User talk:Aervanath/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Aervanath. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

'Biased' sources

The following was copied to User talk:Evenmadderjon to continue the conversation there:

Hi there, I hope it's ok to leave a message on your talk page. I wonder if you'd had time to consider what I should do with the Nontheism/Hinduism article where I'm having points and their sources removed because they are 'biased'. They seem to fit the criteria for reliable sources, so I am confused as to what to do now. I'm fairly certain that any contributions I make (however well sourced or unbiased) will be removed.--Evenmadderjon (talk) 15:44, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried just directly asking what is wrong with the source? Also, I notice that you have yet to respond to Mitsube's latest comment on Talk:Nontheism. While it can be frustrating to deal with someone you feel is targeting you personally, in my experience (and I've experienced it, too) this feeling of persecution is almost never justified. Usually if I'm feeling that way, I take a week off from the article, and go find something else to do. For me, it's de-orphaning articles. However, there's plenty of other backlogged tasks to take care of. If that doesn't satisfy, and you do want to keep working on the article, then my best advice is to never stop engaging the editor you're having a dispute with. If you're not communicating, then there's no chance of solving the dispute. If the editor stops responding to your talk page posts, or doesn't address the points you raise, when you've raised them simply, clearly, and inoffensively, then you have a real grievance that can be taken to the community at large. But I wouldn't recommend starting the dispute resolution process yet, since I don't think you've exhausted the possibilities of simple discussion yet. Just focus on keeping your emotions disengaged while you're at it, and you should survive the wiki unscathed. :) Cheers,--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 02:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The above was copied to User talk:Evenmadderjon to continue the conversation there.

A nom for you

Hey there Aervanath, I've created an RfA for you. If there is somebody else you'd like to co-nom you with, feel free to invite them... although, I would not have more than one other co-nom. In my opinion, more than 2 nominators cries of desperation. Also, you might want to review my essay before starting an RfA. They key points from it are: 1) Don't transclude unless you have 2-4 hours to watch the RfA. People seem to think that you should be available to answer questions for the first few hours. (Also, if you have a co-nom, let them finish their nom before transcluding it.) 2) Keep your cool. You don't have to respond to every oppose, in fact, sometimes it is better to let others do so. I generally, will avoid prolonged debates in my candidates. 3) I have a funky little tradition when I nom somebody, *I* don't !vote until the RfA is over or until it reaches 100 supports. So don't expect to see my support in the voting section right away. Anyway, good luck. If there is something you don't like about the nom or if you feel I misrepresented something, let me know. Also, when you answer question 1, make sure you go over the reasons you gave me the other day about how somebody who works in the Orphanage would benefit from having the tools.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 04:18, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

An admin abusing his powers

Well within 1 day of you moving back History of the Assyrian people, admin dab moved the back again and deleted massive information just so that it fits what he wants the page to be named. Can youp please help with the situation. Iraqi (talk) 06:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

(One comment moved to User talk:Dbachmann for continuity).

I have replied on my talkpage. Fwiiw, the traditional call of "admin abuse" without any diffs pointing to any admin action should be a bit of a give-away already. dab (𒁳) 11:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

