User talk:Gadfium/Archive 14

Sam Harding

Hi Gadfium, In your opinion, do any of the vandalistic edits to Sam Harding (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sam_Harding&oldid=377447641 was the last of a succession) meet criteria 2 or 3 for Revision Deletion? dramatic (talk) 23:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

It meets criteria 2, as "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material". However, the box above the criteria says "A certain low degree of inappropriate or disruptive posting is normal within a large community", and I think this sort of juvenile vandalism can also be regarded as being covered by that. My usual inclination is to revert such material (and deal with the poster) but not to remove it from the edit history, because I doubt that anyone who looks through the edit history is likely to be misled into believing that the edits are correct. Of course, if the person involved complains, the material should be revision deleted or oversighted, and if someone continually reverts to an objectionable version, then revision deletion is one of the tools to make that more difficult.-gadfium 07:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Auckland Wikipedia Meetup

Hey. We're having an Auckland Wikipedia meetup on April 9. Details are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland. Would love to see you there. :) --LauraHale (talk) 02:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Nice to meet you too

It was nice to meet you too. I'll try to get in touch with the guy in Wellington when I have a more firm date on when I will be there. I'll also poke WM-AU to see what can be done on that front and who they've already talked to. --LauraHale (talk) 07:08, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Please do not delete contriibutions of other people just because they contributed things you didn't know. Thanks!

Hello, I added a contribution about MAO inhibitors in the Parkinson disease article. The fact that tobacco smoke contains MAO inhibitors has been well-known for decades. Just make a google search and you get flooded with results of reputable institutions like the NIH.

In fact, your revert was vandalismus, good that others undid it. So, please in future just google a bit before you delete contributions you do not know about.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.25.100.245 (talk) 12:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

It is essential that additions to medical articles have suitable sources. Please do not contribute to these articles if you are not prepared to find such sources.-gadfium 20:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of "Red links"/Creation of Stubs

Apologies for deletion of "red links" on the Music of NZ page. I am fairly new to this and was planning to create the stubs on the topics and then replace the links. I am aware now that this is not the correct procedure. I have however created stubs for the New Zealand String Quartet and the Karlheinz Company. I have a particular interest in NZ music of the "classical" genre and taonga puoro and hope to be making further contributions in these areas.(Ewooll (talk) 22:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC))

Those two articles look good. It's always nice to see Wikipedia's coverage extended, although I don't personally have much interest in NZ music.-gadfium 05:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Katrina Shanks

Considering that the number of articles in the local media that were written about her comments, and the relative absence of anything else in the media about her - i think the complete omission of the section is an over-reaction. I would propose that there is some reference to it, would you not agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louisejgreaves (talk • contribs) 02:30, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

I can't believe that you think almost as much coverage should go into this incident as goes into the rest of her parliamentary career. I am aware that you wrote much of the existing content, but I suggest it needs to be expanded significantly before such mention of this would not be undue weight.

A similar situation exists on the Stuart Nash article, where I (and others) have been reverting the addition of a trivial incident which would make up a similar proportion of the article.

Wikipedia needs to treat all politicians fairly and not overemphasise the occasional gaffe they may make. It does tend to focus more on recent events than their overall historical significance might warrant, and this is recognised as a problem - see WP:RECENT.

If you want opinions from other parties, I suggest you ask for them at the New Zealand Wikipedians' noticeboard, or at third opinion.-gadfium 04:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

I have read the other sections, and I agree with your comments in general, but this was exactly the intention: expanding the content. How can one update someone when they struggle to find anything on them in the public record, and then when there is something in the public record, any mention of it is in effect prohibited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louisejgreaves (talk • contribs) 05:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Why don't you try a one-line addition, eg "Shanks was criticised for calling all filesharing illegal during the debate on the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill.[1]". This seems to be the most significant criticism. I am a little worried that it doesn't actually appear to be substantiated by the quotes from Shanks you included in the article. The quote about "little boxes" is a simplistic explanation of bittorrent, but it doesn't itself say she regards this as illegal. Presumably it is justified by other parts of her speech.

I would also suggest that you consider updating and expanding Copyright in New Zealand with details of the new law, including the reactions to it. I think you could go into much greater detail there. The Stuff article linked above says that the only MP not criticised over the bill was Gareth Hughes. Presumably then, we could be having this debate about every other MPs article. (I realise that there will not be reliable sources for the criticism of most MPs, and the stuff article may be slightly exaggerated).-gadfium 05:36, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

That is helpful, will start work on an update to the Copyright page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louisejgreaves (talk • contribs) 07:40, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for restoring the Peter Jackson picture. Who knows if the IP was messing around or, perhaps, they have only ever seen his pics from his LOtR days he was rounder. I do have to say that the first time I saw that pic that I thought it looked a bit like Dominic Monaghan when he was performing as Merry Brandybuck. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 20:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the confirmation. I compared the picture to many others, and it did seem to be the same person although with significant weight loss from earlier pictures. The clincher was finding another picture taken wearing the same clothes.-gadfium 21:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

J.Williams (singer)

Not sure if you've seen it or not, but skim through Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive118#J.Williams (singer). Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. The article wasn't on my watchlist until I realised that it was subject to frequent vandalism and added it a couple of days ago.-gadfium 20:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Mr. 118.whatever blocked from Red Eye w/greg gutfeld

