User talk:Anthony Appleyard/2017/January-June

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of airports under construction

Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway

Moving Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad from the title it's had since 2004 seems a poor fit for the technical requests process. There's plenty of reason to doubt that the new article title is the correct one (e.g. [1]) and this should have been a full move request. Mackensen (talk) 14:26, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

A Nightmare on Elm Street (disambiguation)

You split the page from List of A Nightmare on Elm Street media. However, the page is deleted. Shall I request undeletion at WP:REFUND, or what else? Why deletion? --George Ho (talk) 01:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Anthony Appleyard!

Happy New Year!

Anthony Appleyard,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 06:58, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Hi

  • Thanks, Anthony Talk:Swatting_(hoaxing), if I had seen the ping I would have quite happily reverted the move. Would it be possible for you to close and do so? In ictu oculi (talk) 11:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @In ictu oculi: I would prefer to let this move discussion run the usual term for move discussions, which is a week. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Okay, but I would really prefer it be closed and reverted if at all possible. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I was told to be bold....pfft

Deleter with no imagination
Kiss my ass for deleting a page to further education and creativity. "Be Bold"....pfft....luke warm and watered down at best.... I am referring to my wild ride page that was deleted...It is labeled below and hasn't been all that since you deleted it...How is your memory? Or is it just a mass delete button you click for all speedy requests...and you don't even take the time to look....either way....

no...i get it...no imagination...why make it easier for people to learn...and have fun... and when you actually think about the power behind the cross referencing if a few walls were knocked down...the power...feel free to live in a box though. Ftpftw1981 (talk) 14:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

He did the same thing to me. :( RedLionSit (talk) 15:58, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Saraiki dialect RM Closure request

Saraiki, This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title Saraiki which are; Saraiki dialect, Saraiki people, Saraiki culture, Saraiki dialect (Sindhi), Saraiki literature, Saraiki music, Saraiki diaspora, Saraikistan Movement and List of Saraiki tribes. Move to Saraiki from Saraiki dialect will be a very silly decision.

Majority of verifiable Sources are saying Saraiki is a dialect. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16], [17], [18] [19] Every language study put Saraiki under Lahnda (Western Punjabi). The Indo-Aryan Languages By Colin P. Masica 1993 Page 289. Lahnda dialects (including Siraiki)[20] ,Page 343. Saraiki and other Lahnda dialects, Page 247. Lahnda (Siraiki) which lacks a Layer 1 instrumental [21] , Page 23. In Pakistan several erstwhile dialects (Siraiki & Dogri) are said to be agitating for language status[22] Page 518. Lahnda/Lahndi (see also Siraiki) [23]

Linguistic survey of India by George Abraham Grierson 1903-1928, Volume 8. Lahnda or Westren Punjabi [24] , The Indo-Aryan Languages By Danesh Jain, George Cardona Panjabi section written by Christopher Shackle in 2007. Page 588, All these structural features of MSP ( Modern Standard Punjabi)...occur in western varieties...in Saraiki and other western dialects. [25] . Page 603. The MSP (Modern Standard Punjabi) declension ....Other varieties have similar pattern...Dogri...Shahpuri...Pothohari...Hindko and Saraiki ... [26], Page 584. Map 16.1 Punjabi area map.............Saraiki ........ [27]

Move to Saraiki Language from Saraiki dialect will be even worse decision . If you analyse LanguageXpert sock file and IP sock series 39..... Apparently uninvolved users Kautilya3 and Kashmiri are actually involved users. Both see Saraiki dialect as a revenge plate forum against LX. They had verbal abuses with each other at some point in time. so Biased voting without reading the sources have zero weight. Only sources should decide the title. Sources say it is a dialect/variant. I request you for closure of third move request (Forum Shopping) in a raw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.245.9.244 (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Help on Restoring Savaari's Company Page

Hello there,

I write to you about the warnings posed and the subsequent take down of our company page-https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Savaari_(company)&action=edit&redlink=1 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Savaari.com&action=edit&redlink=1

We were provided a warning indicating that the article has sections that are classified as promotional content. Can you please let us know the exact sections and also the next steps to restore the page back?

Appreciate your help. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ananddorairaj (talk • contribs) 07:31, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @Ananddorairaj: Page Savaari (company) is merely a redirect to Savaari.com. Savaari.com was tagged at 05:02, 4 January 2017 by User:SwisterTwister and at 06:16, 4 January 2017 was speedy-deleted; much of it is clearly a standard typical advertisement for a car hire service and not what Wikipedia is for; see Wikipedia:Spam. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Anthony Appleyard: Sure- I agree. What we intended was to create a neutral company page that does not include any promotional content and complies with Wikipedia guidelines. Would it be possible to restore the page with the necessary edits made? Any guidance to do so is appreciated. Thanks 17:43, 5 January 2017 User:Ananddorairaj
  • @Ananddorairaj: It also depends on whether Savaari is particularly noteworthy, or merely an ordinary car hire firm. There are very many car hire firms. Wikipedia is not a trade directory. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Anthony Appleyard: Oh absolutely. Savaari is India's largest outstation chauffeur driven car rental company, with operations in 62 cities. Without divulging too much publicly, I could privately point you to competitors who are way smaller in scale who already have a company page. Regards
  • @Anthony Appleyard: Hi there, I wanted to follow up on this pending thread. Looking forward to your guidance. Regards 07:25, 10 January 2017‎ User:180.151.36.142

Celeste Brown disambiguation page

Talk:UTC+14:00:24

Please take a look at the latest comment added by User:BIL on Talk:UTC+14:00:24. There was no Anchorage when US bought Alaska. It's becoming clear that this whole article is a hoax. HkCaGu (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Sunderland station

Hi, I reverted your move of Sunderland station to Sunderland railway station, I realise that it was requested by Comes Dunelmensis (talk · contribs) - a name which I don't recall encountering before. I reverted because the name lacking the word "railway" is in line with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations), as the station has both "mainline" rail (National Rail) and Tyne and Wear Metro, so counts as "any two or more of the above". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:05, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Pizzagate

Belize national anthem

  • Hi Anthony, I noticed that you recently moved Land of the Free to Belize national anthem (per Talk:Belize national anthem). I was wondering if you would consider moving it to Land of the Free (anthem) instead, as the move request originally suggested. For national anthems, the naming convention is to use the name of the anthem or add "(anthem)" if it needs disambiguation. All of the anthems that are titled "Something National Anthem" are titled that because that is the actual name of the song. "Land of the Free" was a song before it became the national anthem of Belize and it seems confusing to title it "Belize national anthem", as that is more of a description than a title. It would be like moving Bald Eagle to National bird of the United States. What do you think? Kaldari (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kaldari: See discussion in Talk:Belize national anthem#Requested move 26 December 2016. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Yes, that is the discussion I referenced above. You will see that it proposes moving Land of the Free to Land of the Free (anthem), which is not the move that you performed. I'm just asking you to implement the move that was requested. Kaldari (talk) 23:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kaldari: But see there User:In ictu oculi's opinion that most people outside Belize hearing of a song "Land of the Free" are going to think of "Star Spangled Banner". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
    • That's why both are mentioned at Land of the Free (the disambiguation page). Frankly, I think it's debatable whether or not the article should have been moved at all (although I was too late to weigh in on the discussion), but to go even further and not even use the anthem's name in the title at all (just because it shares a line with the "The Star-Spangled Banner") seems a bridge too far. "The Star-Spangled Banner" has never been known as "Land of the Free". Just because a title brings something else to mind doesn't make it the COMMONNAME. Nor does one person's opinion constitute the consensus of a move discussion. I realize you were just trying to exercise your best judgement, but I don't think it was the best solution. Kaldari (talk) 08:01, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sooraj Pancholi (actor)

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 Sooraj Pancholi (actor) 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 person or group of people, but it does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 01:47, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Out of the box

  • You recently moved Out of the box (disambiguation) to Out of the box as a technical request. You probably did not notice that I had moved it to "Contested Requests", noting that it was not uncontroversial. The edit history and talk page, which is now lost (or at least I can't find it), showed prior deletion and merge requests as well as a reversion about a year ago when someone else tried to do this. Please undo this move and restore the edit history. If brought to RM for discussion, I intend to oppose it. Thank you. Station1 (talk) 17:56, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Station1: The old Out of the box is now at Thinking out of the box, and it now redirects to Thinking outside the box. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
    • "Out of the box" and "thinking outside the box" are two totally different and unrelated concepts. The talk page and article edit history make no sense under that title. As I said, please undo the moves, which I clearly noted are contested. Station1 (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Station1:  Done, but the definition of "out of the box" shown at this edit looks to me much like the current definition of Thinking outside the box. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Jack Schiff

Thank you for your assistance with the Jack Schiff article. It is greatly appreciated! Mtminchi08 (talk) 20:52, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Deaths in 2017

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

What are you doing? Please move it back asap. We have the Deaths in YYYY page and create month sub pages after the month is complete. EvergreenFir (talk) 08:57, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you and understood! Btw, had this typed up but edit conflict: : See the fifth bullet point of the FAQ if you don't believe me. Talk:Deaths in January 2017/FAQ EvergreenFir (talk) 09:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Moving pages that are contested

  • I thought that if a page's move was contested at WP:RM/TR it could not be moved and then had to be discussed? Don't Leave (Snakehips and MØ song) is simply not notable at this stage, so I don't know why it was moved. I don't know why administrators seem to be encouraging someone's sandbox to become part of a page's history, or the refusal of the user Love on the Brain to copypaste what they have created, which seems to be enough for most other users, over a redirect. It might not be much for you to move it, but I don't think this kind of practice (erasing the fact that somebody created a redirect and replacing with an article that is not yet notable) is very honest or a very good way to do things on Wikipedia. Ss112 23:15, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ss112: I have reverted this move. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

move req

Incorrect category move

It shouldn't have been moved but it probably doesn't matter too much anyway it it still has the same content. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Histmerge request

Thank you. Much appreciated. Rusted AutoParts 05:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Cars 3

Winter of 2009-2100 in the United Kingdom listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Winter of 2009-2100 in the United Kingdom. Since you had some involvement with the Winter of 2009-2100 in the United Kingdom redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 18:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

2010 winter listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2010 winter. Since you had some involvement with the 2010 winter redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 19:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Deleted disambiguation page

Help on article deletion

  • I'm sorry to bother you.
  • I am new to Wikipedia editing,so please give me some help.Recently,I am revising the page of Gavriel Salvendy according to your suggestions.But This page has been deleted.The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.
  • 06:14, 4 January 2017 Anthony Appleyard (talk | contribs) deleted page Gavriel Salvendy (Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria G11, G12. Source URL: http://www.ie.tsinghua.edu.cn/salvendy/)

In this regard, I have two questions need your answer:

Please tell me what should i do?

Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicjiavic (talk • contribs) 08:51, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Rock (music)

Speedy deletion nomination of China University of Petroleum (Beijing)

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 China University of Petroleum (Beijing) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cup.edu.cn/english/aboutcupb/aboutcupb2/index.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Atlantic306 (talk) 00:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

poojanm1985

  • I intended to add this article ( i created ), so that i can tag the school under "list of schools in banglore" page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_schools_in_Bangalore I have seen, there are lot of articles about different schools in banglore, i just intended to add one for SAMVED SCHOOL. hence created that article, please let me know, why this is not permitted.

Poojnm1985 (talk) 06:22, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[user:poojanm1985]

Wikipedia:Defunct WikiProject Wikipedia/praise page listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Defunct WikiProject Wikipedia/praise page. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Defunct WikiProject Wikipedia/praise page redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

A request for your kind assistance

If, at your convenience, you could lend expertise in assuring that User:ChrisGFA receives full credit, as described at User talk:Roman Spinner#A page you started (British Academy Scotland Awards) has been reviewed!, it would be appreciated. With thanks, —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 21:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The Joker (ride)

I hope you do nor mind fixing Template:Six Flags Great Adventure, Template:Six Flags Great America, Template:Batman in amusement parks, Template:Six Flags Over Texas and Template:Six Flags New England as they all have links to a disambiguation page after your redirecting of The Joker (ride). Thanks in advance. The Banner talk 23:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

No action needed any more, fixed by somebody else. The Banner talk 02:25, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Creation Museum/Archive 6

Hi,

I accidentally added content to Creation Museum/Archive 6 when it should have gone to Talk:Creation Museum/Archive 6.

The Talk:Creation Museum/Archive 6 contained archived talk content. Is it possible to get it back?—CaroleHenson (talk) 15:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of the article CARiD

Good day, I am contacting you in regards to the article which was speedy deleted CARiD. This was my first take on creating a content for an article that used to be deleted in the past. I've read the entire deletion log and related discussion of this article and notes of the editors. I created a new text and made sure that none of the key points that triggered the deletion of the previous article were repeated. Since the points listed in former deletion discussion no longer apply to my new version, G4 speedy deletion doesn't seem to apply here per section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion: "It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies". I am just trying to figure out what did I do wrong here, because I am working on a couple of more articles for the the automotive pages that were deleted in the past, due to poor information. Please advice. Denholm78 (talk) 16:12, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @Denholm78: CARiD seems from the description to be an ordinary car and car parts shop and as such not notable. Wikipedia is not a trade directory. If I restored page CARiD, it would likeliest fail WP:AfD. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Anthony Appleyard:Thank you for a prompt response, I totally understand the reason why you have applied a G4. Perhaps I should have left an extended message on the article's talk page explaining my intentions of recreating an article about this subject. I tried to avoid mentioning notable facts in the financial sphere of the subject and only referred to bare numbers and key points, in order not to make it sound as any sort of advertisement, as there is a fine line in determining whether such facts are used in promotional context or function as illustration of notability in the category of business subjects like this. While I agree with you that Wikipedia is not a platform for promotions and business listing and not trying to question it in any way, one other fact that influenced my decision to give a try on recreating this article is that CARiD page used to be mentioned and linked-to by other notable articles within the automotive category of Wikipedia itself, such as Automotive aftermarket; plus there is also an appropriate category that directly corresponds with the subject: Category:Automotive part retailers of the United States, which serves as interlinking of these pages and potentially improves the Wikipedia knowledge base.

With all this in mind I kindly ask you to consider restoring the page CARiD. I will provide an extended summary and include more references on the talk section of this page, which will help to treat it correctly and possibly allow hearing objections of other Wikipedia editors if necessary. While I work on a couple of more similar articles in the automotive field, this experience helps me to deeper familiarize myself with Wikipedia procedures and make more consistent submissions. Healthy criticism is always a good base for improvement. Thank you once again for looking into this issue. Denholm78 (talk) 14:49, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Telecoming

Hi, I am Rozy and guided by several editor recommendations, I have been editing an entry which has been suddenly deleted. following Wikipedia´s guidance, I have included solid external references on the firm, which are independent to it´s activity (deleting media and other "promotional" sources) and in which the company has no influential capacity. In addition, the page has encyclopedical value, since it provides neutral information on a Spanish company´s core business and on its evolution, with a purely information angle which could be useful for readers to understand the nature of the firm´s activity ) Please let me know, how could I adapt the contribution to Wikipedia´s standards, since I am really willing to collaborate (Rozybienert) (talk) (16:33, 25 January 2017 (UTC))

Hi Anthony Appleyard, many thanks for clarifying. I therefore understand that since the information is worth sharing as encyclopedical, factual content I can pursue its upload. Many thanks for the input. It´s much appreciated. I would be extremely grateful for your future input on how to improve the text. Many thanks, (Rozybienert) (talk) (08:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC))

Speedy deletion of 'Hearts On Noses' at user page

Hi, I'd be grateful to have the text for Hearts On Noses restored, possibly to my user page from which it has just disappeared - it had only been restored there for 2 hours after the previous speedy deletion which went ahead despite my plea for it on its talk page (attached in next section below)... it was my intention to edit it it to a point at which it might appear a little less wiki-unworthy, but I don't wish to recreate it from scratch...

Contested deletion (Hearts On Noses)

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... well, OK the article's not the biggest issue in the world today, but animal welfare is important and here are some people doing their best to help, so it seemed it would be good to help them by recording what they're doing... and they specialise in Pot-bellied pigs, not just an individual animal, but "a breed of domesticated pig" etc. I see under CSD-A7 "This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s)". So as the article is about a breed, hence neither about (an) individual(s) nor about the entire species, perhaps it falls in some grey area... Not-so-speedy deletion? Not deletion at all?--Yadsalohcin (talk) 22:55, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Yadsalohcin (talk) 20:10, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Yadsalohcin: I think you're looking for WP:REFUND. Check out that page. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:17, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for this, EvergreenFir. I'm not sure I can be bothered. 2 deletions inside 24 hours, the first despite a request that it should not be deleted and the second off my user space. Ouch.Yadsalohcin (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Anthony Appleyard. At least the article as begun might provide a starting point if I am to try to salvage it... Yadsalohcin (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Telecoming

Telecoming is a Spanish company specialized in mobile entertainment. The firm´s core business is based on mobile content, mobile billing and mobile advertising. [1]. Based in Madrid the company operates locally and abroad in 7 other markets.

History

Founded on 2008, the firm employs over 100 professionals. The company was conceived as a distributor, advertiser and mobile billing technology developer. Over the past 9 years, the team has experienced a significant growth [2].

On 2009, Telecoming was registered as an Official Telecom Operator [3] in Spain, which makes Telecoming comply with the National Regulation and Codes of Conduct. In addition, it attained the Payments Entity License[4] to operate under the supervision of the Bank of Spain (Telecoming Payments Solutions – Pagantis SA) on 2013.

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (Hi, Anthony, following your comments and your undelete I understand that Telecoming´s information is appropriate, factual content which might be of potential interest for Wikipedia´s community as an information page. I therefore do not understand why the last time I have tried to upload the page I receive a speedy deletion notice. I would be extrememly grateful if you could provide me with guidance on the next steps, since I feel a little lost at this point. Many thanks again, your help it´s much appreciated)(Rozybienert) (talk) (08:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC))

Hi Anthony, could you kindly provide me with some insight on why it is that there are companies such as [28] and [29] which have very similar profiles to that of Telecoming and currently have a page and I do not seem to achieve approval for its upload?. I would be grateful for your comments regarding this issue so that I can continue to work on improvements. (Rozybienert) (talk) (14:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rozybienert (talk • contribs)

References

  1. ^ > "Telecoming Google". Google. Google. 2016. Retrieved 12 January 2017.
  2. ^ >"Premios 2015". cepyme.es. CEPYME. 2015. Retrieved 25 January 2017.
  3. ^ > "Operadores". CNMC. CNMC. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  4. ^ > "Registro de Entidades". BDE. BDE. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

Zxcvbnm and Shaun King on Google

Hello, The google results for Shaun King's WP article are kind of weird and I wonder if it has to do with a page move you did recently. When you google "Shaun King", there's one of those sidebars on the right with a little summary and link to his WP article. It looks like to grabbed some of it from his infobox, but then it says his name is "Zxcvbnm" and if you click the link to his article in the sidebar, it brings you to Zxcvbnm. Maybe it's just a matter of time before google gets caught back up? But I wanted to point it out in case you'd seen it before moving other pages and knew how to fix it. Thanks! —PermStrump(talk) 05:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

  • @Permstrump: I did some history-merging work on page Shaun King. I found that under Shaun King's edits about the man was a series of old deleted disambig edits which did not belong in the history that I was called on to re-assemble by history merging. So I temporarily moved Shaun King to Zxcvbnm and back, so that I could fish the old disambig edits out from under by undeleting them and moving them from Shaun King to Shaun King (disambiguation). Then likely, Google's web crawler search program came round and saw the article about the man while for 10 or 20 or so seconds it was at Zxcvbnm. Then I moved the edits about the man from Zxcvbnm back to Shaun King. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Does that just fix itself? —PermStrump(talk) 06:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Wind-powered vehicle

Hi Anthony, you may wish to add to the discussion at Talk:Wind-powered vehicle#Scope—Land only?. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 14:42, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: History merges

Just wanted to say thanks for dealing with all those history merges I needed.

