User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 34

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

→

Archive 39

Joseph Farah

Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I was wondering if you could not semi-p Joseph Farah. I've been working on that article for over a month, and protection prevents me from continuing to do so. One troublesome IP address hardly seems to justify indef protection. Maybe drop it back to a couple of hours or a day? 24.177.120.138 (talk) 15:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you would create an account to edit there. The repeating of vandalism that created a complaint to the foundation and legal threat to the en wikipedia project is not an option. Off2riorob (talk) 15:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't talking to you, Rob. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it seems like it would have been sufficient to just block the offending IP address. Vandalism on that article has actually been few and far-between recently. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 15:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, BLP concerns trump other considerations in this case. You (24.177.120.138) have edit-warred repeatedly to insert contentious material into the article, and semi-protection seems to be the only way to force you and the other IP to discuss your edits. You may request unprotection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for unprotection. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:35, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

BLP concerns can be addressed by blocking the problematic editor. Your edit warring allegation is way off-base, and the equivalency you're implying between my contributions and that of an obvious vandal is insulting. Please redact and reconsider. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 03:10, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I did not mean to imply that you are a vandal (and my apologies if you took it that way). However, you did repeatedly insert material considered by other editors to be contentious[1][2], and I protected the article as a preventive measure. As I said, if you would like the article to be unprotected, feel free to request unprotection at WP:RFUP. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the apology. While the material is indeed controversial, two diffs 36 hours apart hardly constitutes edit warring. I'd suggest that the 3 1/2 days that transpired between the content being removed by User:Dayewalker and your protection of the article, and the ongoing discussions on Talk:Joseph Farah and WP:BLP/N demonstrate that there was no need for you to "force" me to discuss my edits. I wonder if you are aware of the ongoing conflict between myself and User:Off2riorob that predates his (IMO misleading) request for page protection? Anyway, I do intend to seek review at WP:RFUP, but, per the instructions on that article, I'd like to request one last time that you, the protecting admin, reconsider the protection. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 03:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not aware of the "history" between you two, but I don't think it would have affected my judgement as I made my decision solely based on the history of one article. Thank you for staying calm when reasoning with me here, but I will pass on unprotecting and leave it up to another uninvolved admin to do as they think best. Good night. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration. I have brought the issue to WP:RFUP. Good night. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 03:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Madonna

Dear Dabomb, how are you? I was developing the above page for FL here when some thoughts struck my mind. First of all, I haven't included the Razzie awards in the list as TRM said somewhere that they are not industry officiated awards, and not needed. Secondly, the list also contains recognitions like "Most successfiul artist of decade" etc. So do I need to rename teh actual list name to List of awards, nominations and recognitions received by Madonna? What is your opinion on this? I just wanted to ask because I dont wanna cclog up FLC and then answer all these questions backloggin git further. Regards, — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The naming conventions for awards lists have been discussed several times, though I can't seem to find any of the most recent discussions. Based on Category:Lists of awards by musician, the consensus seems to be that "List of awards and nominations received by X" is the most common name, and I think you'll be fine leaving it at that even if some of the included "awards" are actually honors or recognitions. As for the Razzies, I've never seen them in an awards list for artists, so I'll go with TRM's opinion and say they aren't necessary. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Dabomb. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Dan Savage bibliography

• Dan Savage bibliography

Hey Dabomb87, I hope you are doing well. :) I was wondering if you could have a look at Dan Savage bibliography. Eisfbnore (talk · contribs) has reviewed it over and made some suggestions, and thinks its quality is ready for FLC. However he said he did not have much FLC experience, so I wanted to run it by you — do you think it is ready for consideration, and/or does it make sense to go for a Peer Review first, with this one? -- Cirt (talk) 18:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I think I will just go ahead with Peer Review, first. :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Decided to do Peer Review first, now at Wikipedia:Peer review/Dan Savage bibliography/archive1. Feel free to comment. -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Long Island Sound (band)

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Metropolitan90's talk page.
Message added 03:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Pigeon photography