I see you finally had enough of the vandalism and did a one month block on IP 118.---.---.---. I have a question: since this 118.whatever is a shared/revolving IP address, will all the revolving 118.whatevers be blocked as well? I would think not, so I anticipate continued vandalism from his/her past behavior ignoring reasonable explanations. I posted yet another explanation to him right under your 'blocked notice' on 118's talk page. Oye! --RedEyedCajun (talk) 23:06, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

118 has edited as Jackjit (talk · contribs) and Tarheal (talk · contribs), and has a history of adding false information to articles with references which do not support the material. I don't think it is practical to block the entire range of his ISP, which is one of the largest in New Zealand. Instead, I will block his IP address whenever I see his activity. He is welcome to appeal the block using one of his named accounts.-gadfium 23:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't really understand how an IP address can change/revolve, like these shared IP addresses do, and still be traceable back to one particular person. I wasn't aware of IP 118's past vandal history, so he does appear to be consistant, if nothing else. Thanks for helping out on guard duty. --RedEyedCajun (talk) 04:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The IP address changes, but the person behind them repeats the same edits on the same articles. It's known as the duck test.-gadfium 06:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I understood by using logic a Wiki administrator could easily determine it's the same person. I was really pondering how e-mail could be correctly sent to an shared IP address that is always changing, or how other authorities can trace back a shared IP address to a particular person. --RedEyedCajun (talk) 11:16, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Network address translation allows many computers on a private network to use a single public IP address, and e-mail is normally pulled by the client (you query the e-mail server for new messages). XLerate (talk) 13:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The police or similar authority can ask an ISP who was using a particular IP address at a given instant. As XKerate says, many computers may use a given IP address at one time, but normally the person/institution/company behind that address has a knowledge of who the users are. An internet cafe might not know. If you have an insecure wireless network, you may try to claim you don't know who was using it at the time, but we're getting into the realm of legal advice, which I am not qualified to provide.

While I comment in the section below that NZ-based editors might be liable under NZ suppression orders, my concern on Wikipedia is verifiability in reliable sources, as Wikipedia is not directly affected by such orders.

As an example, 10-15 years ago there was a Cleveland-based person of note who entered NZ with an amount of an illicit substance. He was convicted by the NZ court, but his name was suppressed (he paid a substantial donation to some charity as part of the deal). His name was circulated on the internet, but Wikipedia could not have used that. However, the Cleveland Plain Dealer published details of the case, because it was not liable to the NZ suppression order, and we could have used their report as a source.-gadfium 20:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Could you take a look at the Red Eye w/ Greg Gutfeld edit history again? I believe 118 may be using possible sockpuppet "Stevedore2010". This person first deleted referenced content, then when that was reverted, came back recently and placed 'discussion' with possible threats against wiki directly in the viewable article, instead of on the 'discussion' page. --RedEyedCajun (talk) 05:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't see enough similarity of edits between Jackjit/118 and Stevedore. I suggest you follow the steps in Wikipedia:Vandalism#Warnings with Stevedore.-gadfium 06:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Since when have some revisions on certain pages been blocked

I thought you might be able to tell me about the recent phenomenon of blocking the ability to view historical page revisions on certain pages. It seems to be related to WP enforcing New Zealand name suppression laws. Can you tell me if this is the case and if so when this was done and if there is an official decision I can read somewhere? Example Ian Ewen-Street 118.90.37.97 (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The revisions to that article of January 2010 have been oversighted, which means I cannot see them either. However, they will have been removed not because of NZ suppression laws, which do not apply directly to Wikipedia, as it is based in the US (but editors operating in NZ may be liable), but because the material added to the article is not supported by any reliable source. In short, if the New Zealand Herald or a similar source publishes the material, then it may be appropriate to add to Wikipedia. However, undue weight guidelines will still apply.-gadfium 06:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Red eye W/ greg gutfeld

I have noted the you have blocked the past user for what ever reasons but the edit that was reversed by you was not correct, if you had read before this was already noted on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Red_Eye_w/_Greg_Gutfeld&oldid=424739375.

It is a biased POV from which is stated when it says 'Obama made another Political attack" and considering no other media picked up the story, it's hardly relevant to this page as a controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Therapy98 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

New Zealand's Next Top Model

Regarding the NZNTM article, I guess we'll see whether that particular forum post is "reliable" or not. :P

Ethan203.211.103.70 (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

It may well be correct. However, a forum does not meet Wikipedia's requirement for reliable sources.-gadfium 09:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Jackjit

Since you seem to have tracked down the previous case, I thought I should let you know it popped up again: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jackjit ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added a note there with other names he's used.-gadfium 04:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow. Quite the active one! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Derty Sesh

Now was my Derty Sesh page deleted? This had references backing up all the information on there and showed no signs of false information or Vandalism, I have nothing to do with any past vandalism in my last posts so it is only fair that the page is kept, if anyone is willing to help build it, I am gladly looking to work with them but this was unjustified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solidpilot92 (talk • contribs) 04:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

You are evading your block. Any edits you make are likely to be removed, regardless of their merits.-gadfium 04:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Richard Miniter

