User talk:UtherSRG

zOMG

		zOMG
		I, Hojimachong, hereby award UtherSRG A completely gratuitous zOMG barnstar, for being 110% awesome. Plus 1. --Hojimachongtalk

Merry Christmas

JoJan is wishing you a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Not sure if you got this - Tassie Devil FAR

I have nominated Tasmanian Devil for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. I think the original message was archived before you got it, but the article is still in the first stage. --Malkinann (talk)

Thanks. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Recreating the article "CoolSpeech"

Hello UtherSRG,

I'm the author of the program CoolSpeech for which someone else created a Wikipedia article but you deleted it. I didn't read that article and don't know why it was deleted. Now I'm trying to recreate it but Wikipedia says I should ask you first. I can prove CoolSpeech's notability: It was featured on ZDNet as "Hot File of the Day" on June 6, 2001; it was featured on MSN as "Feature Download"; it was featured on SmartComputing magazine as "Smart Choice". For more details, see http://www.bytecool.com/awards.htm

Feel free to ask me any questions at [email protected].

I hope you found the help you were looking for. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Small

I am having trouble with the Everett "Small" Coleman page. You deleted it and I believe it is more than worthy of Wikipedia. How can we resolve this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CoachSmall (talk • contribs) 22:03, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your article is not worthy of being in Wikipedia. If you disagree, go to WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

How can you say that the article is not worthy? Its a biography of a professional gamer who is directly associated with other gamers that have Wikipedia pages. This needs to be looked into further because the article is more than worthy judging by other similar articles on Wikipedia already. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CoachSmall (talk • contribs) 02:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ignored. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Yogscast

Thank you. I've requested creation protection on here, can you do that? --HTMLCODER.exe (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Someone else beat me to it. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Looks like they remade the page again, and CIreland nuked it again. Kill this file, too, please. It's a remnant of that page (I already placed a CSD). Thanks for helping me out! --HTMLCODER.exe (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Awesome, the file's nuked, and CIreland salted the Yogscast page. I think we put a stopper on that! --HTMLCODER.exe (talk) 23:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Is there a possibility to stop not registered person from spamming on new created page? It's vandalism and we can't fix the page every fev minutes... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.76.111.171 (talk) 23:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's called IP blocking. Alternatively, one may protect the page. Both actions are restricted to admins AFAIK. Although if you are referring to the Yogscast page, it's now protected so it cannot be even created. HTMLCODER.exe (talk) 00:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Answered. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

On Deletion of Ignacio Valenti Lacroix

I noticed that a new page was created, after your deletion of Ignacio Valenti Lacroix. I'm at a loss as to how to locate the discussion that took place on Ignacio Valenti Lacroix. I don't know if the AfD discussions are difficult to search, or I am just a novice at it. I tried searching each day individually without avail. Anyway, I'm wondering if this is circumventing the deletion or was suggested by the discussion. Thanks. Niluop (talk) 03:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Dunno. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

School article help (draft)

Thanks for deleting that for me. I was going to delete it myself anyway but you beat me to it. It happened because I forgot the '/' when I was creating a sub page in my user space. Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

WU LYF

Could you please explain how an article on a band that has received coverage from the NME, the Guardian, the Observer and several other publications qualify for WP:CSD? Even the fact that the wikipedia article keeps getting deleted has received coverage! Robman94 (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

It was a previously deleted article. Its restoration should be handled via the deletion review process. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I haven't seen any of the prior versions, but I assume they didn't contain references, and I'm also assuming the people who nominated them for CSD didn't bother to check if references actually exist (as they obviously do). The article that I created had dozens of references from very reliable resources. So am I to understand that any article that has previously been deleted can be deleted in seconds by any admin, regardless of whether the article still meets the criteria that it was previously deleted under, and without the benefit of an WP:AfD review. If that is really the case, that's very scary. Could you please refer me to where that is included in the wiki rules? The fact that Wikipedia deleted the article on the band has itself been covered in the press, only increasing their notability! [1] Robman94 (talk) 19:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Ask on WP:DRV. I'm not interested in debating or discussing. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm reading through the very lengthy instructions now. They say the first step is to discuss it with the deleting admin, but I take it from your last response that there's no point in me trying to do that, right? Robman94 (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Correct. My stance is that the vast majority of CSDs were properly deleted and so should go through DRV. I hold this to be true for total rewrites: go through the process to keep everything fair and square. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

