Foxfoil Thanks for the tip! I will read the article and try to make mine more.... lengthy and useful before I create them. Foxfoil (talk) 16:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC) Ah. Sorry about the wrong post! HAve I got it right now? Foxfoil (talk) 16:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC) You've got it! And adding a : or more times before your comments will indent one or more times (as I've done with these.) Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 17:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC) Re:peer review Thanks for reviewing me. though the edit i made to Michael Crafter when i added "This however is false, and anyone who believed it is stupid" was a mistake, when your on RV patrol the edits start to mix together. Still you gave me some great feed back, thanks. Cocoaguy ここがいいcontribstalk Review Me! 21:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC) Hello :-) No pressure, but I was wondering if you'd had a chance to look at Religious debates over Harry Potter. Thanks for everything! Serendipodous 23:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC) I've read through the article carefully and it seems very clear and accurate to me in its treatment of Wicca. Any more emphasis would be undue weight, I think. I made one tiny, tiny change in a word: scrying is, I think, integral to Wicca (several Wiccan rituals describe it) but not exactly central - I mean, it's by no means the most important activity a Wiccan would ever undertake. With that subtle exception, I see no problem with the text as it stands. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Thank you! I really appreciate getting a stamp of approval from a Wiccan on this. This article stirs up passions for some reason, so getting a firm grounding was vital. Hope you enjoyed it! Serendipodous 01:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC) Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions --202.164.134.254 (talk) 17:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC) Fair use rationale for Image:SEA badge.jpg Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:SEA badge.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Fair use rationale added. (How nice would it be if the template came up automatically when you hit fair use, so you didn't have to get these warnings and go back and re-edit...) Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Indian Decentralization AfDs Combining them is fine with me. The only reason I listed them separately is the last time I did that, no consensus was reached because so many had different ideas about the different articles even though they were closely related and of similar quality (at least IMO). Thanks. -- Dougie WII (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC) Thanks Dougie. I'm talking to the original editor, who now seems to be just about getting the hang of using his talk page and I'm hoping I can help him work out how to contribute. He's obviously trying to be productive, but just hasn't got the hang of how a Wikipedia article looks and feels. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC) New Semester, New Appeal This semester I am teaching academic writing to a group of teachers at my school. This course starts on Monday Jan 28. I would like to know if you are still interesting in "mentoring". You can see the syllabus at Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/SyllabusIf so, please leave a message on my talk page and update the mentor's page Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors, if . If not, please remove your name and information from that page. Thanks! Thelmadatter (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC) Creator Of Talal ALANASI I am creating this Talal alanasi page because his is president of Safe United Organisation (SUO) and member of BlueStar Group (BSG) and also he is the designer of the Iraqi Future Flag. so why did you delete this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArabSky (talk • contribs) 10:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC) Hello there, it was not me who deleted the page but I did tag it for deletion. It was then deleted (twice!) by administrators SGGH and Pegasus. When I tagged it, the article was 2 lines long and made no assertions of notability. There were no sources to indicate how important the person was/is. I'd suggest re-creating the page in your own user space, say at this page, where you can work on it and make it moRre substantial before you publish it to the main space. I think I put a template on your user page with some suggestions about links to advice on improving articles: have a look at those and if you need help to create a n article that will survive here, just let me know (leave a message here.) PS: if you end your messages with ~~~~ you signature will appear - like this - Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 14:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC) RfA thanks Thank you for voting in my RfA, which was unsuccessful with 19 support, 18 oppose, and 5 neutral. I have signed up for admin coaching and will retry later on in a couple more months. I hope that by performing more edits on Wikipedia in the next few months that I could possibly change your mind by my next RfA, possibly around May 2008. I understood that the mop isn't intended for a 21st birthday present (or else we'd have some many drunk mops on Wikipedia. All jokes aside, I hope you had a chance to review my answers for question #8 on my RfA. I hope the answers were satisfactory and partially answers your concerns regarding my uncertainties regarding WP:CSD. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 05:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC) GoRemy I disagree with the GoRemy SD on the grounds that millions of people watching his videos should be de facto notoriety. GoRemy's YouTube page is really both primary and secondary source in that the artist has some control over content but not over the following statics: A-R-A-B: The Rap 02:56 Added: 1 year ago Views: 1,792,021 McDonald's: The Rap 02:49 Added: 8 months ago Views: 2,019,058 Hey There Khalilah 03:03 Added: 7 months ago Views: 1,975,595 Two Percent Milk: The Rap 02:22 Added: 1 year ago Views: 957,830 Warcraft: The Rap 02:27 Added: 10 months ago Views: 846,627 These I think testify to GoRemy's qualifying as a WP:BIO#Entertainer that 'Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.' The fact that his video submission was played at the Dem Pres Debate seems notable, despite his real name not being used. Can a nom de plume not be a notable entity? - Operknockity (talk) 13:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC) To answer your last question first - I think not, unless there is incontrovertible evidence that the nom de plume and the actual author are, in fact, one and the same. But more fundamentally, I think the problem is that YouTube is simply not a reliable source for Wikipedia. My own view would be that until a third party (say a newspaper, book or magazine, or widely broadcast TV or radio programme) refers to the notability of GoRemy, then s/he is not notable in Wikipedia terms. This is only my own view of course, but the deleting admin seemed to agree with me on this occasion. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC) But I'm only using the nom de plume. I'm not claiming it is anybody specific RL and don't think that should be required. I leave that for a future researcher to determine. As for YouTube not being a reliable source, I am opening that discussion here and invite you to come and discuss! Thanks - Operknockity (talk) 14:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC) RE:Term Paper Thanks for the reversion!  Marlith (Talk)  02:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC) Seconded, and for the others. I WP:AGF with User:Boykovladimir, spending some time clearing up the mess and userfying the created articles. I'm deeply unamused to discover that my efforts were wasted and that he's just a spammer. -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 22:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC) Yes, it's frustrating when assumptions of good faith prove to be unwarranted. I think with this user we can now assume the opposite, unless he proves otherwise. He doesn't seem to have stopped his spamming, so I'm keeping an eye on him and the sooner he gets escalated warnings the better, as far as I'm concerned! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC) Category:Hurling clubs in County Limrick D'oh , will rerun AWB and speedy the typoed category , thanks for highlighting that .Gnevin (talk) 21:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC) No problem, glad to catch it early! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC) RfA thanks I am not one for sending round pretty pictures, but after my recent RfA, which passed 68/1/7, I am now relaxed and this is to thank you for your support. I will take on board all the comments made and look forward to wielding the mop with alacrity. Or two lacrities. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC) Adoption? Hello! I'm not sure if I'm doing this right (hence the need for adoption. :P ) but I saw you on a list of potential adopters and really liked the look of your page. I don't plan on being a super huge wiki editor, but I would like someone who I could come to with questions and stuff. Are you available? Browncoatamanda (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Hello Browncoatamanda, I'd be absolutely delighted to adopt you - anyone whose first ever edit is to offer a very useful reference to an article, and who appreciates Firefly, is doubly welcome! If you want to go ahead, what I'd suggest we do is set up a page in your user space - say Adoption page - where we can keep all our conversations. That way you'll have them all in one place rather than spread across one or both of out talk pages. The as to how we proceed - either you could just use me as a source of advice, and come and ask me if you have a question, or if you'd prefer I could set you some tasks to go and try out, and you could come back and we'd discuss how you got on. Which do you prefer? I can also keep an eye on your edits, and offer unsolicited advice if I see you struggling with something, or can suggest a shortcut to you. I should let you know my limitations: I'm not very good at Wiki mark-up: these pages look good because I stole (well, borrowed) them from another editor and just straight copied the code. The technical stuff is really beyond me, but I do know about writing articles, sourcing, and procedural stuff like nominations for deletion etc etc. I edit every day, not all day because I don't edit from work, but will get back to you within a day at all times except holidays. My first bit of feedback would be to use ~~~~ at the end of your talk page posts, to make your signature appear - like mine at the end of this paragraph. Get back to me about how you want to do this, and we can make a start! Best wishes - Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Thanks for the speedy reply! As you can see, I'm not a daily log-inner (yet!). I like the idea of making a dedicated page and I saw a tutorial on how to do that, so I'll get it set up as /adoption like you suggested. I also like the idea of a few tasks to try out. I feel like wikipedia is such a huge place and all the things I'm interested in are already covered so heavily and well that I'm not sure where to start. Oh, and thank you for the feedback on my first "edit." I wish I could've formatted it myself but I was a little lost with the footnote and all. If it's okay to steal code, I'll be set!  ;) I saw some really cool talk pages and whatnot but wasn't sure if it was bad ettiquite around here to just swipe away. While I think that kind of formatting is interesting it's not my primary goal to know how to do it, so I'm not too worried about your limitations in that area. I don't see myself as being extremely high maintenence and I usually won't be waiting by the computer and refreshing or anything.  :) Browncoatamanda (talk) hi This is not cool. I see that you already discussed a speedy tag with the now non-active creator of this article so i consider your new speedy tag as sneaky. if you think this entrepreneur is not worthy of his own entry in wp, please go about the wikipedian way, such as an afd tag. ephix (talk) 22:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC) Hello there. You're quite right: I did have an exchange with the originating editor of this article, the last diff of which looked like this. I had tagged the article with {{db-bio}} and he had removed it. At the time I didn't feel his removal of the tag was justified, but I didn't want to enter a revert war so I just tagged it as needing references and left it alone. Then recently I was looking through my talk archives and clicked on the Eyal Hertzog link to see what state the article was in. As no references had been added in 8 months, and the article was no better than when I had first stuck a CSD tag on it, I had no hesitation in tagging it again. How is this sneaky? The tag is there for all to see,it's not hidden away from view. If the original editor is inactive and unable to see a CSD tag, he's unable to see an AfD tag either. I believe the article meets criteria for speedy deletion, but will propose it for AfD instead. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 23:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC) On further reflection and a quick Google - I'm sure it would be kept at AfD as there are clearly some reliable sources. So I shan't waste anyone's time there, I'll just leave it alone with the {{references}} tag on it. It's a shame that someone who knows and cares about the topic can't add the sources I found, which would improve the article straight away. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 23:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC) The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008) The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC) Vielen Dank! Hi, just dropping by to say thanks for supporting my RfA, I totally wasn't expecting to get so much support, it was a really pleasant surprise. Melesse (talk) 04:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC) Melesse (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. AfD nomination of Internet Superstar Well, I am sorry that you feel that way. I guess I don't really know what you are basing that decision on though. Yes, there has indeed only been one episode. But this is not a low budget, done in some kids basement, videocast. Revision3 Corporation is a legitimate company, with a professional recording studio at there headquarters in San Francisco, that have been around since spring of 2005. They have been making multiple shows since that time. Here is a little reading for you: Business Wire article about Revision3 2007 numbers Now, if there was a wikipedia entry for a television show after one episode, would you have a problem with that? What about a TV show that was canceled after a few weeks, would it be worthy? I can think of quite a few quickly canceled shows that do have entries. Again, not a one-off podcast by some kid. This is a IPTV corporation with major funding with an established audience with many views/downloads. By the way, I did have some third party references, and just added another one.Jeepin22 (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Hello there, thanks for taking the AfD nomination so calmly! The last reference you added looks good to me, and if it had been there in the beginning I wouldn't have nominated the article to AfD. Seeing as no-one else has added anything to the AfD discussion since I nominated, I've taken it on myself to close the AfD and remove the tag from the article. I still stand by the original nomination: although the originating company may be notable, I don't see that it follows that everything they produce is instantly and automatically notable (which I agree would be the case for a network TV station.) The third party references that were originally in the article weren't sufficiently reliable, IMO, but the TV Week article certainly was. Again, sorry to have AfD'd an established editor, but at least the end result is the article stays, with a better set of references. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 07:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Military history WikiProject coordinator elections The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 03:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC) RWY on hold Hi, okie-dokie, sorry for taking so long on finishing this review. Anyway, the article is in good-shape, but I noticed a few minor issues which are on the talk page. Also, feel free to let me know if there's any questions, etc. Good work :) Lazulilasher (talk) 18:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC) Harrold the Flying Sheep hi! i have added my references and have made some comments on the talk page for this article [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harroldsheep (talk • contribs) 10:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC) RFA thanks .: RFA thanks :. Thanks for supporting me! My RfA passed with a final tally of 5 neutrals, 1 oppose and 148 supports, a turnout I couldn't have dreamed of. I'm going to do everything I can to help out the community, help with sysop tasks, and of course, contribute to the encyclopedia. If you ever need a hand with something, feel free to give a shout! Cheers! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 17:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Re:Admin Bit Hi Kim, and apologies for my tardiness in replying. Basically, I see no issues at all with you running round about now. There is nothing you need to do, that you have not already done IMHO. Getting the technical creation/transclusion bit is all you need to consider, and I would imagine you should be comfortable with that anyway - there's nothing else I can see other than reviewing the admin's reading list. If you want to procede hit me up and I'll be pleased delighted to prepare the RfA and nominate. My access tomorrow (Monday) will be sporadic but I will be available, as well as all day Tuesday Pedro :  Chat  21:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC) OK Pedro, go for it. No great rush, just whenever you're ready. I don't edit from work but will transclude when I'm on from home. Have looked at the process and seems straightforward enough. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Leave it with me! Pedro :  Chat  21:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kim Dent-Brown Is alive and kicking .......... :) Pedro :  Chat  21:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Formal Notification ! Thanks for your confidence Pedro. I'll fill out and transclude this later tonight. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC) I lobbed in my support in case I've gone to bed (nominators can support pre-transclusion IMHO!!) Pedro :  Chat  22:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC) [2] However, I may, if they are clearly out of line. If they are legitimate opposes however I will not "badger" them - that's unseemlyand poor practice. I really can't see why you should have any however, but hey-ho!- I'm biased and that's RFA ! Pedro :  Chat  23:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC) AfD from last month You must have been searching for ages for that link...! Watch my editing for the next couple of minutes, hopefully it may make you like Wikipedia even more. And, no fair, Pedro always gets the best. :( *laughs* Regards, Rudget. 12:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC) 'tis no problem. Rudget. 13:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC) One last thing, do you want me to close this SSP case? Rudget. 13:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC) If you're convinced, then yes please do! Seemed pretty incompetently done to me, even down to similarities in user names! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)  Erledigt Rudget. 13:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC) Why thank you - since you're so quick with the mop, I have a kitchen floor at home that needs some attention... Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC) Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry Hi Kim, I am just here to notify you that your hard work on RWY has not gone unnoticed. The article has passed all criteria. Congratulations for your hard work and I hope to see more great articles in the future! By the way, I commend you on the speediness too! Lazulilasher (talk) 16:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC) Merci bien mon ami! Je suis tres reconnaissant de tes travaux! ;-) Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC) You have an optional question... ...from me, at your RFA. :) D.M.N. (talk) 10:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Thelema Thanks for the congrats. Yes, it does feel good. Though I can't leave you believing I did it all in a week. I had been working on the article for a couple of weeks anonymously (using IP addresses) before I created an account. It seemed that I was not being taken seriously without an account though, so I finally grudgingly created one... Will in China (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Well to be honest I assumed you weren't a complete n00b! Your contribs didn't exactly look like a total newcomer. Well done anyway! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath I've declined the speedy request. There's enough claims of notability in there to need an AfD for deletion. Thanks for tagging. --Dweller (talk) 12:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Understood, will look again and probably AfD it. Have left some advice on the originating editor's talk page - he is a little overenthusiastic at the moment. And thanks for contributing to my RfA! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC) No worries. I looked through your contrib history. I have no concerns about you as an admin. Your antennae will soon sharpen up as you run the rule over C:CSD. And we all mistakes. AfD looks sensible. It'll need some expert opinion, I think. You might consider dropping a note at a relevant WikiProject or two. --Dweller (talk) 12:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC) One more suggestion before I leave you alone (!) How bout adding the other articles about his works into this AfD and remove the speedy tags? --Dweller (talk) 12:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Good idea. Will look through contribs and do so - as well as seeing if there's a WikiProject who could advise. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC) User Page Just did a minor thing [3] - it wasn't wrapping properly in IE (don't know if it was okay in FireFox but that break should fix it in both). RFA looking good buddy! Pedro :  Chat  12:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Thanks Pedro - I use FireFox and it looked OK there, but thanks for the tweak. There was a reasonable comment in the RfA about my gender being easily mistaken, so I thought this pic might dispel any confusion! Looks good so far, very interesting Oppose and Neutral contribs - glad I decided in advance to gag myself from replying! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 13:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Yeah, the way I wiew it is that passing at 100% does not make you a better admin than 95%, same as not making WP:100 has zero impact on your ability to be a good admin. There's been some good feedback at your RfA with no grumbles - actually that suprised me because 4,500 edits is still seen by some as a little "light" - i expected some "weak support" editcountitis but clearly quality shines over quantity!! Still, not long until the shiny new buttons! You can hit me up if you need any help in the first few days, of course. Pedro :  Chat  13:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)