User talk:BD2412/Archive 1

Active discussions

Status: Active. bd2412 T


You know, I never got a welcome here - guess I'll have to do it myself...

Hi BD2412/Archive 1. Welcome to English Wikiquote.

Enjoy! BD2412 T 15:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

1919 Bartlett'sEdit

I recognized a number of the redlinked Bartlett's entries as being already on Wikiquote under different titles:

These are just the ones that I recognized offhand. There are doubtless some others as well. I hope these replacement links will be of some use to you. Best wishes. - InvisibleSun 02:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that will be quite a help - I'm going to redirect all of those redlinks. BD2412 T 02:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Well I redirected almost all - Beaumont should have an individual entry, as he has some quotes that are not part of his collaboration with Fletcher. BD2412 T 02:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


Hay...just saying hi! 5 outta 7 21:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


Actually, you are doing it at the same speed as the bot. The bot can go a lot faster, but I don't want to overwhelm the servers. Cbrown1023 talk 01:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)



Thank you for your work, but I disagree on some your edits including John Chrysostom. Since "Chrysostom" is a title/nickname, not family name, and according to the tradition, he is refered always "John Chrysostom" (as well Francisco of Assisi should not be referred as "Assisi, Franicisco of"). For antient/medieval authors, your assuming rule cannot be applied I think. Therefore I would like you to revert your edits on those authors. If you would like to argue further, I would invite you to WQ:VP where we would have a discussion with much wider audience. --Aphaia 07:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Please note that I have only moved the existing sort tags out of the categories and into the default template. In other words, someone else had already put |Chrysostom, John in a category, and I just moved that existing sort instruction. I see that you've already taken care of Chrysostom. Cheers! BD2412 T 14:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thank you for your explanation. I see. Cheers! --Aphaia 16:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

300 transcriptEdit

I believe some of the quotes for the 300 movie could be wrong and I find have found a transcript to check them. However, do you think we could fully trust that transcript?

The only way to be sure is to see the movie over and over again! :-) BD2412 T 17:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


Would you like to get more involved to this project as admin? --Aphaia 05:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I have to think about it - thanks for the suggestion. Cheers! BD2412 T 12:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I would certainly support you! :) Cbrown1023 talk 22:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Family GuyEdit

You wrote:

Would it be disruptive to your trimming efforts if I were to subdivide this article by season (as is done with The Simpsons)? Cheers! BD2412 T 18:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
No, not at all - although it would still most likely require trimming, even after you split it up. I've actually not been working on this page for a while (it needs a lot of trimming still), but feel free to split it up. Unless you plan on working on the amount of quotes, you should probably post a {{checkcopyright}} tag on each season's page. ~ UDScott 11:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thanks I will do that. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


Please do not tag this for speedy deletion. The subject is notable enough. -- 21:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Notability is not the criteria for inclusion in Wikiquote, quotability is. Cheers! BD2412 T 19:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary linksEdit

Thank you very much for your ongoing mass-addition of Wiktionary links to theme articles, which in retrospect should have been an obvious element of our standard theme template. I've rectified this omission for future articles. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I'm just enjoying the fixing-up. There are a few theme articles for which Wiktionary has (or had) no entry. The harder part is figuring out how to insert Wikiquote links into the Wiktionary entries! BD2412 T 02:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Please see my nomination of you at 17:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Thank you, I have accepted the nomination. Cheers! BD2412 T 18:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sysop statusEdit

Congratulations, you are now an administrator here. ~ Kalki 23:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Wow, that was pretty fast! Thanks, I am grateful, and will use the tools sparingly. BD2412 T 23:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Well done; welcome to the club.--Poetlister 17:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Bartlett's 1919 IndexEdit

I am volunteering to transfer all of the Shakespeare quotations. Since the search yields 1639 results, it is something I would be doing over the next month or two. Although we have a Shakespeare page, we also have separate pages for each of his plays. For this reason, I propose striking his name ahead of time so as to prevent possible complication of efforts with other editors. I wanted, however, to consult with you before doing this, since it would be an anomalous thing to do. - InvisibleSun 23:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like a very good idea - please go ahead with it. I'm certain that we already have the vast majority of Bartlett's entries on the bard, but clearing the list will be a feat, and avoiding duplicated efforts in the interim would be a blessing. Cheers! BD2412 T 23:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