I nominated his page for deletion and gave reasons on the talk page - feel free to weigh in. 217.136.87.133 (talk) 01:56, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

nethui & barcamp auckland

are you attending nethui this week (Wed - Fri)? http://nethui.org.nz If you wish to attend and cost is a factor, let me know. If you have simon lyall's email, email him so he can forward it to me. Barcamp Auckland: http://bca.geek.nz/ if you wish to go we can give you a ride there. Linnah (talk) 11:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know about nethui, but I'm now waitlisted for it without great expectations that I'll get in. I've registered for Barcamp too. I can provide my own transport. Thanks for letting me know.-gadfium 21:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

nethui are looking for someone to help with mic assistance. Ie passing aruond the mike during sessions. if you're willing the entry is free and I hear so is lunch. Interested? contact Richard wood. his contact details are http://nethui.org.nz/contact-us tell him I asked you to contact him about it. hope that helps. Linnah (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but not my cup of tea.-gadfium 06:59, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

that's ok. If you make it, come say hi. I don't think the creative commons session on Thurs evening is limited to nethui attendees. check http://nethui.org.nz/events#CreativeCommons and RSVP if it interests you. Linnah (talk) 14:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Some of us are meeting for dinner tonight 30 June 2011 at 7:30pm at Raviz on Hobson St. Location. you're welcome to join us. Bill is split evenly among all attendees. Linnah (talk) 20:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but not this time. I'm enjoying the nethui hugely.-gadfium 20:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

IF ppl want a talk at barcamp about wikipedia, would you be willing to join Simon to do a quick talk? Just rememebered thre was some interest last year. not sure if there's one this year but I could ask. can do it without outing you as admin. ps off line till late evening so don't worry if no reply. Linnah (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Not this time. Since I don't like public speaking at all, I would want to be very well prepared. I would consider it for next year.-gadfium 00:27, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Oldest primary school

Hi Gadfium, Wakefield School claims to be the oldest NZ primary school. I've been trying to find an independent source for that, but have drawn a blank. Any ideas where to look? I've been working on Edward Baigent and apparently his wife set up the school in 1843. Schwede66 04:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't know of any suitable reference work. I see no problem with simply reporting the claim in Wikipedia, as "WS claims to be...". Alternatively, you can look for a school with a plausible counter claim. I've looked in Google and not found such a claim. Nelson Central School claims to be the oldest school still operating on its original site, but is considerably later than 1843. Several websites claim Christ's College, founded 1851, is the oldest school,[2] but this probably means the oldest secondary school. Ranzau School claims to originate in 1848, as another example of a primary school predating this.[3] Sorry I can't be of more help.-gadfium 05:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, found something on Prow (good website with reliable historic info; don't know who's behind it). Have added it to the Baigent article. Thanks for looking - much appreciated. Schwede66 05:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Jackjit/118 vandalizing again

He's back again. Vandalizing using his old 118 IP again, which had been blocked. The exact same vandalism of removing the same well sourced content he was removing over a month ago. Thanks! --RedEyedCajun (talk) 09:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Possible viral infection of Saccharomyces?

I teach microbiology, and have my students perform a plate count to determine the number of cells in a package. This week, while most students got excellent colonies (NA +4% glucose) two students got tiny colonies. Looking at them under the microscope, the cells appeared more round, and there were a number of what I presume to be "ghosts" from yeast cells which have been killed. Does this sound like the yeast viruses you have written about? You may contact me directly at fankhadb@uc.edu. My web page on yeast plate count is:

http://biology.clc.uc.edu/fankhauser/Labs/Microbiology/Yeast_Plate_Count/Yeast_Plate_Count.htm

Regards, David Fankhauser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fankhadb (talk • contribs) 21:01, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not an expert on the subject. I wrote an assignment some years ago on killer yeasts during a second-year university microbiology paper, which I later adapted into an article, but microbiology was just a paper I needed to take to satisfy my university's diversity of research requirements and I have done no related study since.-gadfium 21:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

long time for sure

yes I might start editing again - not sure yet. Been a bit of a hibernation rather than break for me. I wonder if they have a template for that? :-) Shudde ^talk 08:21, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Banned User Jackjit/118 now shopping around looking for others to do his editing

He's shopping around for help to make his edits (and is succeeding), just as his LONG history shows he has done many times in his past when he can't get his way on an article. Please look at his unfair mischief here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Red_Eye_w.2F_Greg_Gutfeld

Jackjit has apparently changed to a new Internet Service Provider after his most recent block on his shared 118 IP and is now using the fixed IP 118.93.220.21 and is again making the exact same kind of vandalism and edits to Conservative/Repulican type of articles using this fixed IP. This new fixed IP should be easy to block, no? --RedEyedCajun (talk) 14:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

This is totally discouraging to me as I have done my very best to improve this place called Wiki. If this shopping around for others by so-called banned/blocked user is allowed to stand, then the Wiki community can count me out as an editor and it really saddens me to say that because for the most part, I have really enjoyed being here and learning/helping to create a better Wiki for all. --RedEyedCajun (talk) 10:12, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The address given above appears just to be part of his usual 118 range. He's probably already onto a new IP address. Changing IP within this range is simply a matter of resetting one's router, and a block of the entire range would be difficult, as it's one of the largest ISPs in New Zealand. Just keep reverting and reporting him, and pointing to the sockpuppet investigation rather than putting too much effort into debating with him.-gadfium 20:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the counsel, but it's difficult when he goes shopping around for "proxies" to do "his" edits and promote "his" ideas with lies. I do understand "don't feed the trolls", but I never imagined when I started editing on Wiki that this kind of unprofessional behavior would happen or be so hard to stop. I really do appreciate your help, time and counsel, as I am relatively new to Wiki and I don't want to become a bother. --RedEyedCajun (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Long-term sockpuppetry violates Internet Service Porviders' "Terms of Service"