Best wishes for your upcoming RFA :) -- Tinu Cherian - 12:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll let you know when it goes live. :)--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 12:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Just an FYI, your RfA is a little closer than I would like, but it is about where I expected it to be... in the 70-80% range. The thing that is encouraging is that nobody has brought up any true negatives or reasons you shouldn't be an admin, so the oppose reason is the one that I gave you as a potential reason for failure... in other words, don't loose heart. There is a lot left to your RfA, and if it fails due to this reason, then it's a reason that can be easily fixed. (It's the RfA's that fail for civility/power hunger/immaturity that are hard to recover from.) Anyway, in short, I haven't lost faith in you as an editor or potential admin.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 01:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. After reading the opposes, I've already been thinking about starting on some articles, whether I get approved or not. Either way, it'll help. Thanks again!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 01:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to go all out to prove that you can write content. As long as long you are able to show that you have the potential, that should be sufficient to most editors. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 15:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey Aervanath. I just thought I should let you know that although I opposed on the basis of a lack of article building experience, I see nothing else wrong with you as a candidate. If your current RfA fails (it's currently on the lower border limit) and you come back in a few months with some articles under your belt, I'll be more than happy to strong support you. Just thought I'd let you know, hope there are no hard feelings. Later. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 17:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Cyclonenim, I appreciate your honesty, and it is a valid concern. Whether or not I am approved for adminship, I think I should get involved in some article building, just to round out my experience as a Wikipedia contributor. Cheers, --Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 06:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Aervanath , How I wish you already had more tangible article building experience , so that such a good candidate like you doesnt need to come back again to RFA. I agree with Baloonman, if at it fails now , dont lose heart , the possible failure reason is something that you can work on easily. best wishes again -- Tinu Cherian - 06:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Tinu, we talked about it. He basically had two options, take a few months to build up a resume (EG jump through hoops as he has shown the temperament IMO to be an admin) or run for it now. If he fails now, it will take him the same few months to build up his resume. Going for it now, thus had no real negatives (IMO) while posing the possibility of getting the tools into the hands of another capable individual. The key for Aevananth to remember, is that so far we haven't seen any real opposes for judgement/personality issues, everything has been a check the box oppose.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 07:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You are right , baloonman. I tool felt that he will make good admin with minus the 'article building skills' and hence supported him. All I wished that he had a 'better resume' so that such a good candidate neednt had to try for a second chance. Thats all. -- Tinu Cherian - 08:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

• Don't lose heart kid. You're trustworthy, you're competent and you do a helluva lotta good stuff around here. You more than meet the requirements expected of Admins. Be well, X MarX the Spot (talk) 07:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No matter what happens in your RFA, carry on with your work. People like you make me proud to be a Wikipedian. Ignore "teh dramahz", it's all an evil plot by the rouge admins. —Ceran^{(dream / discover)} 02:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you both for the kind words. I'll keep them in mind! :)--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

When this is over, I think I'm going to need a massage... I feel like I'm on a rollercoaster ride... every time I think the tide is turning one way or the other, it bounces back... Last night it droped down to 68% and I thought it was over... now it's back up to 71%. This is an RfA that will give the 'crats a nightmare to decide!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 19:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Rollercoaster is right! I saw your comments on WP:BN about it, I'd like to know the closing rationale, too, as this will be a close one. It does cheer me up that at least one 'crat has piped in on the support side already.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Suicide template

I would truly like to help in constructing this, but I think it's perfect. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! We'll see what the others have to say about it. If everyone agrees, I'll add it to WP:SUICIDE, as well.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 01:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm, I'm not sure if I like seeing "Suicide Template" on my RfA nominee's page just hours before his RfA closes ;0---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 02:23, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yeah, I can see where that might be a concern. :) However, it's in good cause. See WP:AN#Suicide threat for the background.--Aervanath's sock lives in the Orphanage, too 10:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I'm guessing you don't have any fingernails left, so here are a few to replace them. Best of luck with your RFA. G'night! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 04:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Such nice looking nails you have! Yeah, if I was susceptible to nail-biting, I'd have zero nails left. This has been a thriller. Just an hour or so left now, though! Thanks!--Aervanath's sock lives in the Orphanage, too 10:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Aervanath, I initially opposed your RfA, but after talking with Balloonman, I switched my !vote to neutral. Best of luck with your RFA. AdjustShift (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that. Thanks!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 12:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I barely squeaked in, but I'm glad I did. I don't watch RfAs that often because it usually eats a couple of hours evaluating and responding, and I've found that I don't have time to keep up with my other (self-imposed) commitments. But I wanted to offer you support and solidarity. I had no clue what RfA was about when I accepted my nomination. If I had, I might not have accepted. :) If I hadn't accepted then, I don't know that I ever would have. All props to people who step up for that process with eyes open. As with mine, your RfA is a bit on the borderline. Should consensus fall to the wrong side, I do hope that you will at some point step up for it again. And as somebody told me, the key is a combination of cardio & beer. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, now that it's over, I guess I'll skip the cardio and beer. :) Thanks for the support!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Your Rfa is being reviewed

The admins' T-shirt.