Cheers, Anothersignalman (talk) 14:59, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Request for restoration of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/World Development Foundation

Hi, 1. 14:32, 25 November 2013 Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk | contribs) moved page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/World Development Foundation to World Development Foundation (Created via Articles for creation). This was done after several improvements, suggestions by various reviews over a long period. 2.The article was earlier submitted and deleted in 2010 due to non submission of enough references. ( -- Cirt (talk) 02:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC)) 3. It was modified thoroughly and rewritten with the help of many reviewers and help desk. After thorough review it was accepted in 2013. (Reference Para 1). 4. The organization is doing work of upliftment of poor and underprivileged in various part of India. Recently it worked in Ethiopia for education of women and children in health, hygiene, literacy by using Community Radio. 5. It is a non-profit organization.

I request you to restore the page which shall help the community at large. If you find any portion not suitable to Wikipedia policy, it can be revised. With regards and New Years Greetings, Rupalisharma (talk) 11:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Dear Anthony, Thanks for a quick reply. I request you to kindly consider following points. 1. The reference of the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Development Foundation is of 2010.In fact the article at that time was deleted. The page was rewritten in 2013 with lot more national and international references, and it was accepted after a review by several experts over a period of eight months or so. Therefore the earlier deletion decision should not be reapplied now. 2. In the entire page, no advertisement or appeal for charity has been made. I request you to kindly reconsider your decision. Regards, Rupalisharma (talk) 10:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Dear Anthony, I am grateful for restoring the article.I have seen the page referred. Shall follow the advice and edit the article. I shall be grateful fr your suggestions. Regards, Rupalisharma (talk) 08:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC) Dear Anthony,

  • The article has been sufficiently modified and the words/sentences specially mentioned promotional by User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi have been deleted. I request you to consider removing the deletion tag after this revision. With regards,

Rupalisharma (talk) 10:15, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Randolph Elwood Streeter

  • Not sure what happened here but there was never any discussion to rename the article originally, it was done without discussion. The name of the article from the beginning for many years was R. E. Streeter. I don't understand why you started an RM to name it back to its original name. It should be the other way around, an RM should be to name it from R. E. Streeter -> Randolph Elwood Streeter. It makes a difference if it closes NC. -- GreenC 17:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Green Cardamom: At 17:24, 27 January 2017 (UTC) User:Green Cardamom asked for this move in Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, and I decided that it needed discussion. And serious discussion has started there. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

In that case you could have named it back to R. E. Streeter and opened an RM for the proposed new name so that any NC result wouldn't default to the new name. Fortunately the closer caught it. -- GreenC 05:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes I did. No prob; a closer should read and understand. Dicklyon (talk) 05:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Anthony

I did not know who solved this problem re Legal history of cannabis in Canada, but apparently it was you.

The explanation that was posted by User:Vaselineeeeeeee Thanks to Anthony Appleyard who responded to your request at WP:Requested moves/Technical requests moved the redirect page that was causing the moving issue to "Legal history of cannabis in Canada (version 2)" so it was then possible to move "Legal history of cannabis in the Canada" rightfully to "Legal history of cannabis in Canada". "Legal history of cannabis in the Canada" still exists as a redirect page now. A little convoluted, but I think that's how it was done. All is well now anyway.

I find all this to be confusing but the problem has been solved. All is well now. So, thank you Anthony! Peter K Burian (talk) 22:12, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Microsoft Corporation v. United States of America

Hi. I did request a move from Microsoft Corporation v. United States of America → Microsoft Corp. v. United States. You said you performed it, but I've not yet seen one. I was gonna reinsert the request in WP:RM/TR, but I decided to notify you instead. --George Ho (talk) 10:04, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh... I didn't see it was moved to the article talk page. When I read "done 1", I wrong assumed. --George Ho (talk) 10:36, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Also, the ping popup didn't work for me. Somehow, the template must have been broken or something. George Ho (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Nineteen Eighty-Four (TV programme)

Presumably you're going to address all the Nineteen Eighty-Four (TV programme) links that now lead to an endless loop on the disambiguation page, rather than to Nineteen Eighty-Four (UK TV programme)? Nick Cooper (talk) 16:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

And all this lot? Nick Cooper (talk) 12:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Nick Cooper:  Done all the ordinary articles that I found in the list (not talk pages, user pages, Wikipedia: pages, and suchlike special pages.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Please help me as new user to submit move request

Jimbo and the Jet-Set

  • Greetings. Got a major issue: over the past twelve years you have (at least) twice introduced a glaring error into the article about the female Jimbo character. Clearly you've never seen the episode "Holiday Weather", where she also appears and does speak. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:14, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Mac Dreamstate: Sorry. Thanks for the correction. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Where do I find the deletion page?

Thanks. Got it. CaseeArt Talk 05:49, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

History merges from User:Felestin1714/sandbox

  • I noticed that you have been doing a lot of history merges from User:Felestin1714/sandbox. Are there any more deleted revisions for that title that need to be merged into the history of other titles? If so, how many target titles are needed? GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 00:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @GeoffreyT2000: Currently User:Felestin1714/sandbox has 1,378 deleted edits which are draft versions of about 40 articles, most of which exist as undeleted ordinary articles. One day I found User:Felestin1714/sandbox deleted, so I am keeping it deleted because that makes it quicker for me to fish out the edits which are the draft for each one in turn of those articles. Many of the earlier of those histmerge requests were asked for by {{histmerge}} by User:HyperGaruda . I can leave it undeleted if that is wished. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
    • Hold on a second, you are not doing any useful work. While the moves are cut-and-paste moves, doing history merges is absolutely unnecessary in these scenario since the sandbox edits are all by Felestin1714, who also created the pages to which the content was copied. It is customary for users to create drafts in their sandbox and cut-paste them into mainspace when ready, provided that the sandbox draft wasn't significantly edited by anyone else. There is no WP:CWW violation taking place, and as such a history merge should not be done unless requested by the user. 103.6.159.71 (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @GeoffreyT2000: Opinion please, and see User talk:103.6.159.71, including about the next message down. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:24, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Createreq

Please create the page WP:Miscellany for deletion/User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Aurelio Hevia. I'll add the content. Thanks. 103.6.159.71 (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Deletion request

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I'd like to thank you for the vast amount of time you've spent contributing to Wikipedia with the histmerges. I do hope that other Wikipedians could help you out more regularly with histmerges. Keep up the good work :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Messy history since 2003

Hello Anthony. I noticed that you're the supreme guru of history merging, so thought of approching you directly. I was working at User:Mikaey/Broken talk pages, and came across the below:

Do you think we can do anything save the history from 2003 to 2006 (i.e. preserve it better by merging histories)? Talkpages were also unsynced and tossed around like dead fish, but I managed to fix that. The articles seems to have quite a bit of simultaneous versions IMO, but I'd like to know what you think. I didn't want to touch the articles without an expert opinion, as this is quite a mess. Best regards, Rehman 13:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated! Rehman 14:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Magdalena Angelova's page

  • Magdalena Angelova (talk) 09:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)Magdalena Angelova Good morning, I am truing to create an autobiographical page for one of the new Psychologists, that exist in Bulgaria. The first time I created her page I did have links to her present work, which was seen, as advertisement and my page was deleted. I corrected the content and left just her bio, but it was still deleted, as unsuitable. May you tell me how I can upload her bio, without it being deleted. If you could help me understand, why you deleted it, it will be appreciated. Thank you! Magdalena Angelova (talk) 09:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC) Magdalena Angelova — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magdalena Angelova (talk • contribs)
  • @Magdalena Angelova: Are you referring to page User:Magdalena Angelova/sandbox? It was speedy-delete-tagged by User:Train2104 as "U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host". It seems to be in Bulgarian. Google's translater shows that it is markedly self-advertisory. As an article in the English Wikipedia, it should be in English. Wikipedia is not a trade directory for psychologists. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Histmerge

Overwriting redirects

Quick question: I thought that autoconfirmed users could move pages over single line redirects? I tried to do it at "Ciao Adios" when it appeared in new pages feed, but was told I couldn't. I went ahead and did a round-robin, but I was curious as to why I couldn't just do a simple move since it only had one edit. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The one edit must must be creating a redirect pointing to the article you are trying to move. If the edit is not a redirect, or if the redirect points to a different article, you won't be allowed to move over it. Jenks24 (talk) 03:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Redirect pointing to a different article would be the reason. Makes sense. Thanks! TonyBallioni (talk) 03:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Meerkat