Hi, you just created Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 6, 2011, scheduling Pigeon photography as TFA for June 6. Fortunately I noticed this because you also protected the article. Apparently Raul is not aware of this. See User talk:Raul654#Preventing an article from becoming TFA on the wrong date? and User talk:Raul654#Pigeon photography. Hans Adler 15:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I was not aware that you would like it saved for April Fools'. Thanks for the heads up. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

And I wasn't aware that Raul had delegated some more of his work, or I might have told you in advance. Congratulations to your new job! Hans Adler 16:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! As you can see, I'm still learning the ropes. Sorry for the inconvenience. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Walton and Johnson

Hello. You recently sent me a warning about being engaged in an edit war. I have been attempting to update and keep intact the page Walton and Johnson. Another user has been consistently removing cited information and making bogus claims on the article's talk page (such as that the article contains links to blogs, that the article calls its' subject names, etc). I applied for protection earlier today, but it has not been granted as yet and the user continues to edit the page. If you could lend a hand it would be of great help.209.34.48.230 (talk) 21:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Final push for Today's featured list

Hi Dabomb. There was a proposal to launch TFL this coming Monday. Which was obviously overly optimistic, given that nobody knew from the FL community knew about it, and both yourself and TRM are somewhat preoccupied at the moment. Nonetheless, the point has been made that there is no real reason to wait any longer. To that end, I was wondering if you would be on board if I were to post the following at Talk:Main Page#Today's Featured List is ready to go live:

The technical side of this is in Edoktor's capable hands. I've outlined at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list#Short term selection process my short-term vision for the content to be used, how the process would work during its infancy, and an outline of how we would attempt to constructively utilise the surge of interest in the opening weeks. Assuming that gets the thumbs up, we can make final tweaks to WP:TFL accordingly (slight rewording to reflect the procedure as of launch day, ensuring wikilinks go to the right places etc), and would be ready in plenty of time for a 13 June launch.

Subject to a little more input at TFL, and with Dabomb's approval (if you don't approve I probably won't post any of this), I propose that we finalise a 13 June launch date.

Assuming a June 13th launch, in my opinion we only need to do the following in the meantime:

• Make sure that all the FLC regulars know that this is going ahead on the 13th.
• Make a few small tweaks to the text and wikilinks at WP:TFL, as explained above.
• Set up a page that encourages would-be nominators to write blurbs for lists they want to see on the main page. The bigger a pool we can build up, the easier yours and TRM's jobs will be, and the sooner we can think about expanding beyond one day per week.

What do you reckon: are we good to go? —WFC— 00:53, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering if you had a quick moment to check over the formal proposal, which I've drafted here? I'm very confident that it reflects what we have been working on over the past three months, but it's best to check with as many people as possible, especially after what happened in February/March. Best, —WFC— 22:48, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Excellent, I think that's a good proposal. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

HELP!!!

There's an Edit War going on on WWE Capitol Punishment as we speak. It needs to be Temporarly Full Protected and soon.--Voices in my Head WWE 01:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

It's been protected by another admin. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

A Signpost suggestion

Since Brockway Mountain Drive was promoted this past week, you might want to consider using File:Brockway_Mountain_Drive_Panorama.jpg as one of the images in the Features section of the signpost this week. The photo is a panorama of the roadway and the surrounding scenery during fall color season. The road was featured as a part of a segment on the Today show as a fall color destination in addition to the history of appearing in travel columns in major American newspapers. Imzadi 1979 → 03:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

TFA

Belated congrats !! Template:TFAempty needs to be updated (protected so I can't do it), and long ago, someone used to prep all the TFA pages in advance, which hasn't been done lately. See here. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks as always Sandy, your support means a lot to me. I've updated TFAempty and will slowly work through prepping the TFA pages (it doesn't take too long; I finished June in about 6 minutes). Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:33, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

FLC

Quick note on FLC: I supported at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Rosenborg BK in Europe/archive1 and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of defunct and relocated National Hockey League teams/archive1, both of which are nearing the point where a decision must be made. Since I'm conflicted after supporting them, either you or TRM ideally should close them when the time comes. Also, congratulations on your new role at TFA. I'm sure you'll do a great job there. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:24, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! And yes, I'm watching those FLCs and will close them soon. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 20:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Arr, matey

The IP-hopper is back at it, can you semi-protect Eyepatch again? Mebbe for a longer period of time... Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 19:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 20:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrol request

I am wondering if you would be willing to grant autoreviewer rights to me, but I cannot make a request myself now because my old request at RFP/A has not yet been archived. The request from three days ago was also butchered, as I was unclear in my wording and I had a little feud with Fastily. To put it clearly, the primary benefit I intend to reap from this privilege is to have my new town, township, and subdistrict articles be automatically marked as patrolled. I don't write BLPs and most of the new place articles I have created have been sourced upon creation or immediately after. Thanks.