Well, Aervanath, your RfA is currently being reviewed by a 'crat... we'll see what the crat's final decision is, but I think it should pass. Of the past 17 !votes, 16 were supports. I think the latest trend should have a bearing, but we shall see. However it turns out, I am proud to have nominated you, and think you will be a good admin either today or down the road. Also, regardless of how the Crat rules, please address the concerns raised. Too bad we didn't get just a few more !vtoes, I was hoping that you'd reach 100 supports.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 13:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Well predicted, Balloonman. Congratulations Aervanath, I'm glad the decision went the right way. :) ~ mazca ^t|c 13:28, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

It's official...here's your shirt. Congratulations!  Frank  |  talk  13:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Now that it is official, I wish to offer you my congratulations as well. Hope it wasn't too stressful... your RfA went pretty much as I expected... although a little tighter than I hoped. I knew that it would be a close one (which is why I told you what I did last month.) But the good news is that you don't have to endure this again ;-) That is, unless you decide to run for 'crat.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 13:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your new mop and bucket! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 14:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks all of you! I'm really relieved now. Yay!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

No problem Aervanath. DJ MeXsTa (talk) 17:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for that message. My opinion has always been that an editor does not need to be an article creator in order to become an admin. Ollie Fury _Contribs 18:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I second that, administrative tools are for maintenance of the encyclopedia, not for article writing. Congratulations!!! macy 18:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Great News, Kid!

Congratulations on being promoted. You'll do fine. :) X MarX the Spot (talk) 19:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats and Condolences

Thanks for the kind note. I'm happy it worked out. So... Congratulations -- you're now an admin. And my heartfelt condolences -- your now an admin. — CactusWriter | ^needles 20:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes congrats mate! It's a very tough process which I've finally decided to put myself through. And as expected it's very.... well tough :) Cheers regardless and I hope to see you around. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! I wish you all the best [despite the fact I opposed]. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:02, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your promotion (and doubly so for holding firm even when it looked like it would not pass)! Best of luck, and I'm confident you'll make the admin corps proud! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

• I was glad to see your RFA passed, good call by Rlevse! (re from User talk:Icewedge) The nonspecific "minor lapses in judgement" part of my comment was mostly referring to the UAA report for Fullyang (talk · contribs), the internet is a big place and I bet there is a corresponding URL for a sizable number of Wikipedia usernames.Icewedge (talk) 00:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
  • All right! Now show them doubting Thomases what you're made of! bibliomaniac15 00:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFA! Even though I gave you my support, to be honest, I didn't expect you to pass. Well done, and make the most of it! Terraxos (talk) 02:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

{{talkback}}: Thanks for the support!

Hello, Aervanath. You have new messages at AubreyEllenShomo's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

⇔ ∫Æ_S dt @ 03:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations...

... you deserved it. Whew! after checking back several times to see how it was going the - "wait one, we're thinking about it" message from the 'crats was almost cruel. I'm glad you got the mop and you have my utmost respect for all your work with orphan articles. I do a little of that too and it can be hard, frustrating (and vastly unappreciated :) work - especially when you have a two line stub to work with! Enjoy the mop, but more importantly enjoy the community consensus that your work here is valued - well done. cheers, Paxse (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Revert on Category:Wikipedians looking for help from administrators

Hi there. I reverted your edits at " Category:Wikipedians looking for help from administrators" because the way you did it was messing up the IRC pinging system that alerts us when {{helpme}} is used. Can you try to fix your edit please? Thanks :) - NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 04:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah. I'll find another way to quicknav between the two, then. Thanks!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

RfA

As I to you. :) — neuro^(talk) 04:27, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Angelo State University College of Liberal and Fine Arts