I have been around here long enough now to see the countless hours put into chasing sockpuppets and their dynamic IP addresses. As you know, Internet Service Providers have strict "Terms of Use/Service" agreements with their customers. In these TOS agreements, it clearly states that if the customer uses the ISP services to damage or destroy websites, or for other harassing type of behavior on the Internet, then their service will be terminated. So, after years of chasing some of these "banned users" here on Wikipedia, I think a good case could be presented to an Internet Service Provider that one of their customers is doing great damage harassing the Wikipedia project and wasting the resources of Wikipedia. All you would have to show is a history of damage/harassment done by the sockpuppet/dynamic IP and the exact times the IP made those edits identified as vandalism, then the ISP could trace it back to a particular customer and terminate their service. Obviously this would only be used in extreme cases which have gone on for many months or years. I'm certain someone at Wiki must have thought of this before, so what is the problem with implementing this as policy on Wiki? --RedEyedCajun (talk) 07:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

thank you for sharing

Next time, you might want to do some investigation before you race to the aid of a fellow Admin. I'm sorry you don't know the difference between a personal attack and a strong (and justified) criticism of someone's actions, but that's not my problem. It's Wikipedia's. Kiwigov (talk) 23:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I did investigate. If you wish to resume editing, please file an unblock appeal, stating that you will avoid such behaviour in the future.-gadfium 02:25, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Hello, Gadfium! I hope you enjoy this tasty treat as a friendly greeting from a fellow Wikipedian SwisterTwister talk 05:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Yummy. Thank you.-gadfium 05:40, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Praise for anons

Why do you think that it is acceptable to remove praise for anons from their talkpages? There is no Wikipedia policy that explictly prohibits this, so I don't see what basis you are doing this on. It may be your personal view that such praise is not appropriate, but it is not disruptive, causes no-one any harm and does not break any of the rules. Wikipedia is not your personal fiefdom; you can't just remove comments if you disagree with them. If I am mistaken, then please cite to me the exact policy that prohibits this. Otherwise, please apologise and refrain from such acts of content removal. --85.210.77.185 (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Praise for vandals is obviously disruptive. So is trolling.-gadfium 20:16, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I fail to see how it can be considered "obviously disruptive". What is so obvious about it? Do you consider compliments to be disruptive? Are anons not worthy of praise? Such activities do not have any affect on users such as yourself or Wikipedia as a whole; they are gestures of thanks. I fail to see how they cause any harm. It may be "obvious" to you, but it is not to me as my actions were not by their nature harmful, so I would like to you to explain yourself further. I am new to Wikipedia and I am still trying to get to know the site, so I would appreciate it if you could clarify your reasoning for me. Furthermore, I refute your accusation that I am a "troll". Trolling is an act of intentional disruption; I did not want to get involved in this argument, but I feel that I am being unfairly treated, given that all I did wrong was to pay someone a simple compliment. How can that be such a bad thing? I apologise if I have offended you in any way, I just want an explanation as to what I have done so wrong. --79.68.111.22 (talk) 09:38, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Who made you God ? Pushbutton auto (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Gadfium. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Maramatanga Society.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Shrek (sheep)

You sent me a message about vandalising the Shrek Sheep article. I re-read the article and the penultimate paragraph still confuses me. It needs to be clearer. The sheep, according to his birth year, was 9 going on 10 when he first became famous. Then it says he was shorn again on an iceberg to celebrate his 10th birthday. He must have been around 12 when this happened. So did they celebrate his tenth birthday 2 years late? Is this right? Can it be made less ambiguous, maybe by throwing in the word "belated". Cheers, Grant — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.19.161 (talk) 01:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:123.2.19.161.-gadfium 03:54, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Transwiki

Hello Gadfium, I wonder whether you can lend me a hand, or explain how to do this. I came across a list of Christchurch heritage buildings on the German (!) WP. Cool, I thought, as I wanted to compile something like this anyway. It's now time to get it across into my userspace for translation. I've had a read of the Transwiki documentation and have no idea what to do. What I gather is that the page history needs to come across with it, so a copy and paste move is not to be done. User:Schwede66/Tools/List of historic places in Christchurch is where it should end up. How do I go about it? If you wish, you might as well shift it there yourself if that's easier, as I don't think I'll need those skills again in a hurry. As always, your help is appreciated. Schwede66 19:45, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I ran into trouble doing this, but user:Courcelles kindly helped me out.-gadfium 21:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to you and Courcelles for sorting that. It took me four months of hard work to collect those photos (could be five months by now). The list, now that it's on the English WP, displays some strange behaviour, though, and that is that it stops to displays templates half way down the page (at the '3-5 Cracroft Tce, Cashmere' entry, to be precise). Is there by chance a limit on the number of templates that a page can handle? If so, why does the problem not show on the German WP? Schwede66 01:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