PS: Hopefully this should not be construed as wheel-warring... —HXL's Roundtable and Record 02:47, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

This could be considered admin shopping, and I'd rather you make the request at the main request page so all uninvolved admins can consider your request easily. Anyway, your previous request was archivived so that should not be an issue. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

All right then. I still have a bit to learn, and at the time I made this post, my request was not archived, or else I would not have come here. —HXL's Roundtable and Record 00:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

hi busy guy/anime titles

I'm sorry I got into a mess with Ferix over two episode titles ...I have verified the one for episode 18 and since you protected the article I have made the request. List of Suite PreCure episodes (see talk page). I'm working on verifying the second of the two disputed episode titles(I have confirmed 18 please edit) via goggle translate(I know terrible) and yes it's just episode titles for a JP TV show that got me in trouble(silly ain't it?)Darkcat1 (talk) 20:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

As the protecting admin, I'd rather stay uninvolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Section 116 of the Australian Constitution: main page appearance

Hi there - I noticed that this article has been listed for a main page appearance shortly. I had been hoping to ask on WP:TFA/R for it to be listed on a yet-to-be-determined day in August, as there is a rare and high-profile High Court case concerning section 116 due to be heard by the court on that yet-to-be-determined day. I thought it might be good for the article to co-incide with the hearing of the case and the news coverage expected to go with the hearing. The article would only require a minor update on the day (the major update will come a few months later when judgment is delivered). Would it be possible to take it out of the June queue? No big deal if it isn't. Thanks --Mkativerata (talk) 20:23, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll switch it out. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect date of Birth Mentioned for Estella Warren

The year of birth mentioned for Estella Warren at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estella_Warren is 1970 even though the actual year is 1978. The three references provided for the year of birth in the article do not validate it at all. Here are a the few links that validate my point -Fanmail, IMDB, hollywoodmemorabilia, Bookrags and many more can be added.

Since it is a semi-protected article, can you please look into this? Tashif (talk) 05:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

It is only semi-protected, so autoconfirmed editors such as yourself should have no problems editing it, and I'm not sure how I need to become involved. That said, none of those sources you listed above would be considered reliable, especially for a BLP. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:56, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

For your reference

Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Winter_Is_Coming

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Is_Coming&action=history

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Is_Coming&diff=433446401&oldid=433442411

Since you happily warned an IP who made one single edit to the page, surely you should be warning the account holder who has been fighting this edit war for several days, especially as he is in agreement with one of the IPs you warned? This would involve actually paying attention to the page history instead of applying the usual Wikipedian approach of "IPs are bad", but come on now... Apply your ruling equally. --86.25.205.231 (talk) 16:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was an oversight on my part, which I have now corrected. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:55, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for apologising then. I in turn apologise for being a bit pointy. But I do get really irritated by the usual Wiki approach of hating on IPs, so I hope you can forgive me. Anyway, onwards to something more constructive! --86.25.205.231 (talk) 16:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Related to this issue, thanks for the warning, and I'll keep its content in mind. In any case, I wanted to state here that I believe a've already been following every one of the suggestions in it (If anyone thinks otherwise I would ask a pointer to it) and that except for une single edit I've only been reverting the edits of anonymous users that refused to participate in the discussion at the talk page.--RR (talk) 18:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Image captions on TFA pages