Did you not associate their user name with the name of the college, or notice the other issues about adding ASU related materials to wikipedia in the past (as noted on their talk page)? Let me know why it wasn't promotional in nature if possible. Thank you. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what their intentions are. It matters how the article sounds. It does not sound overly promotional to me. It is not trying to sell the college, it is simply describing it. If you feel that it is overly positive, be bold and fix it, or take it to Afd. Also, while it's not really relevant, I went and looked at their talk page. There is nothing there that indicates to me that this user has had prior issues in over-promoting their college. Could you provide some prior examples of this?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 11:27, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I was speaking of the images of the college removed. The article itself is essentially a copy/paste of their website and a collection of lists, though I suppose with some TLC it could hold up. Thanks for your comments. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah. To me, all the image deletions mean is that they're still newbies on copyright matters. If the article is a copy/paste, then that would be speedyable as a copyvio, if you have the URL.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 12:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I know from experience issues with being a newb on copyrights and images. Anyhow, if you visit the departmental website of the college, the information is not truly a copy/paste, but is essentially transplanting the information from it and making it into a wikipedia article. It's likely true that all that's needed at this point is fixing the laundry lists on the article as I wouldn't say it's a copyvio at all. The issue which flagged this up for me as a potentially promotional user was that the user name is clearly associated with the college. Later after some other GA reviews I may go through and tag the article for maintenance to clean up the lists if possible. However I do think after fixing the lists the stub at that point would be ripe for merger with Angelo State University. Have a good weekend. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

— Rlevse • Talk • 13:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! I think you should thank Balloonman because he turned it around. At one point, you had less than 70% support. I initially opposed your RfA, but after talking with Balloonman, I switched my !vote to neutral. In this type of RfAs, even one !vote matters. Congrats once again! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 13:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

All right! :D :D :D Congratulations! Have fun with the mop!!!! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, guys! Now I can do my happy dance in my new admin shirt and mop! :) --Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Heheh. Send me the video, willya? ;-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

One happy dance video, coming right up! Here you go! (Warning: that's not actually me. Sorry.)--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:10, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations --Banime (talk) 16:29, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats. Now get to work! Pedro :  Chat  16:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

(e/c) O_O Wow. That is one psychotic kid. The scary thing is, she looks older than a lot of girls I know who are 15 and 16. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

very nice! You'll be a great sysop. Sam ^Blab 17:15, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Remember, don't delete the main page! DiverseMentality 17:50, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Wait, did that pass?? Congrats! Xclamation point 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on getting the mop (hope you didn't mind me switching back in forth before a solid support) :P RockManQ ^(talk) 20:11, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

• DiverseMentality: don't worry, I'll find something far more embarrassing to screw up at.
• X!: Thanks again.
• RockManQ: Don't sweat it. The fact that you actually spent that much time thinking about it flattered me. Thanks all of you!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

• I don't notice that you've had this link yet. I found Wikipedia:New admin school very helpful. Congratulations. I wouldn't give up on the cardio & beer just yet, though. The drama has not yet begun. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:18, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link! Actually, I went through there before I even asked Balloonman for the nom. It'll probably be a little more helpful now that I actually have the tools to practice with. :) Will put cardio & beer back on the Aerva-schedule, then. Thanks!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, it passed! Congratulations! –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :)--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Aervanath. You'll do good. :) Master&Expert (Talk) 04:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• Congratulations! (Rlevse's closing was excellent, imo.) — Athaenara ✉ 21:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• Congratulations and Best wishes . Thanks for leaving me a note on my talk page -- Tinu Cherian - 05:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

X → Template:X RFD Tags

With respect to the X → Template:X RFD debate, the {{rfd}} tags are still on the kept / re-targeted ones. Though B.Wind re-targeted them, he (properly) left the tag as the debate was still open. Now that they're closed, they need to be removed. As the closer, it should really be you who removes them to reduce any confusion. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. N00b error. I'll fix them. There's really no need for it to be me, though, as long as you leave a link to the discussion in your edit summary. Thanks for letting me know!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

As for missing the need to do it, no problem, that happens. For doing it myself, consider my note a more friendly way of saying "it's your mess, you need to clean it up." :-) After dealing with the backlog including the large number Ballet redirects, I had had enough. Part of deciding to close something is being willing to do the work to complete the close. That's why some of the larger or more complex ones sometimes stay open longer. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, this one has already taken a lot longer than I thought it would. Now I see why it was still open. :) I am in the process of cleaning up the "mess", though. Thanks again for the reminder!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: UAA