DRV started. Feel free to contribute if you're interested. Robman94 (talk) 22:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

CSD on Robert's Western World

Just letting you know, I have challenged your CSD A7 on Robert's Western World. In my assessment, the article makes a sufficient indication as to why it is important to survive deletion under A7. I also did a quick Google News search which suggests to me the article may even pass the notability standards, so I have not tagged it for an alternative deletion process, I have no objection if you want to though. Monty₈₄₅ 20:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

The article is also 3 times the size as it was when I had tagged it. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks like the author was adding content while fighting with the patrol bot. It was improved significantly from the version you tagged. Monty₈₄₅ 21:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

unknown

Deletion of a page I was currently working on editing a page when it was deleted before I finnished editing. If it is possible could you undo the deletion of the page I was working on. _Helpfuleditor2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helpfuleditor2 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I might have if you listed the page.... - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Jason Dormon

why did you delete this page? Dribblingscribe 14:38, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

CSD A7, as the deletion logs show. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

do bbc / independent reviews not signify notability? i do think they do! Dribblingscribe 14:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I am uninterested in having discussions about CSD'd items. Take it to deletion review. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - what an absolute idiot you are. what you are saying is you are uninterested in the rule of law being applied and you are going to be some wikinazi and shit on someone's work? is that your finest act to date? people like you really offend me. Dribblingscribe 14:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. I may take the notability requirements to be more stringent than others, but I am interested inthe rule of law, or as we have it here on Wikipedia, the rule of consensus. thus, I ask you to go to DRV so that more people can be involved in the decision. And please, there's no need for your histrionics and name calling. There was nothing personal about the deletion or my reply to you; there should be nothing personal in your comments to me. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

looking at this page of yours i note that you are a repeat offender on this matter. histrionics is your reaction to somebody's request for fair treatment? very odd. Dribblingscribe 15:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Histrionics, such as "hahahahahaha..." and "mikinazi". - UtherSRG (talk) 15:25, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

"Before listing a review request please attempt to discuss the matter with the admin who deleted the page as this could resolve the matter more quickly. There could have been a mistake, miscommunication, or misunderstanding, and a full review may not be needed. Such discussion also gives the admin the opportunity to clarify the reasoning behind a decision. If things don't work out, please note in the DRV listing that you first tried discussing the matter with the admin who deleted the page."

I am doing what Wikipedia asks. Trying to talk to you. Open and honest. Final chance, will you step up to the mark? Where does the article fall down in your oh-so-humble opinion? Dribblingscribe 15:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for complying with the request. I've given my answer. I'm sorry you are frustrated by this. I'm not required to continue a discussion. You are requested to start one, but that is farther than things need to go before you go to DRV. And, I politely asked to to not have this conversation as I am uninterested in it. I have actively declined the opportunity to expound upon my position, and again, politely. You, on the other hand, have verbally attacked me and accused me of not "step[ping] up to the mark". I'm not required to do anything more than what I've done. Please just go to DRV and move on with it. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia asks that I "attempt to discuss the matter with the admin who deleted the page" and so this I have done. I am glad you admit to "actively (declining) the opportunity to expound upon (your) position" - we both agree you are failing to be transparent. I have not accused you of not stepping up to the mark. I have asked if you will. Please re-read what I wrote! There is a difference. I assume your attempts to try to accuse me of an attack is an attempt to justify your harsh treatment. If you are going to quote me then please do things correctly! Dribblingscribe 15:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I've restored the Dormon article, because it clearly asserts notability and supposrts this with multiple independent references. Seriously, maybe you should take a few days off? It's true that Dribblingscribe was rude, but you were in the wrong. DS (talk) 17:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll consider it. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Reasons and rationales

Uther, please believe me when I say that I know very well how much crap an admin has to face on a daily basis, what with all the garbage we have to delete.