There is such a limit, on total template expansion size, and I don't know if it varies between language editions. It's possible that the English version calls a template which expands to more code than the German one does. I suggest you ask about this at the technical Village pump.-gadfium 01:21, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Avoiding MediaWiki expansion depth limit may be useful to you. Is it possible that the en version of the template is not terminating one of the if statements, resulting in a very deeply nested if?-gadfium 04:21, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed it by removing a ref template (one per line, and there are more than 300 lines) with normal refs, and all is good now. XLerate lent a hand, too. Schwede66 01:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

GAR

Awaiting your response to the other points on the earthquake article. Should be good enough for a pass then.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

JackJit

This looks like him. [4] AIRcorn (talk) 01:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, blocked.-gadfium 03:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Patupairehe

Hi Gadfium. Could you move Patupairehe to Patupaiarehe over the redirect - the latter is the correct spelling. I hope also to clean this article up a bit more, cheers Kahuroa (talk) 21:01, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Done.-gadfium 21:05, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Gadfium! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 06:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!-gadfium 06:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Dimitar Dobrev (academic)

I have restored the unaddressed cleanup maintenance notices to the above referenced article. At this time, the article is not in compliance with Manual of Style for biographies, i.e., hyphens, letter and word spacing, wikilinks, etc. If I get time within the next few hours, I will run a quick cleanup. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 14:49, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Gadfium, I have found your notes, your contribution to my page and your valuable advice, for which I thank you for assisting with my article. However, I have neither the time or the inclination to respond to the frequent and unwarranted attacks to the Dimitar Dobrev (academic) article by this "Ambassador to Wikipedia" i.e.amuse who it seems derives extreme pleasure at pointing out imperfections with regards to the Manual of style, notability issues, Wikipedia guidelines, cleanup issues. Professor Dobrev is and remains an outstanding scientist in the accountancy field in Bulgaria. He has contributed an enormous amount of time, effort and work in a 40 year period during which he has written several major groundbreaking scientific works that have influenced other specialists in book-keeping, accountancy, finance management, fiscal studies in Bulgaria. He has taught generations of young students, prepared them as highly qualified specialists in economics who later became lecturers and professors in their own right, he laid out a path for them to follow in governing the country's national and international economic stability. It is important that his work and his contributions to society are noted in the English Wikipedia as this language seems universal nowadays. I will, as you suggest Gadfium, submit a request to the Bulgarian Wikipedia for one of their worthy or expert editors to review this article. Until then I can only pray and hope that Cindyamuse will leave this article in peace and busy herself with the 100s if not 1000s of others that need improving. my kind regards to both of you.Dobrevasnejana 07:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)p.s.all that I can do for now is improve my article where there may be errors in citations and referencing, other than that I hope that my cousin-Dimitar Dobrev will assist with the completion of this article, regards,(Dobrevas)--Dobrevasnejana 07:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dobrevasnejana (talk • contribs)

• Please note that the Bulgarian Wikipedia guidelines and policies are not applicable to the English Wikipedia. The issues identified in the Dimitar Dobrev (academic) are not presented as an attack, but added as collaborative support. The Manual of Style presents Wikipedia's house style, to help editors produce articles with consistent, clear, and precise language, layout, and formatting. The goal is to make the encyclopedia easier and more intuitive to use. Consistency in style and formatting promotes clarity and cohesion; this is especially important within an article. Please note that the article is not proposed for deletion, so there should not be concern with deletion at this point. In my opinion, notability, while not established in accordance with the topical notability guidelines for professors, is established through the general notability guidelines. I have removed the COI notice and placed a secondary notice to the discussion page. This does not dismiss the conflict of interest or the responsibility to maintain a neutral point of view. Again, if you have questions, please don't hesitate to contact me directly. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:07, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Potatoes in Tauranga

Hi Gadfium. My problem is that there is no mention whatsoever in the article of any European settlement on the island, prior to the mention of the missionary goinging there for potatoes. That makes no sense, as new crops accompanied new settlemnts - no-one was merely going around distributing new crops to new lands for the sake of it. So, do you have any information on earlier Europen settlement ou Tauranga? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:30, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

According to our article on Musket Wars, potatoes were in use by Maori from 1794. There's no online reference, but it appears to be covered by Bellich and Ballara. The 1966 Encyclopaedia of New Zealand says "In 1793 Lieutenant-Governor King had two Maoris brought to Norfolk Island to instruct convicts in flax-dressing, and sent presents of pigs, potatoes, and seeds to the Bay of Island tribes"ref, so it is clear that potatoes were available in New Zealand before 1800. See page 159 of Maori Wars of the Nineteenth Century for a reference to the growing of potatoes in the Tauranga area in 1820.