I still think it was a wrong report. Consider what User:EVula said below me, and here - as well as his username being EVula he also hosts the domain evula.com, so his email address could be and probably is [e-mail]. If the user had created an article Fullyang.com promoting his website it would have been justified, but until then WP:AGF applies. I often feel UAA isn't the place to report spam anyway, unless it's really blatant, like maybe if the username had .com at the end. Anyway, congrats on your successful RfA, use the tools wisely. cheers, - filelakeshoe 16:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I can see that. Thanks for taking the time to explain that to me!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Congratulations on passing your RfA. I hope that you would be better article builder soon though. I'll give some basic advice to help you get there. First, I suggest that you create articles later and focus on sourcing old articles. See WP:FOOT for details regarding sourcing. You might consider activating the [User:Mr.Z-man/refToolbar|ref tools]] in your preference tab since it will greatly assist you in sourcing stuff. After you gain some skill from sourcing, you might move into producing DYK's or GA's.--Lenticel ^(talk) 22:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, that sounds like it would be easier than starting articles from scratch. Happy editing!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:RfA Thanks

Your welcome. Seeing your RfA made me feel a little guilty about not doing as much de-Orphaning lately... I've been a bit caught up in some other stuff, but I'll try and work there more often. Anyway, congratz on the mop! ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:39, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I need to do some more de-orphaning myself as well. The admin backlog is high, but not nearly as high as CAT:ORPHAN's is!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thanks for the feedback

Congratulations on passing your RfA, and best of luck with your new role! Wronkiew (talk) 10:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. Just start helping me with some articles! ;) —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 15:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and will do!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

EC green paper

(also posted on my talk) Hi Aervanath, I don't know too much about it myself (I got the summary of topics from the conference organizer), but there was discussion of it recently on the foundation-l mailing list: . Best, phoebe / (talk to me) 21:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 21:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Page evaluation, favor?

Hello, newly minted janitor. :) A contributor has a raised question about some images on Wikipedia on my talk page. Condensed version: these are images of a celebrity duplicated from an external site. The uploader has now placed a release notice on the external site, but the concerned contributor questions whether s/he actually has authority to release these images. Can you tell by looking at this site if it is a fan site or some kind of official site? This could be helpful in determining. I have no clue, given that I couldn't even recognize the language. I thought it was Japanese, but a Japanese speaking contributor has corrected me. Though you identify as a level 1 speaker of Chinese, I thought I'd start by checking with you. I like to approach people I know first. If you have a minute, I'd appreciate your taking a look. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Moonriddengirl, sorry I didn't get back to you before the point was moot. It looks like the images were deleted anyway. It looks like the matter was handled properly. From what I can tell, the external site in question is in fact the official fan club for Jade Kwan. However, there was no evidence that the photos they were using had actually been released by the original authors under a Wikipedia-compatible license. I think that a lot of the photos on the site actually were, as the webmaster has said, given to the site and/or taken specifically for the site, but that was no conclusively shown.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 02:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:42, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

I would like to congratulate you for your successful RfA. I am sorry I didn't have the change to vote. The week you were candidate I was busy in real life and I didn't notice that you were a candidate. Once again congratulations! -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Magiodladitis! Congrats again on your elevation!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 13:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

shared watchlist posted

Hey Aervanath, you can find your requested list at User:Aervanath/Watchlist. Feel free to link it however you like! Spread the word Category:Wikipedia_user_watchlists ;) // ∴ here…♠ 19:52, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, here!--Aervanath's sock lives in the Orphanage, too 02:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Could you recover a deleted article for me?

You're on the list of editors willing to recover deleted articles. The article List of notable people who wore the bowler hat has been deleted prematurely before there was consensus. It's being argued over now. See: Could you please recover it in the meantime, as we have no copy surviving? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/List_of_notable_people_who_wore_the_bowler_hat Thanks! (BTW, the article has been recreated since, and I cannot find the old deletion history-- I don't know how you find this stuff). SBHarris 02:13, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