I noticed you applied indefinite semi at Meerkat 7 years ago due to vandalism. Maybe it's time to give it another chance? ―Mandruss ☎ 04:29, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

WhatsApp

Draft talk:Jurassic World 2

Experience API histmerge

Southern American English dispute

This source says it is from two University professors: https://web.archive.org/web/20140108111111/http://www.acoustics.org/press/147th/clopper.htm It was removed without a reason. And it was sourced content as well. Bilcat removed it by inaccurately saying that consensus was to remove it when three of fours people said "no."Kevinfromtx (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Anthony, is there any way you can please resolve this? I did show the source to the map. Also, I showed where 3 of 4 people were against taking this map file off. Bilcat incorrectly stated that it was consensus to remove the map , when it wasn't. I'd really like this resolved as soon as possible. Been on this for like 4-5 days now. Kevinfromtx (talk) 17:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Move of Cambrian Line to Cambrian line

Hi - I'm not going to wheel war, but I believe the move of Cambrian Line should be reverted, for the following reasons:

  1. The move request was made out of process, as there was no suggestion made on the article's talk page that a move was being discussed. User:Dicklyon has stated in another case that he believes it was unnecessary, as any page watchers would be "rail fans" who would be watching WT:UKT. I do not believe this is the case - the article is also part of WP:WikiProject Wales (where it is of higher importance than WP:WikiProject UK Railways), and therefore there may be users who are interested in Wales but not railways watching the article.
  2. Although Dicklyon states that the move was discussed at WT:UKT#Clearly just descriptive – downcase line, the section reads to me a list of lines he believes should be moved, not a discussion.
  3. A quick check of Google indicates that the top results have caps (either as Cambrian Line or Cambrain Coast Line): ([30], [31], [32]).

Would you consider reverting, or would you have any objection if I did? Optimist on the run (talk) 12:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Achille Emile Meeussen

  • Dear Anthony, I wonder if you would now consider moving the page Achille Émile Meeussen to A. E. Meeussen? Two weeks have gone past without any comments from anyone. Actually I can't see anything that could be contested about it – already one page redirects to the other and now it will simply be the other way round. But what bothers me is that the title as it stands is apparently inaccurate, since the Belgian Professor Swiggers, who has written two encyclopedia articles on Meeussen, tells me that the French spelling with E acute, which I thought was the correct one, is not used in Belgium and advised me to change it. So it's a bit embarrassing that it is still there and I don't have any way of removing it! Kanjuzi (talk) 04:34, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kanjuzi:  Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Kanjuzi (talk) 14:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

One more revision to move

Centre de musique romantique française

  • Hi, Anthony! Would you consider moving this page back to Centre de musique romantique française to re-establish the status quo ante? The new title is overlong, and collates two separate topics, the historic building and the cultural centre that currently occupies it. I think this should have been an ordinary move discussion, not a technical request, and of course would have no objection to one if that's what the new editor wants. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Justlettersandnumbers:  Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:13, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

How???

How do I request a move lock so that the user can't move WWE Universal Championship again without consensus. There is an on going discussion on the talk about the move here which is a clear Oppose. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 05:53, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Gisant

Southern American English talk page

A little over a week ago you made a post here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Southern_American_English#The_map_File:SouthernEnglishMap.jpg

In that talk, there were four people (including me) that were for moving the talk about the Super Region on the Southern American English page to here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology

The reason is because that page talks specifically about dialect "super regions." And that the Southern American English page should be exclusive to southern English just like all the other dialect pages are. The "Super Region" talk should be on the North American regional phonology page.

Could you please move this? Kevinfromtx (talk) 05:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Kevinfromtx: If you want to move text to North American English regional phonology from another page, that is ordinary page-editing, and any user can do that, but best discuss it first. Text can be moved by: Open the donor page in editing mode. Drag the mouse across the text which is to be moved. Press ctrl-X . Go to the recipient page in editing mode. Click the mouse on where the text is to be moved to. Press ctrl-V . Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:59, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Anthony Appleyard: There were three others besides me that approved this in that talk discussion you started, Myself, Monizzle, Derikchetter and Akuma. I'd rather have and admin do it if possible. If you don't want to do it, would you mind if I try to contact another admin? Thanks for responding, Anthony. You've always been helpful to me on here. Thanks. Kevinfromtx (talk) 08:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
These are examples of super regions.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology#Canada_and_Western_United_States , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology#Northeastern_and_North-Central_United_States , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology#Southeastern_United_States

within those super regions (although it doesn't say it) you have numerous dialect umbrellas. For instance in the southeaster region, you have midland, mid-atlantic and southern. Am I not being clear enough? Kevinfromtx (talk) 15:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm not clear on this. Basically, I think this super region section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English#Phonology_of_the_Southeastern_super-region should stay on the North American regional phonology page. I think southern american English should stay exclusive on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English page. It's how it is on most dialect umbrella pages. The North American regional phonology page was specifically created to talk about super regions. I think this section Phonology of the Southeastern super-region https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English#Phonology_of_the_Southeastern_super-region belongs here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology. Kevinfromtx (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Ok, but look at all the other dialect umbrellas like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_English , new york city https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_English or nNorth Central Midwest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-Central_American_EnglishThey all have their own pages that talk about just that umbrella. North American English regional phonolgy exist specifically to talk about super regions. Souther American English should just be about the South. This would be consistent with all the other pages. Talk about super regions should not be on the "Southern american egnlish" page. This is inconsistent with all the other pages. Kevinfromtx (talk) 05:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
This part: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English#Phonology_of_the_Southeastern_super-region Every other dialect umbrella article page specifically talks about that dialect in the various wikipedia articles. This part https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English#Phonology_of_the_Southeastern_super-region includes Midland and Mid-atlantic. Which are both above the South in geography and are under different umbrellas. This map File:SouthernEnglishMap.jpg shows just the south. I think the southeastern part should be removed from the page and the article just focus on the south. Am I being clear? Sorry if I'm being confusing. Kevinfromtx (talk) 09:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kevinfromtx: Which page should the descriptions of the Midland and Mid-atlantic dialects be moved to? I am British and I have no expertise in American dialectology. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Well, this page talks about super-regions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology as I mentioned earlier. They already talk about this stuff there, though. I just don't know why super-region talk was originally added to the southern american english page. This map here shows the dialect umbrellas of North America... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/North_American_English_dialect_regions.jpg 6 is the south, 5 is midland and 8 is mid-Atlantic. Here is the page that map is linked too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English I really don't understand why midland and mid-Atlantic was added to the souther american english page. All other dialect umbrella pages exclusively talk about said dialect. Super region stuff is mention here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology Kevinfromtx (talk) 10:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kevinfromtx: I am British, and I know little about the details of American English dialects. It would be best if you wait until you are autoconfirmed, and then you will be able to edit these files yourself. I do not want to be drawn into a controversy with people who know much more about this subject than I know. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks again for taking the time to do all of this. I think I am already auto confirmed with more than 4 days and 10+ edits? I'm not all that great with grammar, which was one of the main reasons I wanted someone else to do this. Especially since this would be a sizable edit, meaning more than just adding/editing a sentence or two. I think I might try to get a hold of another admin.. Thanks again for taken to time to help me with this. Thank you. Kevinfromtx (talk) 17:29, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kevinfromtx: "I'm not all that great with grammar" :: I could go through the page after you and correct the grammar. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:11, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for cleaning up so many cut and paste moves! At least 90% of the time, when I come across a cut and paste move and tag it for administrator attention, you are the one who cleans it up; and usually pretty quickly too. You are performing a much needed and under-appreciated task. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 17:59, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Delfines del Carmen/Generales de Durango

Draft:Bibliotech

Just a quickie, but you deleted this under G11 earlier- could you compare this version with the old? It looks much the same to me- but my memory's not what it was :) cheers! — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 13:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

That's the answer then  :) many thanks! — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 13:22, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

DRAFT ContraVir Pharmaceuticals (NEED ASSISTANCE RE: SPEEDY DELETION)Lnovick (talk) 14:07, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Anthony,

I had created a draft article and saved it in my "draft space" or "sandbox" (followed Wikipedia Article Wizard). It was marked for speedy deletion and deemed "unambiguous advertising and promotion" however I was still working on it and it wasn't ready for Wikipedia review/public viewing. I followed the same format/structure as other corporate company articles, how do I find out what was "promotional" about it? And how can I get the draft back so I can edit. I spent a lot of time coding and formatting, and do not wish to start over, if it's avoidable.

