User talk:Umbralcorax
Wikimedia Pennsylvania
[edit]Hello there!
I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:
- Contact us on IRC at #wikimedia-pa
- Join our mailing list
- Visit our blog at http://wmfpa.blogspot.com
Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 04:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Phillies WikiProject...?
[edit]Not sure how involved you are with Wikipedia as a whole, but here's something you might find particularly interesting: here EaglesFanInTampa 13:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
AfD for Nar Shaddaa
[edit]As a Star Wars fan and KotOR player, you should really have noticed that Nar Shaddaa is a moon, not a planet ;) Don Cuan (talk) 21:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination)
[edit]I have re-nominated this article for deletion. Please provide your input to the discussion. --Elliskev 17:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niles Harris
[edit]Regarding your comment here, I guess a redirect to the song wouldn't be out of order, since the song does have a page. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I figured in that sense, a redirect would make sense, I was just wondering if its something someone might reasonably search for. If its not, then not really much point for a redirect. Thanks for getting back to me. Umbralcorax (talk) 18:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
New Great Game AfD
[edit]I think you should know one of the editors who argued so vigorously against the New Cold War article is now trying to do the same thing the New Great Game on AfD--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 06:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I just closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Office of the president elect as the nominator has withdrawn from the AfD. While this does not always warrant a closure of the AfD, the article in question (United States Office of the President-Elect) has substantially changed in such a way that a closure is warranted in my opinion. If you wish, you can renominate the page for AfD, but the concerns would surely have to be different. Thanks. DARTH PANDAduel 03:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
McRoll'd
[edit]AHHH. Got Rickrolled in AfD... SYSS Mouse (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
The Thing Is
[edit]I didn't intend it to be a end-all be-all thing. I intended for it to be a base to be built on by wikipedia users in the future. I just wanted to avoid the debocle of what happened last time. I feel this rivalry is quite notable and I don't get why it shouldn't be represented.
I'm a Mets fan, btw.
JuliusNero (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
What kind of sourcing
[edit]What kind of sourcing are you looking for? JuliusNero (talk) 01:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Somebody sourced
[edit]There, a good amount of people have added to it. JuliusNero (talk) 20:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Boxxy
[edit]You can see my draft at User:Hospitality Flawless/Boxxy. Thanks.--Hospitality Flawless (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
A centralised discussion which may interest you
[edit]Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Just an FYI
[edit]I noted you removed a PROD from User:Cjneversleeps/Corrections.com. It appears to been placed because of advice given by an Admin at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cjneversleeps/Corrections.com. In part: "Leave it a month and then {{prod}} it." Soundvisions1 (talk) 14:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Deletion review for YouTube cat abuse incident
[edit]An editor has asked for a deletion review of YouTube cat abuse incident. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. WikiScrubber (talk) 20:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Since you commented the article in it's first AfD, it has since come under a second AfD. I was wondering if you'd like to comment on this one as well: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadya Suleman (2nd nomination). Thanks! — raeky (talk | edits) 03:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I made additional comments that may address your concerns.
Your keyboard
[edit]Sorry about that. Here's a drink to replace the one you spilled.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 20:00, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Earth
[edit]Hey, April Fools' Day is over. I'd love to joke around more but I don't think that's a good idea. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Rand Paul
[edit]Rand Paul has been overhauled. This may affect your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Paul. This message is being copied to 8 people. JJB 07:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Dan Schlund
[edit]The decision to delete the article Dan Schlund is now being reviewed. You have been sent this message because you have previously been involved in the AfD discussion(s) concerning this article. If you are interested in the review discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 April 3. Thank you. Esasus (talk) 15:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
AfD fixes
[edit]Thanks! I couldn't remember whether the title was "archived" or not :). -- Luk talk 19:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the deletion of Barack Obama administration controversies
[edit]If you are going to delete Barack Obama administration controversies then why is there a whole category for George W. Bush administration controversies? Danvers (talk) 21:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)Danvers
There's a new AfD nomination for an article you've previously discussed. Please stop by to voice your opinions again. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 11:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Since you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 September 4#Ashida Kim, which was closed as relist, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashida Kim (7th nomination). Cunard (talk) 08:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Phillies userbox
[edit]Just wanted to let you know that we are surveying wiki Phillies fans to determine whether they want the Phillies' logo incorporated into the userbox ({{User:UBX/MLB-Phillies}}), or want to use a generic version. If you you want to comment, hit the RFC discussion page here. Thanks. BillTunell (talk) 17:27, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Deletion_review#List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
[edit]Can I ask you to rereview? Counting shows a decent consensus to delete. Shoemaker's Holiday talk 16:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Deletion review for Janet Allison
[edit]An editor has asked for a deletion review of Janet Allison. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Power.corrupts (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Magibon
