User talk:Drawn Some

user talk archive
03/05/08 to 06/30/09

Jennifer Carpenter (academic)

if you are going to criticize me for arguing at AfD that consensus should change on a guideline, pick an afd where I make that argument, not one where i support the established guideline, (which in fact is what I almost always do; it is generally not difficult to find a WP guideline to fit my views of what ought to be done.) WP:PROF was my basis at Jennifer Carpenter (academic). I'm not asking for an apology, because others have commented quite enough. I'll be glad to argue with you over the validity of using AfD to change guidelines--but first you might want to see Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines#Sources of Wikipedia policy, especially point one. Changing practice is the most effective way of changing guidelines, according to that policy page. DGG (talk) 05:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there are better examples of your disruptive behavior like here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jak_&_Daxter_vehicles Drawn Some (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dryads_in_popular_culture Drawn Some (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfD bulk nominations

Hi Drawn Some, just wanted to drop you a friendly note about the formatting of your "dried cherry" RfDs. Please compare the original format with the format now, after I refactored it during the closing. I think you'll agree it is more compact and readable. When nominating multiple redirects for exactly the same reason, it is usually easier on everybody to just put all the redirects under one heading, instead of separate headings. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 11:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's helpful. Drawn Some (talk) 01:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for more eyes on this

Hello, Drawn Some. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Drawn Some seems to be wikistalking User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). Thank you. -- Banjeboi 07:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Be very careful how you interact with this editor, their favourite trick is to interact with you for a bit and then say you are stalking them and that you are homophobic (regardless of if the original incident was around those topics). When their complaints go nowhere (and it seems more editors think they are a "boy who cried wolf"), they will leave for a bit claiming "stress" but will continue to badmouth you. --89.168.187.231 (talk) 09:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning. I have already had to ask Benjiboi to leave me alone and stop pestering me once before, you can look at my talk page archive and see. This time I am hoping he just gets bored and finds someone else to harass without me having to insist. Drawn Some (talk) 16:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, an anon and you are now attacking my character. Anon, I have never acted as you accuse but if you actually believe that to be true please feel free to use your actual account and raise my behaviours in any forum you feel appropriate including my talkpage. Drawn Some, that last "pestering" was when I quite reasonably questioned what looked to be your pointy use of the rescue tag, for which you avoided giving a direct answer when three different editors had the same concern, frankly I had forgot about the incident until you brought it up. Seems my hunch on this situation was more spot on than I thought and I'm sorry I feel that way. I hope in the future I have nothing but full trust in your actions as I really don't enjoy spending time on these interpersonal dust-ups. Whatever is going on between you and RAN I hope will also be resolved as I think you both have plenty to offer the project. -- Banjeboi 19:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have not attacked your character. I merely commented on your actions which are offensive. Drawn Some (talk) 19:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you feel asking for clarification is in any way offensive, that is how consensus is built. -- Banjeboi 02:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of redirects

Following your addition to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Pumyea II I thought you should know that if a page is deleted, any redirects to it are usually deleted at the same time - they become candidates for speedy deletion under criterion G8. Guest9999 (talk) 18:24, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience the closing administrator normally does this as a matter of course, I'm not sure but it may be a feature of some the scripts that some admins use to close AfDs. There are also bots with administrator flags which operate to do this task (example: User:Yet Another Redirect Cleanup Bot) so one way or another they usually get deleted without having to be specifically tagged. If you do across examples then it may be worth tagging it for deletion (db-redirnone is the appropriate template) but with the processes in place it's normally not necessary and redirects aren't generally mentioned at AfD. Hope that helps, regards Guest9999 (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rev War Officers