Best, Lnovick

Title: DRAFT ContraVir Pharmaceuticals

Lnovick (talk) 14:07, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Lnovick: I have undeleted Draft:ContraVir Pharmaceuticals; but as it stands it has a strongly advertisory note. For more information see Wikipedia:Spam. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:34, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Hi, Anthony. Can you please identify how this article is being promotional? We are comparing the page with other pharmaceutical companies such as Merck & Co and Bristol-Myers Squibb and there seems to be the same level of information. Thank you.Lnovick (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Lnovick: Best see what discussion says if someone again speedy-delete-tags this page. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • It has not been deleted again, but as I'm revising, I would like to know what stood out to you as advertising/promotional so I can address/fix. When comparing to other pharma Wikipedia pages, the content, tone, format, information provided, is all similar. We will also link words within Wikipedia (not external sources). Many thanks for your help! Lnovick (talk) 16:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Lnovick: To me it is acceptable as a history of medicines development; but it remains what other people think. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

History merge

Cryptic clues

  • Hello. Your addition to Cryptic_crossword#Misleading_clues has just been fixed twice (once from EXERCISE to EXORCISE, and again to EXORCIZE because the clue specifies a Z), but given the nature of the section - and the fact that I can't see how this is a misleading clue - I'm now wondering if we both missed the point in correcting it. Is the answer somehow actually EXERCISE after all? --McGeddon (talk) 08:43, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @McGeddon: Thanks for the correction. The unusual feature is that it uses "times" to code an X. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:44, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

... for move and especially hist merge of Carl Nielsen works! Could you do something similar for Max Reger works, - a history which was copy-pasted into List of compositions by Max Reger? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

ps: To make things more complicated, the missing history was moved first to List of works by Max Reger. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Undelete request

Hi. Please restore Bansal Classes. It is already in discussion at wp:Articles for deletion/Bansal Learning. It was a bit promotional but that issue can be easily fixed. The deletinf admin insists on DRV, but that is plainly unnecesaary in my view. It can be redeleted if the consensus at Wp:Articles for deletion/Bansal Classes is so. Thanks. 103.6.159.85 (talk) 12:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

User wanting histmerge as they think their stub was copypasted

  • Hello AA, informing you because you perform most histmerges, a user is placing the histmerge template on an article I created, Somethin' I'm Good At, because they think I took the basis of what an IP address created at their now-redirected Something I'm Good At and used it for my article. I informed them through various edit summaries (that I knew they would see) on their page that the article should not have been recreated there (as the title is correct with an apostrophe), and redirected it for having only one source and nothing that could not be contained at the artist, Brett Eldredge's article (per WP:NSONGS). Now they are assuming the basis of what I soon after wrote at my article was taken from what an IP (not they themselves) wrote on theirs, and it clearly is not. The lead sentence was taken from the artist's previous single, as was the basis of the infobox. Please look at the histories of both pages above and you will see there is nothing there to be merged (and nor should it be, as this should only be done when it's clear there was a cut-and-paste done). I did nothing more than what I'm assuming the IP who recreated content at the erroneous namespace did, and that was use the previous single's basis for what I wrote. I don't want my creation of the proper namespace (in February, only expanded today) to be overwritten by a user who created an erroneous namespace and now wants to take credit over an assumption I took anything from their unsourced stub. Ss112 17:08, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ss112: I have rejected that move request: WP:Parallel histories and no evidence of a cut-and-paste event. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:41, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

History merge - always warranted?

  • Thanks for fixing the C&P move of Unlicense. I think there are some additional related ones; is it appropriate for me to request merges when (like this one) it is a cut and paste with only one author in the pastefrom? VQuakr (talk) 07:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @VQuakr: There are likely other opinions, but I prefer to always repair broken histories if possible. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:49, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Level Article

Hello. Level (airline) and Level (Airline). The second article was created later than the first one... Both articles are of the same airline. --by---->Javierito92 (Talk to me) 19:14, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Move request re OMSI 2

You processed Lordtobi's move request for OMSI 2 but probably should have simply redirected, since the article OMSI 2 had a fairly-recent AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OMSI 2. --Izno (talk) 12:38, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Undelete mistakenly deleted talk page

You have deleted Template talk:Main without providing a reason. Can you please undelete it? GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:54, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Saint

I may have made a mistake with the Saint George's Cross move, St. (or St) looks to be the common n-gram name]. The way I looked at it was that it was Saint George's cross, referring to the individual who is the namesake of the cross, and missed that it seems to be a proper name. I was going with MOS:SAINTS on this and missing that it was a proper name. My apologies. Then again, would MOS:SAINTS apply, and negate the common name policy, thus rendering the page name Saint George's cross, lower-case 'c'? Maybe, but probably not. (EDIT a few minutes later: Well, maybe. Lower-case "c" is a red-link but maybe it's accurate] Randy Kryn 00:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Nope, St. George's Cross seems correct. At MOS:SAINTS I just added the subsection "Cities and all other entities named after saints" by removing the last sentence from the subsection "Buildings named after saints", where I had missed it. 'Cities and all other entities' is quite a bit more inclusive than 'Buildings', so at least that clarification came from my mistake. Randy Kryn 00:53, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Lawndale, Logan County, Illinois

Orphaned non-free image File:Aa nort troopers 02.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aa nort troopers 02.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Twenty One Pilots (album)(redirects) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Twenty One Pilots (album)(redirects). Since you had some involvement with the Twenty One Pilots (album)(redirects) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Peter Rehse (talk) 07:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

History of Taiwan (Island)

Hi, Anthony. Regarding this, why is it necessary to go through RM to get the article moved back to its longstanding title? Kanguole 21:48, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I see you labelled it a "contested technical request", when it was actually a request to revert an undiscussed move.[35] Kanguole 21:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Asia Kate Dillon problem with merger/redirect - please help to give proper atribution to mainspace article creator

Hello,

The article was created in mainspace. A draft version at AFC was rejected for notability problems. Please someone look this over, because the creator of the mainspace article, and its history somehow got left out in the merging and redirect. The creator at main space needs to receive attribution as the article creator. I have no objection for additions from the failed AFC draft to be added to the article. Please @AnthonyAppleyard look this over just once more. Thank you. Antonioatrylia (talk) 06:17, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response to help rectify this matter. You do seem quite professional in your duties here. Again, Thanks. Antonioatrylia (talk) 10:05, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@Antonioatrylia: @Anthony Appleyard: I originally created the draft in March 2017 - you can see from the retrieval dates in the references of both pages. I don't know how to check for sure when the two articles were created, but I originally blogged about creating the draft here on 2nd March 2017, and at the time there was no mainspace page called Asia Kate Dillon. So I am fairly sure that mine both came first and is more complete.
I moved two references, two categories and an external link over from the mainspace page to my draft, so as far as I can tell all the content in the mainspace page is in the draft and then some. I think it's appropriate to consider the draft as having come first. I don't mind whose name is put down as the creator, because I know I made the draft first and that's kinda all that I need, but I don't think any merging should be held up due to the mainspace page coming first - because it didn't come first. I think the draft article could entirely replace the newer and less complete mainspace article.
I hope this helps!--Cassolotl (talk) pronouns: they/them 17:41, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
I am so sorry to have to spell this out because I do not want to cause any distress or ill feelings, but the draft at AFC is/ was a draft. A draft that was failed for notability at some date. Another editor created a stub in the main space. That is a stub article about Dillon. The date you first thought of writing a draft, or the date you first created a draft has not much significance here. You did a good job trying to flesh out the draft, but it was not accepted officially (after previously being failed for lack of notability) because apparently the reviewer could not publish it, because a stub article had been written and was already published in the main space. I have heard of this sort of thing happening before at sometime. Perhaps Anthony Appleyard can enlighten us. Antonioatrylia (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@Antonioatrylia and Anthony Appleyard: I don't actually mind about the merge history, I just assumed that it was something I had to wait for before I could go ahead and merge my information into the mainspace article! I honestly thought the quibble was about which article came first, and therefore which edit history should be kept, or something. Is it about editors of the draft not being recognised in the mainspace page?
But yes, if I can move content over without having to wait for anything to be completed or untangled then I'm happy to do so. The draft contains all the same information as the mainspace page plus a bunch of other stuff - is it okay to just entirely replace the mainspace page with the draft, or is there a more proper way to do things? --Cassolotl (talk) pronouns: they/them 19:03, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
I object to that AnthonyAppleyard, if that makes any difference. Respectfully, I must say that there is a principle at risk here. A dangerous precedent could be set. The next time a situation such as this happens where an AFC draft is failed. In the meanwhile an editor starts a stub article, another editor adds proper references to show notability, and then several days later an AFC reviewer looks at the draft again, he decides it passes. When he tried to publish it, he could not because there is already an article published on that subject whether it ne a stub or a more full article. It is out of process to suddenly publish the at first failed AFC draft, and wipe out by redirecting the actual article that was in the mainspace as an article first. Again, I have no objection if any information is added to the mainspace article from the failed AFC draft. Antonioatrylia (talk) 22:18, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
@Antonioatrylia and Anthony Appleyard: Thanks for all your points and expressions of feelings on the matter! I will think about it for a couple of days, and maybe try a non-intrusive merge when I have more spoons. I do agree that this is an issue that is rare but likely to happen again, and I'd be curious to know where an administrator decision would lead, but I just don't have the energy to pursue it! Hopefully I can get back to this later on, but if not anyone is welcome to merge information from the draft to the mainspace page or replace the mainspace page with the draft, as they see fit. --Cassolotl (talk) pronouns: they/them 00:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I object. I have spelled out my reasonings in my above posts in this thread. Perhaps we could ask for another opinion from an admin like maybe Anne Delong . Thanks. Antonioatrylia (talk) 05:39, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
@Antonioatrylia and Anthony Appleyard: I have no objections. :) I'm actually not sure why this is even in question, because the current mainspace article has *less* information in it than the draft did when it was rejected for being not notable. --Cassolotl (talk) pronouns: they/them 10:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
What Anthony Appleyard did was perfectly fine. Content in Wikipedia is kept or deleted solely on the basis of consensus as to what is best for the encyclopedia and its readers. if a specific editor's words are included, they must be properly attributed for copyright reasons. It's not important whose copy of the same references ends up in the article, and there is no need to attribute content that was not used because it was redundant. In what space the article was first created isn't important either, but the originator gets notified when the article is tagged in the future, so it's helpful if it's someone who has put some time into the subject - Anthony Appleyard's moves addressed that issue. Words still in the article from Timtek, "is an actor", are too few to need a copyright attribution in my opinion; the creation of articles that are so short they don't even qualify as stubs and are basically useless is not to be encouraged, especially one created by ignoring the notification "There is a draft for this article at Draft:Asia Kate Dillon." Later editors, such as Antonioatrylia, wouldn't have seen the notification and ended up doing duplicate work.
That said, even though there is no policy or attribution reason for it, Cassolotl seems willing to incorporate their text into the mainspace article instead, and through their selflessly putting the encyclopedia above their own article and edit count considerations, can make everyone happy.—Anne Delong (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Generosity withdrawn, praise for it redacted.—Anne Delong (talk) 03:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
@Antonioatrylia, Anthony Appleyard, and Anne Delong: Wow, I had no idea that a "There is a draft for this article at Draft:Asia Kate Dillon" notification would have been completely ignored. Thank you for your input, Anne, that's really helpful.
Honestly, if the policy/guidelines would land on the side of replacing the whole mainspace article with the draft article, and Anthony's original decision is generally considered sound, I would rather that happen than me combing through the article and painstakingly slotting parts from the draft into the spaces around a not-great article. Is that still an option? It seems like it would be a simple job for an admin, that would take much less time and energy than me manually merging the content for the sake of a person who created an article while ignoring the "there's already a draft" prompt and "try not to make stubs" guidance. --Cassolotl (talk) pronouns: they/them 18:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
@Anthony Appleyard: Thanks! :) --Cassolotl (talk) pronouns: they/them 22:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arras, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Innocent. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Spurn