Hello, please remember to add a caption to each image you add to TFA pages. It won't display for most users, but without it, screen reader users and people using text-only browsers will encounter the image filename on the Main Page, which is not a good thing. The caption will behave somewhat like alt text, but IMO taking the caption from the corresponding article (and perhaps removing some unnecessary detail) would be fine in this case. I've already added captions to the TFA pages for today, tomorrow and Tuesday. Graham87 02:45, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, sorry for neglecting to do that. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Protections

Hi there, I see that you recently salted a bunch of Australian footballer articles. The only problem is that (as far as I'm aware), the majority of the articles are on notable subjects (eg pass WP:NSPORTS), but that they were just incredibly poorly done, and will eventually be created properly. I was looking at WP:SALT and it's my understanding that salting is indefinite and a strict time limit can't be set, which is a pity. So, my questions are: am I correct in assuming that salting is indefinite and a specific time limit can't be set? And, if so, would it be a good idea for me to note down all the articles that have been salted due to this user and request for them all to be un-salted in six months or a year (assuming the user trying to create shoddy articles has left Wikipedia by that time)? Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 04:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I think they should be unsalted immediately, or a week at worst. Some of them are notable players (ie have played in the Australian Football League) and hopefully he'll get bored of this game soon enough. And there are plenty of other redlinks left that he'll probably just move onto. Otherwise I may have to try to revive the "autoconfirmed required to create articles" RFC or even run the RFA gauntlet myself! The-Pope (talk) 12:39, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I've downgraded the protections on all of them to create=autoconfirmed. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I didn't even know that was an option. The-Pope (talk) 14:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know that was an option either, but it's greatly appreciated. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Dallas Mavericks

Hey Dabomb, did you protect the article from IP vandalism or just from being moved? I'm new to the job and saw your protection, and the IP edits that followed. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

It was just move protection. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

OK. I don't know if it needs more--there doesn't seem to be much right now, as opposed to half an hour ago. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:28, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, given the circumstances, I wouldn't say the level of vandalism is too bad. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Haha, the Mavs finally win and no one cares? (I'm a Laker fan myself, but I'm happy to see Miami lose.) Drmies (talk) 03:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I think America is generally OK with Dallas winning (as for that football team, that's another story). So am I. I watched the 2006 collapse, and am glad to see Dirk a champion at last. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:36, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

True. And I'm happy for Kidd as well--he made me root for the Nets. Later, Drmies (talk) 03:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

TFAR / TFL, June 27 and a generally dark blue appearance to the Main Page

Bodley's Librarian has been TFL-picked for June 27 - the date that I've suggested at WP:TFAR for one of "my" FAs, also on an Oxford University theme, because of a good date connection. Such an abundance of dark blue material on the main page of Wikipedia might only serve to annoy editors from a certain younger university using light blue as its colour of choice, including our very own TRM. If the Buildings of Jesus College, Oxford article is picked as TFA, might I suggest that the Bodley list is replaced with something else, to avoid TRM and others turning a nasty shade of something? Thanks, Bencherlite^Talk 14:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Is it fine if I switch Bodley's Librarian to feature on June 20 instead of June 27? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Fine by me. (/me wonders if List of female United States Cabinet Secretaries would work better on July 4 than June 27, but that sort of decision is way above my pay-grade!) Bencherlite^Talk 14:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Good calls all around. I have a not-yet-featured list in mind for next year (although I love the irony of a Brit working on a list of independence days, given that half of them are our "fault"). —WFC— 15:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Another thought: at WP:FL, the "list of" is generally piped to avoid boredom of multiple "list of". Should we do the same for the "recently featured" note at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/July 4, 2011. Bencherlite^Talk 14:29, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 16, 2011

You selected Tropical Storm Allison as the TFA on that date, but it was already selected on December 19, 2007. Also could you unprotect the page? It is unneeded now. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 20:07, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, good catch. I'm not sure what happened there. I didn't protect any page though. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I meant, unprotect Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 19, 2007, it won't be vandalized (I guess). ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 22:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:56, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Lee Mills‎

Many thanks for protecting the article! GiantSnowman 23:06, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI

FYI, my rollback rights have been revoked, please see here.

--Thepoliticalmaster (talk) 11:01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much!