Per your comment I took a look at the article and tagged it for notability. Is it appropriate per not a directory to have an article seeking to list all officers from New Jersey in a given war? Why would this state or this war be special in that respect. "Officers from New York in World War 2" would be a logical extension. So would extending the list to soldiers of every rank. People doing genealogical research like to look up such information, but they also look up "Passengers from Germany to the United States in the 18th century"or "Persons in the 1790 census" so that desire does not mean that every person of genealogical interest belongs in a list in this encyclopedia. Edison (talk) 15:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wal-Mart (disambiguation) at DR

Just letting you know that the discussion for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) (3rd nomination) has been listed for deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 July 15. You may be interested in commenting. Tatterfly (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea Bissau and Russia

thanks, it was one of those true barrel scrapes that comes from googling the 2 countries and inserting anything you can find into bilateral articles. LibStar (talk) 05:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I can't believe someone would try to put that in a bilateral relations article. I have my suspicions about why this particular editor behaves the way he does and I don't think he can help the way he acts. Drawn Some (talk) 05:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notification

Hello, Drawn Some. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.. Alansohn (talk) 20:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deja Vu

Now the attention is off you and RAN is claiming to have a new "wikistalker". [1]. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was on vacation and I was talking about this guy to some friends and they agreed he probably has issues he can't help and that he's not actually hurting anybody. I will still try to clean up after him some when I have time. Drawn Some (talk) 10:39, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health effects of wind power

Thought you may have an interest in this one... Johnfos (talk) 07:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cynthia Roche

Would you consider redirecting this article to James Roche, 3rd Baron Fermoy right now? The article is obvious not notable in its current form, so this material can be removed right now, with only a redirect remaining. I could redirect the page right now for you and close the Afd. Please let me know as soon as possible, because as soon as someone else comments on the AfD, they must agree also before I can redirect the article and close the AFD.Ikip (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

also, William Graham, 3rd Earl of Menteith redirected to Earl of Menteith ? Ikip (talk) 19:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, they need to go to AFD. I could have redirected them but it would just be undone without some consensus. I don't have time to battle the editors who think notability is unimportant and everything should be included in the encyclopedia. You see A. Nobody is already making irrelevant smokescreen !votes. Drawn Some (talk) 19:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Next time you want to delete a page, let me know the title via email, and I will redirect it. I know you have been the focus of a lot of scrutiny, so I can help you in this reguard. Many of these redirects stick, those that don't you can take to AFD. But redirecting is much easier, and much less hassle. You now have a 7 day fight on your hands RE: Cynthia Roche, a simple, discrete redirect would have avoid this all. Ikip (talk) 21:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your offer and will keep it in mind for the future. Generally, when I nominate something for deletion, I am willing to turn it over to the community for discussion and not "fight" during the discussion. There have been some exceptions but that is my general practice. Drawn Some (talk) 14:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Per your request in the two AfDs, I have asked for additional eyes at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Drawn_Some_and_Richard_Arthur_Norton_III as it just doesn't feel right here. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dePRODing of articles

Hello Drawn Some, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

PROD removed from Olof Adolf Sjöström, by User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), with summary '(- {{dated prod|concern = This genealogical entry violates a Wikipedia policy, WP:NOT:)'
PROD removed from Alice Claypoole Gwynne, by User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), with summary '(- tag, notable)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Invitation to join Wikiproject Micronations

I note your interest in the subject of micronations.

Wikipedia always welcomes a diversity of opinion, so you might wish to consider registering as a member of the WikiProject Micronations:

I look forward to working with you over coming months to improve and significantly extend Wikipedia's micronation content. --Gene_poole (talk) 01:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I merely commented on an AfD, it is a subject I find to be of passing interest but not enough to join a project. Thanks, Drawn Some (talk) 14:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heads-up

Hi there. I'm shortly going to propose that this site be added as an WP:EL to both List of micronations and Micronations.

As the site includes the most extensive, up-to-date listing of micronations currently available from any source, I believe that it is directly relevant to the subject of those articles, and that its inclusion within them would significantly complement the existing content, and enhance their usefulness and the level of informativeness they communicate to the general reader.

