User talk:The wub/archive18

Archives

2005: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2006: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2007: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2008: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2009: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2010: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2011: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2012: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2013: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2014: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2015: J F M A M J J A S O N D 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Holy crap

Wow, I should monitor your account so that I can tag articles for speedy deletion when you're online.

Seriously, though, I'd been made to understand that unless an article is absolute patent nonsense, no editor will want to speedy it.

Anyway, ta much. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 22:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I was just about to post on your page that you're really doing a good job of rooting out the non-notable band articles! And that's certainly not true about speedying, in fact I consider myself fairly conservative about what I speedy delete. Don't forget, there's always prodding as a middle ground. the wub "?!" 22:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC) P.S. I believe I've been impressed by your name before, but just wanted to say, it's still awesome :-) the wub "?!" 22:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah! ASCII art! Fab! I've only managed to root out these articles because I stumbled across the idea of looking through a category page. I'd really, really, really like to find someone who has a script I can run in linux to automate this process, as it takes a few long minutes to fill out each AfD, and I can guarantee you there is at least 100,000 WP:VSCA articles here, with thousands more being added every day. I wish someone could just make me an admin so I could kill all these on my own without having to go through AfD. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 23:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Twinkle has a great tool for automatic AfD listings which might help you out, as well as a tonne of other features. Trust me, I know how much crap there is floating around. I used to be a regular on AfD, but have only really returned recently to do some deletion sorting. As for adminship, in the good old days I'm sure you would have easily become one. Unfortunately RfA standards have risen to (IMHO) unrealistic and arbitrary levels in recent times. Keep up the good work though, and I'd be happy to nominate you. the wub "?!" 23:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

CFDW

Hello. I just wanted you to know that I took one of the items from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 August 12#Category:Australian television presenters by network and moved it from WP:CFD/W to WP:CFD/W/M since it was a multiple merge that will need some special attention. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 11:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I shouldn't have missed that. the wub "?!" 11:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem; with the two categories strung together like that in the nomination, it was easy to happen. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 14:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

List of notable people who have taken psychedelic drugs

This article was delete fairly recently and I do not wish to reinstate it. I would like to view the article as it was when it had a rather lengthly list of names. Is there any way to view the article as it was a few weeks before it was deleted? Thanks in advance. C8755 06:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied on User talk:C8755. the wub "?!" 09:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much with your help regarding this article.C8755 16:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow

Thanks for choosing the article. I appreciate the recognition greatly. Thanks! -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Category

Hello! I'm afraid I disagree with your closure of the "Shakespearean actors" CFD. In particular, the argument that the inclusion criterion is not objective was not addressed by anyone. Could you please elaborate a bit on the closing? >Radiant< 11:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Though being too subjective would be a good reason for deletion and was well argued, there was no consensus that it was true, with dissent from Tim! and Xtifr. (IMO it's no more subjective than any of our music genre categories for example, but my opinion is irrelevant). When closing discussions, I generally only override consensus if a 'killer argument' is pretty watertight and accepted or a clear matter of policy, and this appeared to be neither. Note that I also put little weight on the !votes of the nominator, and by extension Onnaghar, as pointing to an irrelevant precedent. As always, if you still disagree with my closure you may take it to deletion review. the wub "?!" 14:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

CFD Closing script

Great idea! Thanks! --Kbdank71 19:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait, that does sound cool, but what is it about? >Radiant< 09:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I've been messing around with javascript. See Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Working#Closing script. the wub "?!" 10:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks nice. I don't suppose it's possible for the script to add a line to WP:CFD/W? >Radiant< 10:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I had thought about it and it might be possible, but pretty difficult since it would have to identify the changes to be made and list them in the correct format. As it is I generally prefer to list tasks in notepad as I close them, then add them in a batch to CFD/W, which is easier and requires making fewer edits. Of course you're welcome to copy and modify the code yourself. the wub "?!" 10:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

That notepad trick is a good idea as well. I use a small text file to hold things I do often, like all of the cfd templates, cfdend, cat redirect, etc. But I never thought to use it to bulk update cfd/w. Thanks again! --Kbdank71 13:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I haven't tried this yet, but it looks cool. Would it be easy to adapt to work for WP:UCFD also (if it doesn't already)? --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Should be fairly easy. I'll take a look this afternoon. the wub "?!" 10:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. the wub "?!" 14:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Traffic at UCFD is a bit low right now, so I won't be able to use it there for a couple days, though I do like using it at CFD. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 10:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

redux: List of notable people who have taken psychedelic drugs

Thanks for restoring the history of this page.

If you examine the history, you will find that the page was vandalized on 25 July 2007 by User:Madsci, who left a comment saying "began list", when in fact a useful and somewhat sourced page was replaced with an unsourced list of internal links.

When the Afd debate occurred, this vandalized version of the page (obviously) got no support. The time frame (1 week?) does not allow all the people who have an interest in that page (like me) to be part of the debate.

Is there a debate or review procedure for a CSD deletion? I would like to bring this page back.

Thanks, Bill Huston ^(talk) 20:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, as far as I can tell from the deletion log snippet and deleted history, Corpx nominated for deletion and Krimpet speedy deleted the (original) page a few minutes later as a BLP violation. Madsci's edit wasn't strictly vandalism, but it was an unhelpful recreation. I closed the debate early under the snowball clause, since it was unanimous and BLP was a concern. However I can see that this might benefit from deletion review. Please bring it up there if you wish, and let me know if you do. the wub "?!" 21:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_19#Georgia_category

I just noticed this debate, actually noticed as a result of bots renaming the cats, but this discussion has resulting in some rediculous category names, not everything that has Georgia in it needs disambiguation. Some examples include Category:United States Senators from Georgia (U.S. state), Category:U.S. Highways in Georgia (U.S. state), and Category:Interstate Highways in Georgia (U.S. state), just to name a few. When there is no risk of confusion, disambiguation is not necessary. --Holderca1 15:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure I agree with the outcome either, I prefer not disambiguating unless necessary. That appeared to be the consensus though and it's not without precedent, notably band related categories. The argument in favour is that it keeps the category names consistent, even if they are redundant. Actually in the debate someone mentioned your first example, considering the possibility of an immigrant to the U.S. from Georgia (nation) becoming a senator for another state. the wub "?!" 21:46, 3 September 2007 (UTC)