But if someone does come to you and ask for an explanation of why the page was deleted, they deserve an answer that's a little more detailed than "read the deletion log". Okay? DS (talk) 15:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Generally, yes, but I was already aware that this user was uncivil. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Similarly, there's a line where "I interpret things a bit more strictly" translates as "actively disregarding the criteria". significance, not notability. And try to avoid deleting things under G4 because you previously CSDd them; that tag is to be used when an AfD on the subject has occurred. Ironholds (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ironholds (talk) - Uther's silence on this is deafening! Dribblingscribe 16:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Indiestu I set up a profile so I could start to write on wikipedia. why did you delete this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Indiestu (talk • contribs) 15:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

That's not your username. You should not edit others' user profiles. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Or rather it wasn't when you edited it. If you are changing usernames to avoid the warnings you have previously received, that's a bad move. - UtherSRG (talk)

I was asked to do it by him. He is a close friend. He is getting started. Is helping someone get started by putting to boxes signifying their favourite football teams such a bad move? If helping people is bad then this world has gone mad! Dribblingscribe 15:58, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

It also does not explain why you have deleted his profile? Dribblingscribe 16:01, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Restored. do try to avoid these kinds of edits. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

• Ryeland Allison. Not only is it not CSDable, it's not even deletable. As said, there's a line between "being stringent" and "failing to follow the rules" - you've crossed it. Read policy, understand it and apply it, or I'll take this discussion further up the food chain. Ironholds (talk) 17:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

UtherSRG, I agree that Jason Dormon was a very bad deletion. While it was correctly tagged as A7 at the time, by the time you deleted it, there were lots of references, and several assertions of notability that should have sent it to AfD at worst. "I am uninterested in having discussions about CSD'd items" was also not good.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Difficult users make for difficult situations. I'll keep an eye on those... - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

deletion

hi, i am new to wiki life, and so apologize if i am naive, but i put up a page today, Albert J Levis, MD which was quickly deleted. it was libeled for the following reasons: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject). i want to contest both of these assertions in that the page was not advertising anything, and the subject was significant in terms of addressing the bio of a researcher that has advanced a serious psychological theory. i turn to you because i received the alert message from you, although i know you did not delete the page. any advice would be much appreciated. thanks for your help, Mlevis (talk) 18:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlevis (talk • contribs) 18:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Please read the notability guides. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment

Uther,

I read your page today with a great deal of dismay. I worry about the example you're setting for new users, and the hostility that i'm seeing displayed here is troubling. I wonder if you'd consider taking a few weeks away from the tools? We'll keep the house in order while you do. But I think it's important that you recalibrate your decisions with the rest of the community. In my capacity as an administrator and volunteer, not as an employee action. - Philippe 18:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not hostile. I've been very calm and rational. I may have been short in my words, but I have not been hostile. Indeed, when faced with a rather rude user bordering on hostile, I was plenty patient and calm. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I think this is very much justified. I have never come across such sabotage and abuse. If we allow people to act like this then things will fall over. Dribblingscribe 23:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Please stop writing on my wall. You are not being helpful. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

It seems you have a fan

See User:UlherSRG. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful.... - UtherSRG (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Declining A7

I'm declining your A7 deletion request for Glyn Lewis. There are several sourced assertions of significance in the article, including "Lewis leads the Academic Unit of Psychiatry at the University of Bristol" and noted publications in The Lancet. A very cursory news search shows many articles wherein Lewis and his studies are quoted in reliable sources, including BBC News. There is absolutely no way that this article is a valid A7 candidate.--Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 19:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Legacy of the Battle of Little Big Horn AfD

If you'd care to withdraw the AfD nomination on Legacy of the Battle of Little Big Horn, I'll turn it into a redirect to Battle of the Little Bighorn#Aftermath, where the topic is already covered. —C.Fred (talk) 20:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I've just gone ahead and closed the AfD early. It's obvious that no article is warranted, but a redirect is reasonable. —C.Fred (talk) 20:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good enough to me. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Wish Upon A Hero

Hi UtherSRG- I wanted to repost the Wish Upon A Hero page that was deleted. We have edited the article language so as not to come off promotional and would love to submit it again for another round of review. Wikipedia suggested I contact you before trying to submit the article again. Thanks. StarGroupies (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Please post it here for review. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:59, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've submitted it for review, but you can continue to work on it. Note that it has moved, but the link above still works. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

SPEEDY DELETION TAG ON SUDAN NOW

I responded to your tag - any idea when decision will be made as to if it can be removed? --Jespah (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I responded there. You need to understand out policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Please be more careful

I've declined the speedy deletion of Achaean War. The article names the war's participants and the year when it happened, plus briefly addressing the historical background. By no means does it fit the "no context" criterion. I know that looking at a bunch of new articles, most of which should be junked right away, can make one careless in applying deletion tags, but please try to read more carefully. Thank you. A. Parrot (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2011 (UTC)