I am not sure what you refer to by "the island". Do you mean the North Island, or one of the small islands off the coast of Tauranga? You say that new crops accompanied new settlements, but in New Zealand the potato was enthusiastically adopted by Maori as it was substantially easier to grow and more productive than the kumara - the Musket Wars article explains that the potato enabled the wars as much as the musket did.-gadfium 21:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Though I still find it odd that a crop would have taken hold so quickly, especially as Europeans were initially not very keen on adopting it, therefore would not have propagated it until it became widely used. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

If you have no objection, I will move this discussion over to Talk:Tauranga for future reference.-gadfium 20:53, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Gadfium. Someone has in the meantime provided futher information on the introduction of potatoes into New Zealand. In fact I thought it was you and conflated the two and was a bit annoyed at what appeared to be a determination to have your way. Then I saw it was a different person. My apologies. On the contrary, I see that you are not of the controlling type, having suggested moving the debate to the talk page (which I had done at some point). Again, my apologies, I've become intolerable of the types who go around reverting everything they don't agree with and allowed my blood to boil. Bad slip-up! Best regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I've now copied the relevant parts over.-gadfium 20:16, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Intervention required?

Any suggestions how to deal with this editor? Schwede66 04:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I think it should be blocked as a troll. However, as a friend of Grutness, I am an involved party, so I won't do so unless the trolling gets even worse.-gadfium 06:12, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Where can I ask for this to be done? Schwede66 07:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

There are a number of admins who watch my talk page (116 people are watchers), so attention may already be paid to the editor. You could also start a topic at admin noticeboard/incidents.-gadfium 08:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I've posted a notice at ANI. Schwede66 10:16, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Link for NZ schools changes

In case you haven't found it is here. Rich Farmbrough, 11:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC).

Great, thanks.-gadfium 23:39, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Auckland Volcanoes

Hi Gadfium, I am lead author of new book Volcanoes of Auckland: the essential guide. Auckland University Press, 2011 and a geologist with extensive experience with this volcanic field.

The current number of volcanoes recognised is around 50, it depends how they are combined and split. 1. One volcano not listed and recognised by me last year is Grafton Volcano, which should be added to the list with areferernce to the book which gives it a whole page. 2. Some of the other volcano names are mispelled. Thus Pukekiwiriki (= Red Hill, Papakura) should be Pukewairiki (reference the book for explanation). Te Pouhawaiki is more correctly Te Pou Hawaiki according to our Maori historian expert coauthor. 3. Duders Hill in Devonport was recognised as a separate small volcano by early geologists but in more recent years it has beeen reinterpretted as a part of Mt Victoria scoria cone rafted downhill on its lava flows (see book for reference) - should not be listed a s a volcano. 4. A number of others are not absolutely correctly named but the slight mispellings are liveable with.

There are a number of things on this page that are not precisely correct - I corrected several a month or two ago, but may correct one or two others soon when I get a chance.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.167.43 (talk) 04:37, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I suggest you create an account on Wikipedia; it will make it easier for you since your edits will be more recognisably from a single individual than those from an IP address which may be used by many people (and which may change for an individual, depending on configuration). An account will also allow you to move pages to correct titles. You may wish to communicate with user:Avenue who has been one of our major contributors in this area.-gadfium 05:47, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Alzheimer's

I understand your reasoning for the change in this article, but now there is no relatively direct or simple statement about causation. From reading the article, and from other reading spurred by a personal interest, I understand that there are various hypotheses, but that the cause for most Alzheimer's cases is still essentially unknown. Do you agree that it would be appropriate to add a sentence like that to the article? Thanks -- Jo3sampl (talk) 13:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I suggest that you raise this at Talk:Alzheimer's disease. You'll get people much better qualified than me to discuss the merits there.-gadfium 20:58, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Naming of schools

Hello Gadfium, you usually take an interest in all things schools, so could you please have a look at this move request and comment? So far, nobody has contributed, and I fear that it will just fizzle out due to a lack of interest. Schwede66 23:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers

The article New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, possibly copyvio. cf. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/200 Greatest Israelis. List articles that simply reproduce lists published elsewhere are non-notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

The AFD is interesting. It appears that there was considerable debate about whether such lists are copyright violations, and the suggestion that articles on TV programs which contain lists seems to have been rejected since TV programs are considered notable whereas websites are mostly not. I will consider whether to contest the prod. Rather than debating this article by article, it might be appropriate to hold a more centralised debate on all such TV programs.-gadfium 08:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

The prod was contested by another editor while I was sleeping. I've since improved the referencing and added my opinion to the AfD.-gadfium 19:44, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers 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/New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Incomplete AfD

Thanks Part of the blame goes to WP:TWINKLE, but ultimately the buck stops with me. Isn't there a bot that comes by and adds these...? Either way, it was very considerate of you to finish this nomination for me and even more considerate for you to tell me. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Spurious "Human Rights Review Tribunal"

I've now removed it from the archive, but any idea how "Human Rights Review Tribunal" was added in this edit? Mark Hurd (talk) 12:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The text must have been in my edit buffer, and Firefox will automatically paste the edit buffer when you middle click (maybe I had to set that up, since I'm primarily a Linux user that's the behaviour I prefer). I must have hit the middle mouse button at the wrong time. My apologies.-gadfium 19:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

In case you are still blocking JackJit

This is pretty similar to this. Therapy98 quacks like a duck and you brought him up at a previous SPI.