Thanks so much for reviewing not just one but two of my DYK articles about decim periodical cicadas. I really appreciate it, because I was worried that nobody would even notice that I added another article to that hook. Sharktopus^talk 22:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Protect Scott Carson please

I saw you protected Diego Forlan for similar reasons, could you please semi-protect the page Scott Carson. Reichsfürst (talk) 17:54, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

José Antonio Reyes also if you wouldn't mind - getting very confusing. Reichsfürst (talk) 18:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:54, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of The Two Roads Theater for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Two Roads Theater is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Two Roads Theater until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 19:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

José Antonio Reyes

Hi there DABOMB, VASCO from Portugal,

thanks for the protection in this player's article, keeping the "wiki-beasts" at bay. Unfortunately, one week will not be enough, not by a mile. Kids (and fully-bearded individuals!) with nothing better to do...If you could do the same at Tomas Ujfalusi one of this days, it would be nice man!

Keep it up, have a great weekend from Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

FA/GA categories

Hi DaBomb, I asked a question at Category talk:Featured articles#Redundant that you might know something about, given your work with maintaining the FA count. Best, rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Availability

Hey dude, thanks for the note. Have a good time away from Wikipedia if you can. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 20:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Seconded. Take it easy and we'll hold the fort down until you're back. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for protecting Woe, Is Me from the raging genre hopping IP vandal, although it wasn't genre warring, it was actual vandalism ---- several users were reverting those edits too being aware that those edits are vandalism edits. Please protect the discography for Asking Alexandria, The Devil Wears Prada (band) and We Came as Romans too, tho and all their albums because those are also getting attacked along with Of Mice & Men (band) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.138.144 (talk) 17:27, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I've protected the articles where the IP hopper has been active recently. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:32, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Due to being on the history for these bands reverting the same vandalism, I just now noticed this IP was reverting these a few days ago. To be perfectly honest, this is not the first or second time it's happened. This vandal is at it again today for nearly the fourth time as I can remember. If I could make a suggestion to report this to the administrator's noticeboard, I think it would be appropriate hence the fact that this issue has occurred non-stop on a number of episodes. • GunMetal Angel 20:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I've blocked 109.111.128.0/19 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) and 213.149.0.0/19 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)). Dabomb87 (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Sergio Aguero

Could you please extend the protection of Kun to September 2, 2011. Reason being that August 19, 2011 still falls during the transfer period thus meaning IPs vandalizing the page. Transfer Period ends September 1, 2011. Do care to leave this on my talk page after replying {{tb|Dabomb87}}. GaneshBhakt (talk) 09:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent TFA you added

Hey I was just informed that you had added a US roads article as the TFA for July 4th. I just wanted to let you know that I was intending to nominate Don Valley Parkway for August 31 (the 50th anniversary of the first section opening) and am hoping that this won't bear on the outcome since it'll be within 60 days. Cheers, ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 21:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI, Interstate 68 has been nominated for August 2, which (if selected) would give DVP a two point penalty. Bencherlite^Talk 21:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure why its nominated over 30 days in advance. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 21:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

It was Raul654 (talk · contribs) who scheduled the article as TFA, FYI. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, the instructions state that "Requests must be for dates within the next 30 days that have not yet been scheduled." (emphasis mine) As of right now, TFAs have been scheduled up to July 4, and August 2 comes 29 days after that. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:55, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

That said, assuming no other road articles are scheduled between July 4 and August 31, I don't think I would be less inclined to schedule DVP. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Use dmy dates

I'd like you to reconsider elevating the protection level of Template:Use dmy dates from semi to full. There has not been any vandalism whatsoever, nor was it requested. Such high protection levels do not allow editors like me, with over 60,000 edits and plenty of experience in template coding, to make useful edits. Debresser (talk) 00:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there a specific edit you would like to make? The template has over 100,000 transclusions, has a history of vandalism (albeit from IPs and non-autoconfirmed users), and there is little need for it to be edited constantly. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:07, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, the protection was in fact requested. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reaction. The request wasn't mentioned in the edit summary. Which is why I assumed there hadn't been any such request. Still, I am not in favor of such measures. Yes, the specific edit I want to make is to change DMCAT to DMCA, that is to remove the "T". Debresser (talk) 01:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Debresser (talk) 01:30, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Request