Glad to see you active in closing VfDs. However, you should formally close the discussion by editing it and putting {{vt|Delete}}-~~~~ at the top and {{vb}} at the bottom. Best wishes.-Poetlister 22:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the tip - and for getting those as well. Cheers! BD2412 T 22:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandal accountsEdit

The one I just blocked here (IJstLrndAlotAboutStargateAtWP) I've just spent 20 minutes clearing up after on en wb. Same user has created an account on wiktionary - I've reported it but you may get there sooner (if you are around). Cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

He's made no edits at Wiktionary, but I've blocked the account. Massive vandalism of one wiki is enough! Cheers, BD2412 T 17:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
they created accounts on four wikis at about the same time but I think they had so much fun on en wb (here) that they had no time to play elsewhere - thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 19:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hannah Flagg GouldEdit

I hadn't done much research. I think there's an article in the American Dictionary of National Biography (not available online) and was planning to check University College London library. Poetlister 23:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Stephen BenjaminEdit

I declined the prod request. It seems to me that he probably is notable. Please send to VfD if you want more opinions. Poetlister 23:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

VfD quibbleEdit

Could you please strike your earlier "delete" vote in Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Arthur Norman, now that you've registered another one? It's not so much an issue with closing admins as it is in making clear to the community (especially for the frequent VfD newbies) that one "vote" per person is the rule. (Just striking the bolded "delete" is sufficient, I think, to communicate the message while leaving your earlier rationale readable.) Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


Is the name of the poem really "Why the Robin's Breast Is Read"? --Ubiquity 04:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

That would be something in the way of a Freudian slip. Thanks! BD2412 T 06:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


Solid support for tightening our standards. I think requiring a reliable source for all quotes is a good first step and one that can be enforced. Thanks for spearheading this idea. Take care, FloNight♥♥♥ 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I'm not immediately as concerned with the sourcing as I am with the quality of the quotes themselves - but sourcing probably helps that as well, as something quoted elsewhere is most likely "quotable". Cheers!

Oh, just saw the draft of the quotability standards and you are my hero. The criteria presented are an excellent start and I can think of a few recent highly negative quotes that would fail under those questions. Thanks for the thought put into that draft. -- Greyed 19:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

New Year's resolutionEdit

It's an excellent resolution and I'll help if I can, but no promises.--Poetlister 12:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Attributed and UnsourcedEdit

I don't think that it's policy to use "Attributed" as a heading. There are three possibilities:

  1. You are happy that the source is reliable; move to sourced
  2. You don't trust the source; it is unsourced
  3. The source suggests that the person did not actually say the quote; it is misattributed.

Happy to discuss.--Poetlister 22:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

If the source says he's rumoured to have said something, put it in Sourced and add a note saying "Attributed: see ..."--Poetlister 22:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Compilation copyrightEdit

Pardon me if I'm rehashing things we've already talked about in our lengthy discussions last year; my memory has been misbehaving of late. But I've been wondering for many months now just where I got the phrase "presentation copyright" — protection of the selection and arrangement of existing material — as I couldn't readily find it mentioned on the U.S. Copyright Office's website. I finally did a little digging and found that many other people call it a "compilation copyright". I am putting together some references on my near-term to-do page for use in a new "Compilation copyright" section for Wikiquote:Copyrights. I thought I'd better check with you to see if I've finally got the right name and idea here. Thanks for any advice. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Compilation copyright is just as correct. Of course, when you have a compilation of facts which are not individually copyrightable, the copyright subsists in 1) the particular selection and ordering, if any creative thought is required to select and order those facts; and 2) presentation elements other than the facts themselves, such as fonts, styles, background colors and images, and the like. BD2412 T 14:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


hi! can u please delete We are on good and on bad forever. It's a load of rubbish. A wrong, direct translation from Polish (I'm a polish native speaker). Nothing worth remembering. Thanks! 17:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Closing VfDsEdit

Please don't forget to sign your VfD closures. Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


In my revert editing summary I used "WQ:" prefix, which doesn't work for generic links, sorry. It should be "Wikiquote:" instead, i.e. Wikiquote:Village_pump_archive_3#Maximal_length_of_a_quote.3F. You can comment further here, or on another talk page if you prefer (maybe start another discussion on village pump regarding maximal length of quotes, if you would like). iddo999 13:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Urgedhands blockEdit