However, before I iniate that discussion I firstly wanted to disclose that I'm the owner and primary author of www.listofmicronations.com. Secondly, in order to avoid any suggestion of WP:COI I intend to refrain from adding the link myself, should the eventual consensus support my proposal. --Gene_poole (talk) 02:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Today's actions

~~Hi Drawn Some~~

I just want to point out that so far today, everything you've posted has been either in the AN/I thread about you and Richard Arthur Norton, or in a DRV started by Richard Arthur Norton. This isn't the best way to look innocent of wikistalking, is it?

~~Seriously, please do something else.~~—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 13:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I take that back, you were doing something else even as I posted.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 14:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is commenting on an ANI thread about me wikistalking anyone? And commenting on a DRV on something I nominated for deletion? Especially after an absence of several days. Really. I saw in the ANI that you argued for reason. A baseless attack by a few like-minded editors after off-wiki discussion is highly offensive. This is the 3rd ANI on the same topic, there is no basis for the complaints. I have nominated a small percentage of one editor's many articles for deletion as non-notable and very many of those nominations have resulted in deletion. That doesn't constitute wikistalking by any stretch but these repeated ANIs and are starting to border on harassment of ME. 14:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

- I hope that something else is not some kind of retaliation against me for starting the ANI thread (using a WP:JNN for an article I am in the process of reworking and referencing). Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:02, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Nobody, I have no idea what your gibberish means but I am warning you that you are harassing me again. Drawn Some (talk) 14:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given the ANI threads, please do not harass Richard any further nor start doing the same to me. The community clearly identified a problem. Just because I started an ANI thread that nearly all respondents agreed a problem existed for, you should not then retaliate by making false statements in AFDs for articles I work to keep now. Thank you and good bye. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you're talking about. If you are going to make accusations of me making false statements, give facts. And again, nominating articles for deletion is NOT harassment. Your strange attacks ARE. Drawn Some (talk) 14:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did argue for reason on that AN/I thread and I do have some sympathy for you, Drawn Some.
I think it's important, though, to take Protonk's comments to heart, particularly the ones about AfD batting average. More than 75% of AfDs come out as "delete", and one would expect over 80% nomination-deletion rate from an editor of your experience and knowledge. If Protonk's right about the 40% figure (and I haven't checked), then I would tend to think that does imply a problem with nominating the wrong articles.
I also think that while in a perfectly fair world you shouldn't need to steer clear of RAN's material when you think it should be deleted, this isn't a perfectly fair world and it might be wise for you to avoid his stuff for a few weeks.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 16:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Majora Carter

I don't know what your concerns are with this edit at Majora Carter, but I see nothing wrong with it. You've reverted four other editors to delete that material over the past week or so, and it's really getting to the point of disruption. Please stop. If you want the content removed, bring it up on the article's talk page, but stop reverting. user:J aka justen (talk) 17:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir:

I am going to list the Joachim Cronman article for deletion soon. I just thought I'd give you a heads up on it. Torkmann (talk) 22:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old sock, new socks

Hi. I noticed you were involved in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Montreux69/Archive, and the same socks there seem to have cropped up again. Rightly or wrongly, the place with the most information now seems to be an AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Strutt_Family_Trust. Would you mind taking a look and seeing if anything seems familiar to you. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gerbelzodude99 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 17:56, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Australia–Kosovo relations

This article has been renominated for deletion by User:Libstar. Since you took the time to comment in the first discussion, you deserve to be notified of the situation. Regards.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 02:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD - Chiropractic controversy and criticism

AfD nomination of Chiropractic controversy and criticism

An article that you have been involved in editing, Chiropractic controversy and criticism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chiropractic controversy and criticism. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. - I am notifying you because you participated in the original AfD. DigitalC (talk) 19:59, 16 May 2010 (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) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Amateur theatre companies in Latvia has been nominated for deletion

Category:Amateur theatre companies in Latvia has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 (talk) 09:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]