Hi Anthony, can you revisit your additions to the Spurn article. You indicate that the road was severed in storms of 2017 but the reference for rebuilding is from 1996. Keith D (talk) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Jump redirect to Jumping

Proposed deletion of Jump

The article Jump has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This takes people away from a perfectly good disambiguation page and makes it harder to get to the village named Jump which has its own page

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chemical Engineer (talk) 14:23, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Redirect deletion request

Could you delete the redirect for Goodbye Christopher Robin? I'm wishing to move Goodbye Christopher Robin (film) there as no other title is named that. Rusted AutoParts 18:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Rusted AutoParts 21:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

History of Mac OS listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect History of Mac OS. Since you had some involvement with the History of Mac OS redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

GotPrint Page Deletion

  • Hi Anthony, I was working on the GotPrint page when it was deleted. Could you give me some pointers as to how I can get this page back on track? Were more citations/sources or perhaps content needed? I know that this page was automatically tagged for speedy deletion (criteria A7/G11), so I was wondering if you agreed with the automatic deletion criteria? - The language used did not promote this entity and they have a multinational operation so they are noteworthy. - Thanks for your time! SteveLMasters (talk) 22:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @SteveLMasters: Herewith undeleted GotPrint, but read WP:SPAM. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Page move?

Hello Anthony Appleyard; I have a question about "round robin" page swaps. Please pardon my learning curve if this has already been discussed and resolved; for I have observed:

If a valid request exists in the following form:

[A] and [talk:A] → [B] and [no talk:B]

An admin would delete [B], leaving [no B] and [no talk:B], then move [A] and [talk:A] to become [B] and [talk:B] leaving a redirect and culminating with [A] redirecting to [B] and [talk:A] redirecting to [talk:B], (all 4 pages are blue).

A page mover follows the following 3 steps:

1. Move [B] and [no talk:B] to [C] and [no talk:C] without leaving a redirect; the target page is left as [no B] and [no talk:B].

2. Next they move [A] and [talk:A] to become [B] and [talk:B] without leaving a redirect; the original title is left as [no A] and [no talk:A].

3. To conclude, they move [C] and [no talk:C] to become [A] and [no talk:A] without leaving a redirect; the temporary page is left as [no C] and [no talk:C].

This style of move culminates with [A] redirecting to [B] but [no talk:A] for redirecting to [talk:B], (by comparison, a page is missing).

Is this an issue for concern? Is there a modified procedure in place to preclude it from occurring? If not, should one be developed? Thank you for considering this question. I look forward to your answer, and the insight I might glean.--John Cline (talk) 23:32, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

  • @John Cline: If pages A and B both have text (not merely redirects), and they genuinely need to be swopped, then this can be done by moving A to C, then B to A, then C to B, each time along with their talk pages and other such appendages if any, and without leaving redirects. And before the move, first find what deleted edits are sitting under A and B and C and their talk pages etc.
    • But when A is text and B is a redirect, some people ask for A and B to be swopped; then a plain move from A to B leaving a redirect at A is all that is needed. If there is already junk text at B, then it will be enough first to move that old B text to a third name such as 'B (old version)', as I do not trust leaving a deleted WP:Parallel history sitting under a visible edit history. And sometimes a visible page can have a surprisingly long history of old deleted redirects sitting under it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much; your reply was incredibly informative. I read the entire page at wp:histmerg and will immediately begin following the good advice in your reply. I will admit that much more is involved in moving pages than I ever imagined.

In appreciation for all you have done to rescue and repair Wikipedia's editing history as well as the insight so graciously shared with your reply, it is my hope that I learn these things well enough to one day assist your efforts; even to the fullest possible extent. It's the least I can do in consideration of past mistakes when I most probably increased your workload instead.

I thank you again, and also wish you the absolute best.--John Cline (talk) 11:45, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

  • @John Cline: "I will admit that much more is involved in moving pages than I ever imagined": including what to do with talk pages in page history merging. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Need a histsplit

Homosexuality and Roman Catholicism

10 years of adminship, today!

Wishing Anthony Appleyard a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 15:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Rejected histmerge request

  • When you rejected my request for a histmerge for the Until Then (album) article's history to be merged into the Back 2 Life (LeToya Luckett album) article's history, you also said that they were about different topics and actually they weren't, they were about the same topic and that's being LeToya Luckett's third album, since you rejected it, I will add a new request and try to get somebody else to do it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonsdebut8 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @Moonsdebut8: Page Until Then (album) is about an album of 2 songs: "Don't Make Me Wait" and "I'm Ready". Page Back 2 Life (LeToya Luckett album) is about an album of 13 songs, and none of those songs are "Don't Make Me Wait". Admittedly, the song "I'm Ready" appears in both albums. But that still looks like Until Then and Back 2 Life being effectively different albums. If album Back 2 Life is a much-revised rename of album Until Then, someone should say so somewhere. The texts of the two pages are very different at the supposed cut-and-paste point, and if no significant text was copied across, then in principle there is no reason for a history-merge. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • And see Talk:Back 2 Life (LeToya Luckett album)#History merge. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Going to assume AGF for now. Kevinfromtx (talk)

Possibly missed request

In your edit here, you may have missed the request to move "Peter Griffin (Family Guy character)" to base title "Peter Griffin" as the primary topic. The person who moved it from base title probably didn't take into account how this character is by far the most popular search term. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:01, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet

...and the protection settings need to be moved back too. The hazards of being an admin, I guess. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
The article wizard page is template protected edit and move. The draft needs to be moved to draft or article space. – Train2104 (t • c) 15:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
After edit conflicts:
By "part of the article wizard" I meant the subpage Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet, not the Wikipedia:Article wizard itself. The history and protection settings currently at Wikipedia talk:Dynamic Syntax Tree belongs at Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet. This page is linked from several buttons on other article wizard pages, so the wizard is currently broken.
The April 25th/26th edits currently at Wikipedia talk:Dynamic Syntax Tree/stray edits by Tim.security (talk · contribs) are about a computer science topic; Tim.security accidentally overwrote and moved the article wizard subpage to Wikipedia talk:Dynamic Syntax Tree. They could be left there, but would be better at Draft:Dynamic Syntax Tree. This page needs no protection, as Tim.security needs to work on it.
The earlier edits at Wikipedia talk:Dynamic Syntax Tree/stray edits, from 2009 up to 5 October 2016, should be part of the history of Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet. They show the wizard being overwritten and restored a few times. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
The edits from 2016 and earlier, currently at Draft:Dynamic Syntax Tree, belong at Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet. – Train2104 (t • c) 16:00, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
The earlier edits at Draft:Dynamic Syntax Tree really do belong at Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet. For example, from October 2016 there's an edit by Usmanmirzza currently at "DST" and a corresponding revert by me at "AW/NQY"; and so on for the other old edits. The history of "DST" should show Tim.security as the creator of the page. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:30, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
The article wizard page has previously been the target of misguided users who create their articles right there. This was the exact same situation, only in this case the user also moved the page away. I simply reverted both the move and the overwriting, then had it template-protected. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
That's correct. But the earlier edits belong at Wikipedia:Article wizard/Not quite yet so that the history there is a record of the page being overwritten many times and corrected. Only Tim.security's edits should remain at Draft:Dynamic Syntax Tree, so that he is shown as the only editor of the draft article. -- John of Reading (talk) 05:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Wow, that was messy. But it looks fine now history-wise. Now one last step, please restore template-protection of the article wizard page. – Train2104 (t • c) 06:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Page move (about page 'Rape in Kashmir Insurgency')

I am no longer interested in page move,[36] since better[37] suggestion has been provided. But what would be the correct procedure to withdraw it? Capitals00 (talk) 18:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

  • @Capitals00: Since edit 15:02, 26 April 2017‎ by Fowler&fowler (49,686 bytes) (+1,171)‎ (Requested move 26 April 2017: what sort of garbage is this???), much more discussion has happened. I could try to append clearly (e.g. in a boldface-edged box) a request to stop the discussion, and hope that people will obey it, if they obey it, if it is within my authority to make such a request. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Bon Appétit (song)

Are you willing to move Draft:Bon Appétit (song) into the main space by overriding Bon Appétit (song)? One editor seems determined to keep the stub (which was appropriately tagged as a new page and under construction) out of the main space, citing the single must be released in order for the article to exist. The single is being released in a few hours, and I'm not the only one who thought the stub was fine. If not, no worries, just thought I'd ask someone with the ability to override the redirect, otherwise I'll just request a technical move tomorrow. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mercedes (car)

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Mercedes (car) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

RPM (disambiguation)

I reverted your move of RPM (disambiguation). I know you normally catch these things, but in this case RPM is a longstanding primary topic redirect that was changed without consensus. I have restored the status quo ante. bd2412 T 16:01, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Act to Restrain Abuses of Players, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interlude. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Double redirects

Hey, Anthony, just a heads up: one of the template moves that you made a few days ago (Template:zh -> Template:lang-zh) created a few double redirects, from Template:zh-p, Template:zh-c, and Template:zh-cp, which broke those templates in mainspace. I thought the bots that fixed these things were still running, but I guess not; I've manually fixed them. Just a thing to keep an eye out for, I guess. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:56, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

WP:REFUND query

Is history merger required?