I'm afraid your suspicions were correct about this apparently innocent new user. After doing a CU on the obvious vandal accounts, I identified "Urgedhands " as a sockpuppet of the guy who created all six of the accounts in the timeframe you saw. But you were right to undo the block with only circumstantial evidence. When you see something suspicious like this, just ask a checkuser to look into it. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced Quotes by PopeEdit

I have an edition of Pope which contains most of the quotes now in the Unsourced section of the Alexander Pope page: The Poems of Alexander Pope, ed. John Butt, sixth edition (Yale University Press, 1970). It is subtitled "A Reduced Version of the Twickenham Text." (There's no ISBN because it predates the appearance of ISBN numbers.)

Here are the quotes and accompanying information as found in this edition. I've included the spelling, capitalization, italicization and punctuation as found in the edition.

  • For he lives twice, who can at once employ
    The present well, and ev'n the past enjoy.

    p. 117: Lines 10-11 of "Imitation of Martial, Book 10, epig. 23"; written c. 1716, published in Poems on Several Occasions (1717)

  • There, take (says Justice) take ye each a Shell.
    We thrive at Westminster on Fools like you,
    'T was a fat Oyster — Live in Peace — Adieu.

    p. 832: Lines 10-12 of "Verbatim from Boileau." Written c. 1740. Published 1741.

  • Who dare to love their Country, and be poor.

    p. 707: Line 14 of "Verses on a Grotto by the River Thames at Twickenham, composed of Marbles, Spars and Minerals." Written 1740. Published 1741.

  • Of Manners gentle, of Affections mild;
    In Wit a Man; Simplicity, a Child.

    p. 818: Lines 1-2 of "Epitaph on Mr. Gay, in Westminster Abbey." Written 1733. Published 1733.

  • The Mouse that always trusts to one poor Hole,
    Can never be a Mouse of any Soul.

    p. 98: Lines 298-299 of "The Wife of Bath her Prologue, from Chaucer." Written c. 1704. Published in Steele's Miscellanies, 1713.

You're doing an incredible job on the Pope quotes. I hope that what I list here can be of some use. - InvisibleSun 02:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I think this will just about finish the job! BD2412 T 02:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

What is an unsourced poem?Edit

Great job on William Allingham. But I wonder, if we have a line from a named poem, isn't that a source? Ideally, we should link it to a web site (as I did for "The fairies") or a page in his collected poems or an anthology, but is it necessary? Cheers.--Poetlister 14:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Do we not require a date of publication for a work to be considered fully sourced? And for poems, don't we generally require line or stanza numbers? Right now what we have is a collection of quotes imported from the public domain 1919 Bartlett's Quotations (plus one that was already there) - but Bartlett's has made errors from time to time, so I consider those quotes unsourced until I have checked them against another authority (but for now my goal is to transfer all the Bartlett's quotes over, and consider sourcing as the next round). BD2412 T 15:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
The point of having sources is so that readers can verify accuracy. We don't have an editorial board, and our pages can change at any time, so we must provide reliable, verifiable sources for our material, just like Wikipedia. Since poems aren't typically published by themselves but instead included in collections, we should always include specific publication information of the physical or electronic work in which the quote is found as quoted. Arguably, we don't need to include page numbers for short poems, but there are poems the size of novellas, too. Some poems also have multiple titles, or are cited in works that otherwise make it hard to find the given title, so I'd argue that we should recommend including page numbers wherever possible.
One problem we have is the dual meaning of "source". Quotes have original sources, which may not refer to publications (e.g., any speech, a letter from Thomas Jefferson to some other famous figure, Yeats's "The Second Coming"), but they also have many published sources that may disagree with each other. It is vital that we insist on citation of specific published sources so that anyone can at least theoretically attempt to verify that the quote cited on Wikiquote matches its representation in the cited published source. We may try to find "better" sources for any given quote, but an ambiguous or unspecific cited source undermines the primary use of sources for wiki reading. In cases where we know of variations or disagreements where the most accurate version is not clear, we can include multiple sources, each tied to the version it cites.
By this practice, Bartlett's 1919 is a reliable tertiary source. Any quote cited from this work (with page number or hyperlink of a reliable copy) should be placed under "Sourced". That doesn't mean that we can't improve the source or find a more accurate version, any more than citing a source for a statement in a Wikipedia article is the last word for factual information there. Without an editorial board, Wikiquote readers must make up their own minds about the validity of the sources, and are always welcome to find better ones. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Then I shall so mark them - I'll be traveling next month, but will attend these when I get back in June. Cheers! BD2412 T 06:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome responseEdit