Nevermind, just saw your message above. Will file an old fashioned report. AIRcorn (talk) 06:40, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Help on issue of difference

Hello Gadfium. You have obviously been following the issue between me and BiggerAristotle on the Sonny Bill Williams page. I hope you can understand my position is based upon support and the examples set from other articles with the same issue. I cannot understand BiggerAristotle’s position. He has provided me no evidence to support his removal of my edit other than to carelessly throw around the issue of consensus. He seems to be against my edit simply because it does not agree with his own view. Your support would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 06:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you look to WP:MEDIATION. It seems to me that you are both good faith editors who have a content dispute. I am not particularly interested in the subject, but I would like the article to be stable and without frequent reverts or bitter edit summaries.-gadfium 07:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Gadfium/Archive 14! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Next Top Model articles

0_0 Dear lord can you help? I have tried doing just that a thousand times — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.38.163 (talk • contribs)

I have added links to the appropriate manual of style pages at Talk:Top Model series.-gadfium 00:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Faculty of Education, University of Waikato

Hi Gadfium, I am David Blackwell -username foehelp - the web master of the Faculty of Education website from the University of Waikato. My home page: http://education.waikato.ac.nz/about/faculty-staff/?user=dblackw Yesterday we put some content up from our website. Faculty_of_Education,_University_of_Waikato - Can you let me know what we have to do to confirm the content. We own all the copyrights to the material I added and I have the permission to place content on the web representing our faculty. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foehelp (talk • contribs) 21:26, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

To use material verbatim from the website, you need to license the website content under conditions compatible with Wikipedia's Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. You can do this by changing the copyright statement on the pages in question, or by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Contact us/Permit.

There is also the issue that the material is not worded appropriately for use in an encyclopedia. We require material added to be neutrally worded rather than promotional. Words such as "we" and "our" are certainly not suitable.

I suggest that you consider expanding the material at University of Waikato, citing the FoE website as your source, but making sure you use your own words. If you would prefer to recreate the stand-alone page, feel free to do so, again using your own words, but you run a risk that someone might tag it as an item of insufficient importance in its own right and suggest it be merged back into the university article. Citing multiple sources to indicate notability would help. I am aware that many NZ university faculties have their own articles, but none of these articles are of particularly high quality as far as I am aware.-gadfium 23:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and you should read our conflict of interest guidelines.-gadfium 23:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Requested move of National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research

I was thinking of closing this move request, which has been open since October 14, but there seems to a good-faith difference of opinion. Are you confident that 'NIWA' is more commonly used than 'National Insitute of Water and Atmospheric Research' when people want to refer to the Institute?

An obvious improvement that would make it easier to find 'NIWA' would be to create the redirect NIWA -> National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research. Though your move comment suggests that Nintendo Independent Wiki Alliance is less notable, it gets five views per day, while this important-seeming water institute only gets two views a day. Also Niwa clan gets 14 views a day.

My proposed solution would be to

• give 'NIWA' to the water institute by creating a redirect,
• keep 'Niwa' as the dab page for the other meanings of Niwa, while
• put a hatnote on the water institute linking to the DAB.

If I can find even one person supporting the move who likes this option, I might close the move request, otherwise I'm not clear what to do. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:14, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I like your proposal, EdJohnston. Schwede66 17:03, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy with your proposal too.

My comment that the name NIWA is almost universally used is based on my experiences in New Zealand. The organisation's website, http://www.niwa.co.nz, does not bother to give the full name on the home page, so I think it is likely that international usage follows domestic usage, but I have no direct evidence for this.

My comment that the Nintendo alliance was non-notable was not well researched and I may have done them an injustice. When I use Google, I automatically get google.co.nz which is more likely to give me hits relevant to New Zealand than google.com is. A google search for me shows both organisations, but also several news items referring to the climate institute, and no news items for the Nintendo alliance. I tried using google.co.uk and got similar results. Of the top of my head, I don't recall how to force google.com not to redirect to google.co.nz, so I cannot see the search results an American might see.-gadfium 19:24, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Calling you out

This was a completely inappropriate block. I understand that the IP has had problems before, but the edits that you and cluebot reverted were not vandalism. I am requesting that you remove the block because it was made in error. In addition, it was only the editor's second edit; although, I understand that there is some justification since the IP had vandalized before. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Please check the reference. It says that while body contact between duos is not permitted, eye contact is. The edit was vandalism.-gadfium 03:42, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

If you read further the reference specifically says that "Interpreters may refer to each other and make eye contact with each other during the introduction and/or transitions". Under this definition, the speakers may not look at each other during other portions of the speech. Still, the truth ends up being slightly irrelevant to the context of this discussion because the definition is clearly ambiguous enough to make it clear that the edit was made in good faith. Furthermore, the edit was not similar to other edits the IP had made in the past. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:48, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've lifted the block and apologised.-gadfium 03:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep, I applaud you, from you quick block and clear cut statement "the edit was vandalism" added to the fact that I have never worked with you I was sort of under the impression that you were hardheaded. You have proven me wrong, you're a good man and continue improving the encyclopedia. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:50, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Geotagging

You might find this interesting. --Epipelagic (talk) 05:12, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is interesting. I had in fact already seen it. Pity the Māori Wikipedia wasn't one of those included.-gadfium 05:44, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Muldoon

is this good enough for you? Rt Hon Winston Peters: Having regard to the Minister’s comment that the accounts will be in such a parlous state that he will begin a nominal borrowing programme over the next 3 years, is this a case of a former Prime Minister and Minister of Finance’s words coming back to him, when he said: “They can’t promise anything because I’ve spent it all.”? Does he recall the aftermath of that, when the next election turned up in 1972? http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/2430AC6B-8B63-4AB9-A0C2-7CF38DD8E5BB/89283/47HansD_20040522.pdf