The deletion history is only visible to administrators. I have restored all deleted revisions from the history for your viewing.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! That recovers a lot of work I did sorting the list, etc., which really isn't in the old article. WP is full of lists which have nothing for sources but the Wikis they are lists OF: as in List of birds, List of trees, etc. So what's the big problem, here? From the way somebody's trying to speedy-d this thing, and you'd think it was full of a bunch of peoples' home addresses or SSNs! What is the big rush, please? There's quite time enough to put a {fact} tag on entries people are suspicious of, or else click on the link to see the person wearing a bowler hat, and what more do you want? Somebody on the deletion page really doesn't understand the point of list-articles, do they? SBHarris 00:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. As for why it's being deleted, I think the main concern is that this list is not notable by itself, as there aren't any sources saying why the group of people who wore bowler hats is a notable group in and of itself. So the consensus seems to be that this list would be fine (in a trimmed down form) in the original article, rather than splitting it out from the main article. There is no consensus that I can see to delete the material entirely.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 02:08, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Date linking RFC

Here's the breakdown of events over the past week:

• Over a week ago Masem (talk · contribs) suggested creating an RFC as a way forward in the dispute at WT:MOSNUM.
• During that discussion, Masem created an initial draft of the RFC at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)/Date Linking RFC.
• That draft RFC was worked on/edited by numerous participants in the dispute.
• Tony1 (talk · contribs), for reasons only Tony knows, decided to create his own RFC comprised entirely of questions worded by him practically on the eve we had planned to take the other RFC live.
• During the beginning of that RFC we attempted to add some background information about the discussion so far and it was aggressively removed by Tony and his supporters.

For these reasons it's highly unlikely "merging" the RFC would be possible as Tony and his supports seem to believe this is some kind of holy war. An uninvolved admin, Tznkai (talk · contribs), who was alerted to the issue of the spontaneous Tony RFC twice attempted to blank it but was quickly reverted by Tony's supporters. As delisting and closing the other RFC isn't possible, and merging them isn't possible, do you have any suggestions on a way forward so we can get input from the larger community? —Locke Cole • t • c 06:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I wish I could be more helpful, but I'm not really sure how to take care of the situation, either. You may be right that in the end the only thing to do is to go through this farce of having two duplicatory RFC's. Something else needs to be tried first, though. I would ask you to post this issue on WP:AN for more input, since I'm afraid I don't have any brilliant ideas on how to do this. The thing that concerns me is that, if the two RFC's come up with conflicting results, we haven't achieved anything. Even if the RFC's will come out with exactly the same result, it's stupid to ask editors to vote twice on two separate RFCs. I am interested to find out what more senior administrators think on this matter, though, so bringing it up on WP:AN is probably the best idea.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The clincher is WP:UNINVOLVED, WRT my recent post at Watchlist talk. I may have been premature in my implied accusation, for which I apologise. In addition, I think you may consider that some of the entries above may be one-sided and open to question on their basis in fact. I await your response. Tony (talk) 09:26, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Tony, are you referring to the edit summary "editprotected" on MediaWiki talk:Watchlist-details, and the protected status of MediaWiki:Watchlist-details? If so, that page is part of the Mediawiki space and is protected by default. Admins are the only ones who are permitted to edit pages in that space; as such, Aervanath was responding to a request to edit the template. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I've done as suggested and posted at here. If you have the time, your input in that discussion would be appreciated. —Locke Cole • t • c 10:19, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You are perfectly right. My fault, arising from my extreme time constraints. I've removed the irrelevant part of my previous post here, for the moment. Thank you. Tony (talk) 09:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletions

Aervanath, do you remember what I said during your RfA? --Elonka 21:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes. And I'm chagrined to realize that I haven't really followed through on my promise to start on some content creation. So I'll get on that before going through any more deletions. Which deletions in particular do you think were wrong?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 21:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't looked at all your deletions, but Luke michaels and Grants office were borderline. Some admins might still have deleted them, others might have declined and recommended prod or AfD. I was actually in the process of declining the Grants office one, when I saw that you'd already deleted it. And the edit summary on the Luke michaels article when you deleted was probably more than needed. Unless you had some other way to know that he was the one that wrote it himself? It might have been a fan.