[edit]I've re-nominated her for deletion. Pisomojado (talk) 07:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Since you participated in the DRV for Secret Maryo Chronicles, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Maryo Chronicles (3 nomination). Tim Song (talk) 07:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Umbralcorax. The close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One-night stand was not in line with Wikipedia:Speedy keep. We don't use WP:SNOW to close an AfD. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_an_AfD_discussion_is_closed for more info. Even if it appears that an article is going to be kept, we still let the AfD run for the full seven days to allow people an opportunity to join in the discussion. This does no harm, and can do some good. An AfD which is closed too early can be challenged and brought to DRV. All AfDs should be allowed to run for the full seven days, apart from those which meet the criteria in Wikipedia:Speedy keep or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion.If you have any questions, please get in touch. Regards SilkTork *YES! 12:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but since when is that not a valid application of WP:SNOW? This is news to me. When an article has that many convincing keep votes, even if it is over a short period of time, there is absolutely no reason to keep it open just because thats what the process says. I stand by my original close. All the re-opening achieved was to re-affirm that I'd made the right decision in the first place. And if WP:SNOW was the wrong thing to use, consider it a close per WP:IAR. Umbralcorax (talk) 02:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Removing Prods
[edit]I noticed that you removed some prods I placed on Star Wars books but did not give an edit summary or edit the talk page giving a reason for the removal. Would you mind letting me know your reasoning for removing the prods so that I can decide if I should send the articles to AfD? -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 22:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. My logic in removing the prods is much the same as my keep vote in your previous AFD, that I do not feel that deleting these articles is the right course of action. If you still feel its necessary to go to afd, go right ahead. Umbralcorax (talk) 04:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review
[edit]Kindly refrain from calling my judgement "boneheaded". Nyttend (talk) 04:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- No offense, but that's what it was. Sorry if it violates WP:CIVIL, but I thought the decision sucked, and felt no reason not to say it. Umbralcorax (talk) 04:36, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]
Message added 03:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Airplaneman ✈ 03:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Umbralcorax. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 May 12#Muir Skate Longboard Shop, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muir Skate Longboard Shop (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 02:08, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
As you participated in Deletion review/The Irving Literary Society (Cornell University), you may wish to comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Irving Literary Society (2nd nomination). The story is long and convoluted but there's a timeline at this new AfD. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
A. M. M. Naoshad
[edit]Thank you for fixing that. I knew I was missing something but couldnt figure out what. Wolfstorm000 (talk) 21:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Bands Against Bush nominated for deletion again
[edit]As you commented in the earlier discussion, I wanted to make you aware of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bands Against Bush (2nd nomination), which I have just started. Please feel free to comment there if you wish. — Gavia immer (talk) 21:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks...
[edit]...for your contribution to the article American Cocker Spaniel! Chrisrus (talk) 01:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
RE: Ball close
[edit]Thanks for the heads-up. AVFM came up earlier, but I haven't read through the site extensively; looks like they've got a lot against Wikipedia. Anyway, I'll keep an eye on this. Cheers, m.o.p 02:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I'll keep an eye out. Thanks again! Cheers, m.o.p 16:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]Message added 03:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Jayjg (talk) 02:59, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Tripping Icarus
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Tripping Icarus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Nubzor (talk) 04:26, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Euclid
[edit]Way to not read what I wrote. I'm well aware of the sources in the last AFD, but if you'd bothered to read the damn AFD, you'd see I said THE SOURCES IN THE LAST AFD ARE NOT RELIABLE THIRD PARTY COVERAGE. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
AfD for Chronology_of_diplomatic_recognitions_and_relations_of_South_Sudan
[edit]You participated in a related discussion before. The current one is here. Japinderum (talk) 11:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Deletion Review of Sandra Fluke
[edit]An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sandra Fluke. Because you participated in the original deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 13:07, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Rescue list (2nd nomination)
[edit]You are getting this alert because you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Rescue list
Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Article_Rescue_Squadron/Rescue_list_(2nd_nomination) is now up for deletion.
- Per Wikipedia:Canvassing:
- An editor who may wish to draw a wider range of informed, but uninvolved, editors to a discussion might place a message at one of the following:
- ...On the talk pages of concerned editors. Examples include editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics...The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions—for example, if notices are sent to editors who previously supported deleting an article, then identical notices should be sent to those who supported keeping it. (emphasis my own).
Thank you. Spoildead (talk) 20:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
I've added 5 sources to the Scott Menville article. Since you thought the article should be kept but couldn't find any sources, I figured this may be relevant to you. Inks.LWC (talk) 23:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
April 2015
[edit]An article which you recently supported has come up for deletion review. As it was of interest to you before, you may wish to weigh in again. Pax 18:38, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)