Since you have been so kind, could you please move Frank Garcia (magic) to its redirect Frank Garcia (magician). Only an admin can do it. I hope the reason for the move is obvious. Debresser (talk) 01:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. Debresser (talk) 02:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Request

Would you pull John A. Macdonald for July 1? Unfortunately, I don't like how Tony1 has edited the blurb and it is beneath my dignity to edit war with him. Until issues between myself and Tony are resolved, I'm using my veto as principal editor on all my FAs.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:07, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Done, replaced with another article about a Canadian politician. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

This is shocking and disappointing. We are going to lose the opportunity to have the first Prime Minister on the main page on Canada Day (and with all respect to Brownlee, he is nowhere near Macdonald's stature) because one editor does not like a blurb and is having a fight with another? Seriously? Since when does Wikipedia credit editors as "primary authors" and "principal editors" and give vetos to editors? I sincerely hope this can be rectified. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I would have no objection if it ran with the blurb approved by Raul. But frankly, I don't really care. Now will everyone leave me in peace?--Wehwalt (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Wehwalt, you created the problem by taking it upon yourself to make this request (to exercise your "veto"). You should not be surprised if others contact you and ask you to reconsider. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I think six months of work gives me the privilege, "childish" or not. Please respect that I have said what you asked. I'm rapidly learning how thin civility is around here.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree you have put a lot of work into that article - I believe that I supported you and deferred to your good judgment every step of the way. I'm not sure that gives you an ownership right or the entitlement you seem to think you have, but I do appreciate that you made the request. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

By our customs at TFA, the principal authors get that veto. However, see my comment below.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Folks, regardless of the merit or the unfortunate incident, please leave it alone now. DaBomb has done his job, and we needn't be seesawing back and forth on this. It's done. Lessons learned and all that. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Why is it done. A problem can still be fixed. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Your insistence is only prolonging a dispute, and seesawing back-and-forth on a TFA is not a good idea. There is a Canada Day every year, is there not? SandyGeorgia (Talk)

I am not insisting, I am simply asking that a problem be fixed. I appreciate that you may not care, but why the need to be so dismissive of someone trying to rectify something so that it goes forward as planned? What prejudice is there to anyone? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I have not asked for anything, and do not. I merely came here as Skeezix desired. Dabomb, I have no objection to you running any article, or Raul, henceforth, as long it is run in a version approved by you or him, with the blurb not edited by Tony. I don't know how that gets accomplished in practice. Frankly, I was very tempted just to revert just before full protection kicked in, but I felt that was violating the spirit of WP:INVOLVED even if not the letter. So please give me some credit. I have not struck back at Tony in any way other than unsuccessfully appealing to the community for help.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

TFA day can be a stressful and emotional day for the primary editor, which is understandable given the amount of time an effort one invests in bringing an article to FA status. Raul and I will always give the "author"'s requests considerable weight when considering these issues. Of course, if Raul wishes to schedule Macdonald anyway, I have no problem with that. If he isn't scheduled for tomorrow, consider that there's always next July 1, which would be the 145th anniversary of Macdonald taking office. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Your comments are well taken. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:46, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Skeezix, can I ask as a personal favor that you let this go? I don't think I'm up for the stress of a TFA day. I did not want to make it more about me than it already is, but I just don't want to deal with it. As Dabomb said, there's always next year, by which time I hope this has simmered down.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Dabomb87's comments were helpful in putting this in perspective. It is very disappointing to see it pulled (I was very pleased when I saw this would be TFA for July 1), but it would be far more disappointing if you did not get to enjoy it. I would much rather wait than have you even more stressed. Next July 1, then. Thanks for your help. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

It is just appalling that someone like Wehwalt is able to intimidate the system into removing what appears to have offended his ego. The original blurb was faulty, and needed improvement. This extraordinary diatribe is very destructive. I'm very disappointed Dabomb has succumbed so easily to pressure from vested interests. Tony (talk) 16:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic

Can you keep an eye on that page and make sure they're all at the proper spelling (with a colon and capital I in Is), and maybe move-protect again if necessary? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:04, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

→

Archive 39