Hello

I've been studying the Wikipedia literature on drafts and I can't seem to decide what's the correct action here.

A user with a COI published an article revision at Symantec Endpoint Protection/Draft. I reviewed the draft and after a lot of fixes, merged it with the main article at Symantec Endpoint Protection. Is a history merger required here?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:56, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Mz7. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Numbered Panda, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Mz7 (talk) 05:51, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for this automated message. The article was autopatrolled from your histmerge, and I wanted to put it through WP:NPP again so it has a second pair of eyes. Mz7 (talk) 05:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Cephalopyge (disambiguation)

  • I at one time created this page because there is a sea slug of that name, but also is the name in common use for a trilobite. I thought the disambiguation page would help users to the right lemma. Speedy deletion seems a bit of overkill for something that may be viewed as superfluous, but does no do any harm whatsoever. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 08:10, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
  • @Dwergenpaartje: User:Kuyabribri, who tagged Cephalopyge (disambiguation) for speedy deletion, likeliest thought that the hatlink at the start of page Cephalopyge trematoides, served that purpose and was sufficient. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:27, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm GeoffreyT2000. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, CostPerform, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 05:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lake Makgadikgadi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Okavango. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Unprotect page Flamethrower?

Hi

You protected flamethrower nearly a decade ago. Seems likely the IP vandals have moved on by now? Perhaps worth removing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bishbashbosch (talk • contribs) 14:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Photo of one week old baby Hawks

  • Hello Anthony Appleyard, I am also a photo enthusiast, and I just noticed your photo of baby chicks on the Harris' Hawk article. I too have a photo there, but nothing as beautiful or exciting as yours. The reason for this message, is to ask you if you have any follow-up photos of those chicks as they grew up? Do you? If so, I would love to see them. Let me know please. Jessie Eastland: Pocketthis (talk) 16:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)c
  • @Pocketthis: Harris' Hawk image :: Sorry: I have no follow-up image; I took that image on a chance opportunity at a falconry centre. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:00, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Too bad, thanks for your reply. Pocketthis (talk) 22:25, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Riverdale

Hi. Thanks for the move concerning Riverdale. However, I would point out that disambiguation by year is acceptable per WP:NCTVUS; country is used "when there are regional versions of the same format/premise", and year is generally used when the two series are "within the same region and/or across multiple regions"; this particular series would satisfy the "across multiple regions" section, and didn't especially need the move. No harm done anyways. -- AlexTW 04:51, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Yemeni Civil War (2015–present)

Hi The title was used from years. Also, the rules are clear. The first title was used since 2 years so you should revert the move then we will launch a request move. Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 11:47, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

As a followup to your question

  • I thought it would be better to follow up here than at AN as it really has nothing to do with Administrators. I am assuing you are using windows based on your reponse. The way you might have changed the text size to begin with is if you had Ctrl pressed and you used the scroll on the mouse. Ctrl and scroll up increases text size, Ctrl and scroll down decreases text size. That is how I have inadvertently changed text size in the past. ~ GB fan 13:36, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
  • @GB fan: Thanks. I first searched in the ordinary Wikipedia help, but there I found nothing relevant. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:43, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Or ctrl0, ctrl+, ctrl- Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:38, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Advice/Question

Hi. I have a question that needs someone of your expertise!... Currently, Knight Squad is a redirect to List of Steam Early Access games as it was a video game. However, it was announced today that an American television series with the name Knight Squad is going into production: [38]. What I'm wondering is this – should the article for the eventual TV series go at Knight Squad (as it will presumably become the "PRIMARYTOPIC"), thus necessitating a WP:G6 CSD of the current redirect? Or should the TV series go at Knight Squad (TV series), leaving the redirect for the video game at Knight Squad unchanged?... Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Could probably move the redirect for the video game if you really want to preserve trivial edit history for the video game topic. Otherwise, just edit over the redirect and fix the other incoming links to Knight Squad (video game). --Izno (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
That's not a bad idea... Thanks, Izno! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:59, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Cantabria (Mesozoic island) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cantabria (Mesozoic island) 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/Cantabria (Mesozoic island) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Fram (talk) 13:34, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Sandbox history move/merge request

Perfecto. I thought it best to ask here rather than with a standard history merge template. Thanks. It doesn't show up on my talk page edit history so I guess I lose the summaries? No big deal I guess. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

The Edge move

New Peruvian Regulations: Spelling of toponyms in indigenous languages

Hi Anthony Appleyard. I would like to inform you about recent Regulations of the Peruvian government concerning toponyms in indigenous languages. According to Decreto Supremo No 004-2016-MC (Supreme Decree), published on July 22, 2016 which approves the Regulations to Ley 29735 (Law 29735 of July 5, 2011), the aim of the Peruvian government is a) to keep the naming of toponyms in the indigenous languages and b) to replace the commonly misspelled indigenous toponyms by their adequate spellings according to the normalized alphabets to gain a unified spelling. The National Geograhic Institue IGN (maps of Peru) is therefore involved. (For details see Reference 1 below.)

These Regulations also touch the naming of Wikipedia articles.

I noticed that you are skeptical about the many requested moves of place names from ‘Quechua spelling to Spanish spelling’. However, these are rather moves from 'correct Quechua spelling' to 'wrong Quechua spelling'. The same occurs with articles names in Aymara. It affects quite a large numbers of articles, mainly concerning the categories of mountains, lakes and now also the archaeological sites of Peru.

However, all these moves are in conflict with the Peruvian law. And obviously all these moves from right to wrong are all in vain and will have to be reverted. The government is determined to fight discrimination against indigenous peoples and their languages resolutely. We should take this into account. Thank you. -- CaTi0604 (talk) 19:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Reference 1: “Artículo 20.- Toponimia y el fortalecimiento del paisaje lingüístico multilingüe
20.1. El Instituto Geográfico Nacional realiza las acciones necesarias que correspondan para mantener las denominaciones toponímicas en lenguas indígenas u originarias en los mapas oficiales del Perú, conforme a los alfabetos normalizados para cada lengua. Progresivamente se debe proponer la adecuación de los nombres de municipios, ciudades, comunidades, barrios, aldeas, caseríos, asentamientos humanos, zonas, calles, lotizaciones, parcelamientos, entre otros, a los alfabetos oficializados por el Ministerio de Educación, con la finalidad de uniformizar las denominaciones empleadas por el Instituto Geográfico Nacional y las demás entidades.”
  • Google translation: ":: Reference 1: "Article 20.- Toponymy and the strengthening of the multilingual linguistic landscape :: 20.1. The National Geographic Institute performs the necessary actions that correspond to maintain the names toponímicas in indigenous languages or originating in the official maps of Peru, according to the standard alphabets for each language. The names of municipalities, towns, communities, neighborhoods, villages, settlements, areas, streets, lotizations, subdivisions, among others, must be progressively proposed to the alphabets, which have been formalized by the Ministry of Education, for the purpose of Standardize the names used by the National Geographic Institute and the other entities. "". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • See Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 55#Peruvian placenames :: use Quechua/Aymara spelling or Spanish spelling?. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:36, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Pandora s box listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pandora s box. Since you had some involvement with the Pandora s box redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Daedelus

Hey, thanks for clearing up the Daedelus case. As a follow-up, could you also move Category:Daedelus (musician) albums to Category:Daedelus albums? I'm not sure what to do with Category:Daedalus (band) albums (to which Category:Daedalus albums is a redirect), since its primary topic is Daedalus (band), but I'll leave that to you, I guess. Cheers! Lordtobi (✉) 16:23, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of A.P.Valves

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 A.P.Valves 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 company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator.   Pariah24 ┃ ☏   21:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Norwegia listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Norwegia. Since you had some involvement with the Norwegia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 13:02, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Bankruptcy in China/version 2 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bankruptcy in China/version 2. Since you had some involvement with the Bankruptcy in China/version 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

What's the problem man....