Muldoon was outgoing prime minister, and he said words to the effect of (either on radio or TV) "there's no money -- I've spent it all." http://www.grownups.co.nz/discuss/show/id/2247/page/3 (it was TV i saw it)

there's no money, I've spent it all hahaha http://www.racecafe.co.nz/forum/printthread.php?t=33069&page=2&pp=10

Muldoon once said, 'I've spent it all' http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00170.htm

further more i can assure you that my recollection is best money? there is no money. i've spent it all hah ha hahahahaahhhaaaaa

your diffidence ie.: a) That doesn't sound like something he would have said b) it seems unlikely ... would be overlooked betrays a) your passive aggressive desire to avoid reality in this matter b) your complete lack of understanding of the man (if that is what he was) who said many remarkable and mainly unsavoury (including homophobic - shall i tell you that one? - no you wont believe me)things he is famous for it but obviously this has passed you by

your inability to find any further references merely confirms the above and also calls into question your effectiveness and impartiality as a researcher and therefore editor if you must edit why dont you try being constructive rather than like just about all compulsive editors completely destructive i will be willing to bet that you do not take this and go back and improve and correct the article deletion and blocking is the compulsive editors only game

i do not have a vast number of edits to my credit because i do not presume to edit things i know nothing about and i am absolutely opposed to style over substance evidence can be added or counter evidence produced but removing the seed kills all possibility of evolution whichever the direction

1972 was a long time ago and i was barely a teenager but i remember that horrible man i just assumed over the years that it was after the "sink big" fiasco but it appears now he was a serial offender

later in life i was with a bunch of dudes and we had his car on 2 wheels outside the Dunedin town hall till we thought better of it i got my picture on the front page of the Evening Star

go on put it back fix it up be constructive

now thats enough i despise this chatter i dont want to talk to you people— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottomachin (talk • contribs)

I have responded on your talk page, as that is where this conversation began (other than in edit summaries).-gadfium 20:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

i am happy for you to do as you think best - let me know — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottomachin (talk • contribs) 21:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottomachin (talk • contribs) 21:39, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

November 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from New Zealand Māori rugby union team. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 124.169.105.8 (talk) 03:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Preferential treatment by Air New Zealand towards John Key

Hi Gadfium, thanks for your message on my talk page. I have explained my reasons why this incident does merit inclusion in the Air New Zealand and John Key articles despite not being an ongoing 'scandal' as such, since it nonetheless has attracted controversy. Please read my posts on the discussion pages for the two articles. Thank you! Bonus bon (talk) 10:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

New MP pages

If you have time before Friday evening, your help with this politics task force collaboration would be much appreciated! If you have questions, please ask them there. Schwede66 07:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

You deleted my page

Hi Gadfium I am fairly new to WP and I created a page, ACG Strathallan, and I came back about an hour later to find it was deleted. Apparently it had been deleted before. Why did this happen and is there any way we can restore this? Can you please explain to me why it was deleted? All of the information was completely factual and I included references to back it all up. Regards Victor997 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victor997 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

You can see the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ACG English school. This discussion is now closed, but if you wish to appeal it, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. I suggest your best argument is that Strathallan is a significantly different entity than the English Language schools the deletion discussion was primarily covering, but you will need to explain this clearly. You will also need to show significant coverage of the school in independent sources. The article as you recreated it only gave sources from Academic Colleges Group, and a couple of newspaper report on Justin Bieber. I suggest you find newspaper coverage of its opening.-gadfium 23:52, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I will most certainly appeal the deletion and contact whoever deleted it / proposed it for deletion in the first place, and I will explain to these people that Strathallan is vastly different to an English language school. And while I will try to find more independent sources, such as a media outlet covering its opening like you suggest, I don't see why sources from Strathallan's parent company, ACG, aren't acceptable - plenty of other New Zealand high schools have citations and references from their private websites. Anyway, thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victor997 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Dementia

Hello, I have posted a reply to "request for a link on the talk dementia page" Thankyou John cordingly (talk) 13:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I am hoping you will get replies from people much more qualified than myself. My role at this article is primarily to patrol it for vandalism, not to decide on content.-gadfium 18:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Im finding it very difficult understanding the decision making process for links. I believe that the link i have suggested is perfect for the subject matter. If i cannot post myself due to the conflict of interest i understand, but i do not believe that somebody has posted a link such as "helpdementia.org.uk" who have not had a conflict of interest when posting that link. The subject is dementia and the link i have posted is all about dementia, how much more does a site have to be relevant to the subject to be relevant to the subject page? Come on.. lets keep to the spirit of wiki John cordingly (talk) 23:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, can you please point me in the direction of an editor who may help me with this thankyou John cordingly (talk) 21:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

You could ask for more feedback at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard.-gadfium 22:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Maggie Barry

Gatoclass (talk) 00:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Gadfium. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

FanN | talk 05:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited 1921 Waratahs tour of New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gisborne (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) 10:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I knew it was only a matter of time before you caught me!-gadfium 19:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)