In any case, if a more experienced admin had deleted them, I probably wouldn't be saying anything, as I'd just write it off to "difference of opinion". But since those articles were grey area, and since you just told me a few days ago that you weren't going to jump into deletions, I wanted to bring it up. Don't get me wrong: There's always a backlog at WP:CSD, so helping there is great. But it might be best to stay away from the borderline decisions until you have more content-creation experience, per your campaign promise?  :) There are also plenty of other backlogged areas where you can help. I've actually been working on an "advice for new admins" page... Perhaps you could scan through it, and give some feedback? Since you're one of the newest ones out of the pipe, you'll be one of the best people to comment on whether the advice there is useful or not: User:Elonka/Advice. --Elonka 22:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I am quite a newbie still myself, so I can understand Elonka's concerns. What I do is this: When I encounter a decision where I am unsure how to correctly react, be it CSD, AFD or RFPP, I put the page into my watchlist and await until some other admin decides it. If it was an experienced admin, I can see if my "hunch" was correct and learn how to handle a similar situation. Just a tip. Regards SoWhy 22:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd love to collect all these "tips for new admins" in one place. SoWhy, if you have any others, feel free to add them to my subpage: User:Elonka/Advice. --Elonka 22:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Elonka, I will certainly contribute to the advice page. I didn't consider Luke michaels to be a grey area, and you can check the deleted talk page for why I called it an autobio: . Grants Office probably would have seemed more borderline to me if it hadn't been created by User:Grantsoffice. I'll undelete and WP:PROD it if you feel that's wise. As for SoWhy's advice, that is in fact what I was doing for a couple months before my RFA, so I guess I thought I was "ready for the big time". :-P Guess not. I'll work on some more content creation first, which is something the community has been clear that I need to do. It's just that the backlog is calling to my inner wikignome. But, as you pointed out, there are other backlogs to be worked on. Cheers!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 11:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, good point on Luke Michaels, I hadn't seen that, so I see where you made that assumption now. As for Grants Office, no, it's not worth undeleting. Neither one of them was really that bad a call, they were just borderline situations. I wouldn't have noticed it at all except that I was about to come down on one side of the line, and you came down on the other. And even then I normally wouldn't have said anything, except that this was something that the community had raised concerns about, so I wanted to remind you. If you can get an article to GA (or FA!) before engaging in any other controversial deletions, I think it would be very helpful. And yes, I know that getting an article to that level is difficult. But that's why it's so valued. :) --Elonka 23:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Timer to Good Article starting...now. (Although I confess I did delete a couple of nonsense/attack pages today, but those weren't anywhere near borderline.)--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 14:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, A Nobody^{My talk} 02:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

WPJudaism Template

Hi, You responded to my request to change the WikiProject Judaism template. I've posted my requested proposal on the template talk page. Thanks for your help. Shirulashem (talk) 16:49, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Done--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

thanks! Shirulashem (talk) 17:04, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Greetings Aervanath - had meant to convey my thanks for adding the Wikipedia guidelines at the Talk:Pablo Casals page, but got caught up elsewhere. Hopefully your wikilink and comments will suffice. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 16:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Technopat, it's my pleasure. I'm always gratified to know someone appreciates something I do. It looks like conversation stopped dead after my comment, so hopefully it'll be another few months before someone shows up to debate the issue again. Happy editing!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

History of Washington, D.C.

Hi Aervanath,

I would be glad to help in an overhaul of History of Washington, D.C. I was actually thinking of expanding this initiative to fix up all of the Washington, D.C.-related articles and perhaps make a run for WP:Featured topics. In any event, the main article will probably become WP:TFA on Jan. 20 for the inauguration, and the article's traffic is already way up since the election. So it would probably be a good idea to make sure that the supporting articles are at least GA quality (even if not every one of them is submitted for GA status). Thoughts? --epicAdam^(talk) 15:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

That'd be great! I'd be willing to help out on a broader basis, but I think the history article would be my main focus. Unfortunately, while I've been around for a while, I'm a total newbie when it comes to putting in a concerted effort on one article. So, any suggestions on where I should get started?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Well I personally think that the history summary in Washington, D.C. is actually better than the History of DC article! Some suggestions to improve thee subarticle:

• First, there are a number of paragraphs without citations that could very easily be corrected using the references provided on the main page. I'll look into doing that.
• Second, in a related issue, User:Corker1 added some information awhile back, mostly about the city's founding. Some of it was sourced, a lot of it was not. More of a concern, much of what he referenced wasn't in the citations he/she provided. I believe much of what he added was simply his own beliefs and research and simply added sources that he thought people wouldn't really look at. We'll have to pay special attention to those areas to make sure sources match up.
• Third, we need to purge the article of information about events that are not related to the city itself (the Lincoln Assassination, the "Bonus Army", much of the terrorism information, etc.). People seem to often confused the events that occurred in D.C. with the history of D.C., those need to be purged.
• Fourth, the article needs to be rewritten as a narrative. Currently, it's mixed between a sort of time-line format with dots about specific events. Grouping things into "centuries" never made much sense to me, either. We'll have to come to a consensus on how we want the article organized.

I think this is enough to start on for now! Best, epicAdam^(talk) 18:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: IP block at Child sexuality

Hi Aervanath - thanks for your help with this ANI report.

The blocked IP is dynamic though, and one of the reverts was from a different IP, though clearly the same person:

• 217.112.186.131 (talk · contribs)

• 217.112.178.113 (talk · contribs)

Would you consider semi-protecting the page for a week or so, so the user can't continue the reverts after signing in with a new different IP?

Also, the IP's last edit still needs to be reverted, and I don't want to do a third revert in one day. Would you mind undoing the edit with an edit summary that the undo is based on the ANI report?

Here is the diff that needs to be reverted:

The various articles related to pedophilia or child pornography have this kind of thing happening often. It's less common on the child sexuality article, hopefully it won't escalate.

Thanks a lot, much appreciated!--Jack-A-Roe (talk) 06:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Jack-A-Roe, I've full-protected the page for 2 days to allow discussion to occur on the talk page. Unfortunately, as this is a content dispute, and not a case of vandalism, I am declining to perform the requested revert. (For a somewhat satirical essay on this, see m:The Wrong Version.) When the protection expires, interested editors can resume editing the page in accordance with Wikipedia's policies. Yours,--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Aervanath, I am familiar with the m:The Wrong Version essay. I appreciate that you took an action that would be appropriate in an ordinary content dispute.

With all due respect, that was not the correct decision in this case. The two IPs are clearly the same person, without a doubt, so aside from any content dispute, 3RR was violated. But because dynamic IPs cannot be blocked, semi-protection would be the best solution. There is no way a couple days of page protection will stop this problem. When the page is unprotected, established editors will revert that completely unreliable source and the dynamic IP will aggressively re-insert it. It will end up with the article semi-protected anyway.

As a newly-promoted administrator, you may not be aware of the continual disruption by both IPs and an endless stream of pro-pedophilia activism sockpuppets who appear and then are blocked while trying to insert their agenda into the various pedophilia-related articles.

I recommend that you discuss this with your administrative mentors to check your action in this situation and find out if it was the best decision. In particular, I suggest that you discuss this with User:Ryan Postlethwaite who has extensive experience in this topic area. Thanks. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 08:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

If, as you say, there are other administrators with more experience in this area, then I recommend that you contact them directly. While I hear what you are saying, I stand by my actions, as I do not think that the IP will necessarily come back immediately. However, I have no objections if other admins override what I have done. Cheers,--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Aervanath, thanks for your reply but I'm not trying to get the protection reversed - that's a small detail and will resolve shortly.

The reason for my note was to suggest that you might want to learn about this topic area, so you can improve your admin skills. It's a difficult area that regularly attracts a lot of disruption, that can often become quite intense. As an active admin, you are sure to encounter these kinds of things again in the future. By learning about it in advance, you'll have better understanding of the context and that will help you make better decisions.

This is not a complaint about your action. I am offering a good faith suggestion that you learn about an area of admin work that is outside your range of experience. Increasing your knowledge about a sensitive topic area would increase your effectiveness as an admin, and that's my only motivation for suggesting you discuss this with Ryan Postlethwaite or any other admin experienced in this topic area. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Jack-a-Roe, Thanks for your suggestions. I just might do that. Cheers!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)