What's the problem man.... SheIsAnAngel (talk) 07:47, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Try to improve it... Don't delete it... OK SheIsAnAngel (talk) 07:50, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Template:Removeaccents

Aakash Institute

Hi @Anthony Appleyard:, You recently deleted one of the articles that was created by me. That's totally fine. Any article which violates Wikipedia policy either it should be deleted or it should be fixed. You've deleted this article under G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion which says article was advertising or promotion in nature, which i totally disagree. I believe it was not promotional in nature as i had included only that information which was verifiable by third party source. Let's assume it was promotional, I believe, instead of deleting the article, it could have been fixed as per FIXIT. Your deletion looks suspicious me as you did not leave any message on my talk page prior and after deletion informing me about deletion. Don't you think, it was violation of Wikipedia's deletion policy? You must have leave a message on my talk page informing about deletion. I would request you to undelete the article, as i disagree with your unfair deletion. I would love to fix the problem (you think it had) in the article you've deleted.--Elton-Rodrigues 07:34, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank You @Anthony Appleyard:. I have corrected an error from article which i made by mistake. Business Standard reported in 2012 that the institute was bullshit about its online offerings but instead of writing it bullshit it made it bullish by auto-spell check. An other problem you pointed is undue weight about an award mentioned in article. But i find it appropriate to mention as it was reported by Hindustan Times, but if you think it is inappropriate, you remove it.

If you think, now article is fine, you may withdraw the deletion nomination, as I believe, article is notable as per Wikipedia's policy. Otherwise AFD discussion is best way to reach any consensus. --Elton-Rodrigues 08:57, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Need help

@Anthony Appleyard: I want to bring this to your notice that there are some unknown individual purposefully trying to delete the articles by Hoaxing. They are creating new accounts (possibly sock) and after initial few edits here and there over Wikipedia, they nominate their targeted article for speedy deletion. I came to know, an other article were deleted dated 8 January, 2017 was FIITJEE with same education category. I want to know that, who had nominated FIITJEE article for deletion? Who had created article FIITJEE? So that just i could confirm that did nominator leave a message on article creator (user)'s talk page. Possibly, these people are following same pattern to delete their targeted article. It would be great help if you could answer. Thanks!--Elton-Rodrigues 20:43, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

  • @Elton-Rodrigues: FIITJEE or Forum for Indian Institute of Technology and Joint Entrance Examination is a coaching institute. Its page's history is:-
    • 12:52, 8 June 2017 Dlohcierekim deleted FIITJEE (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion (TW))
    • 10:38, 8 June 2017 Specialpage (Reason for db-g11)
    • 14:14, 6 April 2017 Specialpage (request for speedy deletion.)
    • 13:52, 12 March 2017 Vanamonde93 restored FIITJEE (627 revisions restored: Questions raised over CSD eligibility)
    • 10:17, 7 February 2017 Vanamonde93 deleted FIITJEE (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
    • 07:21, 7 February 2017 Jimfbleak restored FIITJEE (627 revisions restored: seen history, I'd delete, but...)
    • 07:18, 7 February 2017 Jimfbleak deleted FIITJEE (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
    • 14:14, 6 April 2017 Specialpage (request for speedy deletion.)
    • 11:59, 31 December 2016 KrakatoaKatie restored FIITJEE (242 revisions restored: discussion at RFPP, possible bad faith CSD nom)
    • 11:58, 31 December 2016 KrakatoaKatie restored FIITJEE (271 revisions restored: discussion at RFPP, possible bad faith CSD nom)
    • 13:22, 30 December 2016 Jimfbleak deleted FIITJEE (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
    • 21:13, 27 July 2015 NawlinWiki restored FIITJEE (538 revisions restored: speedy not appropriate)
    • 21:11, 27 July 2015 NawlinWiki deleted FIITJEE (A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events))
    • 09:54, 1 July 2009 Shashankgupta started AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FIITJEE
    • 18:33, 16 February 2009 Accounting4Taste deleted FIITJEE (A7: No indication that the article may meet guidelines for inclusion: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSD A7))
    • 03:15, 16 February 2009 Kylu deleted FIITJEE (G11: Blatant advertising)
    • 15:25, 12 July 2007 Khukri deleted FIITJEE (content was: '{{db-inc}}{{NPOV}}{{tone}}{{Notability|date=April 2007}}{{Unreferenced|date=April 2007}}FIITJEE or Forum for IIT-JEE is a for-pr...')
    • 00:24, 11 July 2007 Mitchoyoshitaka (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD a7). using TW)
    • 08:04, 13 June 2007 Rockpocket restored FIITJEE (65 revisions restored: Major competitor survived an AfD for notability, thus this should probably be restored too)
    • 07:52, 13 June 2007 Rockpocket deleted FIITJEE (WP:CSD#G11 advertising by competing private tutors)
    • 12:23, 17 January 2007 Flyingtoaster1337 (8,678 bytes) (JS: Requesting speedy deletion}
    • 02:03, 31 December 2006 created by Vipul

Return user sandbox page to mainspace

Deletion

Would you mind deleting User:Mednear? Cheers and thanks, SwisterTwister talk 04:58, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Malplaced disambiguation page

Can you please move Everything Is Wrong (disambiguation) back to Everything Is Wrong per WP:MALPLACED? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:00, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

RM: Hijra (South Asia) → Hijra (transgender group)

You recently participated in a move request discussion at Talk:Hegira. I have now proposed one of the suggested moves independently. Please it discuss at Talk:Hijra (South Asia) if you care. —  AjaxSmack  00:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Template:Latin alphabet

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Latin_alphabet

could you replace in the protected articles A, B, C, G, L, Roman numerals "{Latin alphabet}" with "{Latin script}"? 77.179.45.27 (talk) 15:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

History merge request

Aakash Institute again

Since you were the one who started the 2nd AfD for Aakash Institute, you might be interested in the 3rd AfD as well. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:22, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Undiscussed category move

Hi, Anthony Appleyard. What should I do about this? I was about to list it at WP:Requested moves, but, while previewing my post, I got a message that the page is not for category moves. I was pointed to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. Either way, I think that the move should be reverted because it was undiscussed and I don't believe that the rationale provided by Doseiai2 is valid. I tried to revert the move myself, but something is preventing it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:26, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:29, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Great Pixel War

Hey, for the article the Great Pixel War, it looks like you deleted the talk page, but not the article itself. I am not sure if this was intentional. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ᐁT₳LKᐃ 17:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

John Michael Miller

Hi there, I'm wondering if, when you completed the history merge for John Michael Miller, you might have forgotten to complete the requested move and not moved it to J. Michael Miller. Or is that yet to happen? Thanks, 142.160.131.202 (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! 142.160.131.202 (talk) 20:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Omkara listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Omkara. Since you had some involvement with the Omkara redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Loginnigol 13:39, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Saragarhi (film)

Hello, I had said you to merge the page history of Battle of Saragarhi (Movie) to Battle of Saragarhi (film). See here. What you did is you deleted my page Battle of Saragarhi (film) to make move for Battle of Saragarhi (Movie). Now can you please restore my page creation edits to Battle of Saragarhi (film)? Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 17:01, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Honest (The Chainsmokers song)

Hello. Why was it necessary to move Homest (The Chainsmokers song) over the top of Honest (The Chainsmokers song)? Nothing that was written there was really worth maintaining enough to move the page, speedy deletion notice and all, to the correct namespace. Quite frankly, the creating user, PlzNo, has never communicated with anybody else over their editing decisions, and they have made some very questionable ones. They linked to the "Homest" page, where they surely would have at least then noticed the page was created with an "m" where the "n" should be, and thus I think it was a deliberate attempt to circumvent having to create content for someone else's redirect. It's evident we now have a small number of users who want "full credit" for creating pages themselves and know how to do avoid a space they did not originate. In fact, several users have brazenly admitted to doing so. Why we are encouraging this by moving deliberate misspellings and not speedily deleting them I don't know. Ss112 19:51, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed after I wrote my original message, but that was asking for a history merge, not a page move for a user who has previously created articles in the incorrect place and appears to still be doing so. I understand that moving pages doesn't mean you speculate on users' motives or check out the creator's contributions, but PlzNo, who created the misspelt page, has previously done things like this and been asked to check where they create articles/see if there's not a redirect for it first (and even questioned on this creation by TheMagnificentist). Ss112 22:40, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Eyes Open restoration

Can you please restore the history of Eyes Open deleted at 22:02, 13 May 2009? The page was previously a disambiguation page for 2 years, and after 8 years, is now such a page again. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Dunning school

Hi, I think we edit-conflicted in reacting to this technical move. Do you mind if I move it back and open a discussion? My comment was going to be:

Dunning school → Dunning School – The Google Ngram shows lower case as dominant form for term and to comply with WP:NCCAPS. Mitchumch (talk) 04:12, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). EdJohnston (talk) 04:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Comment: This needs a discussion. My own search in books.google.com did not come across any lower-case references, but it wasn't very thorough. I suspect that the Ngram search could be picking up the word 'Dunning' in contexts that don't refer to this school of historians. I don't know any way to examine the individual items that are found by Ngram to be sure they have the intended meaning.
Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

On the Run Tour (Beyoncé and Jay Z)

Hi there. Can you move On the Run Tour (Beyoncé and Jay Z) to On the Run Tour (Beyoncé and Jay-Z) since I saw you moving them and I don't think I can move this one? Thanks --Jennica✿ / talk 05:42, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

And what about moving categories? Category:Jay Z albums and others. --Jennica✿ / talk 05:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm working on moving all the songs/albums in those categories right now. Thanks! --Jennica✿ / talk 07:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Last Jay-Z request, if you could help. It says I can't move this one, only an admin. Category:Jay Z to Category:Jay-Z. I'm working on moving all of them over to Jay-Z with the hyphen (per the talk page consensus) but I might wait on it until it's moved over totally. Thanks! --Jennica✿ / talk 07:19, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anthony_Appleyard/2017/January-June&oldid=1143894473"