Thank you for friendly welcome!As you se get me a very Secret Account name:J. Milch! So now nobody can´t figure out that my name is Jan.M!Wasn´t Clever you Think? All the best to you and Cheers from in a Still Rainy and Cloudy,Gothenburg.--J. Milch 04:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

  • It's my pleasure! Especially since we're both C. Wright Mills fans! BD2412 T 05:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandal accountEdit

Please ban this vandal account Special:Contributions/Charitwo_is_an_evil_mexican, thanks. --Charitwo 17:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Done. BD2412 T 17:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

As you're an adminEdit

Can you take a look at User_talk:Kalki#Uhh? Maxim(talk) 01:28, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok. BD2412 T 01:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for correcting my mistake on the QOTD. I wasn't working from my normal machine, where I have many templates and forgot that I had been editing the July 10 page to prep for July 11, and not actually the July 11 page. ~ Kalki 02:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm just happy I didn't screw anything up! BD2412 T 03:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


Hey. Just wanted to know what's wrong with reflists? ^^ --Koveras 16:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

See the ongoing discussion at Wikiquote:Village pump#Reflist. Cheers! BD2412 T 04:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

User removing interwikilinksEdit

Hello! User:Arbok is persistently removing interwiki links to the Norwegian wikiquote on Life and Loneliness (See the respective histories). He's reverted messages left by User:Ranveig and myself on his userpage[1][2], and claimed that we're commiting vandalism by attempting to add interwikis. Could you please get him to put a stop to this? Thanks. Sorry to bring this to your talk page, but I couldn't find a general forum for requesting administrator intervention. -- Vadakkan 00:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Those are not real languages! That's why I'm reverting your edits! - Arbok 00:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me? Norwegian (nynorsk) is a real language. -- Vadakkan 00:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, then, I apologize for hurting your feelings. - Arbok 00:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't matter whether they are real languages. If there was a Klingon Wikiquote, it would be legitimate to have interwiki links to the corresponding pages on that project. Interwikis do not assert the legitimacy of the language linked to, only the existence of a Wikiquote page in that language. BD2412 T 01:27, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Against Proposal to Disband WikiquoteEdit

Hello my dear fellow friend and contributor. I am also highly against this "disbanding" or getting rid of altogether of wikiquote and/or separating it from its sister wiki-projects. You know that I support your every say in the proposal section on the wikimedia site, as I posted earlier, but I don't know how else to provide aid in strengthening your argument. I am here out of sympathy for the same cause since I too have contributed to this project heavily and hope to continue to do so in the future. Let me know if there's a vote/tally we can participate in so that we may sway it in our favor. We must notify as many devoted contributors in order to win this fight since, after all, we both genuinely love wikiquote heavily. Thanks again mate. - Zarbon 04:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a dead issue. A few alarmists raised obviously unnecessary alarms, and the bulk of the response from non-Wikiquote people has been a collective shrug. However, the best defense against this effort is to join the effort to trim non-notable quotes out of pages on copyrighted works. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
After reading through the pages of discussion over the copyright issues for WQ in various places, I'd like you to know that I think WQ is a valuable site, with a purpose the other Wikimedia branches can't adequately duplicate, and I appreciate your efforts to preserve the project. Kudos! --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων 04:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, BD2412. I appreciate your works and inputs both on meta and here. I agree with you what our best defense is. You are doing a great job. --Aphaia 10:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate the support, but I don't think the effort was ever likely to succeed. Cheers! BD2412 T 04:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikisource importEdit

I have pulled down all of the text at Wikiquote:Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers and the bot is now uploading it to Wikisource now. The Wikiquote pages can now be deleted. John Vandenberg 06:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Since I am still intent on using them to sort quotes into appropriate pages, I will dismantle them bit by bit. Thanks! BD2412 T 01:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

WQ:VP split?Edit

Could you please give a look and your opinion to Wikiquote talk:Village pump#Split?? --Aphaia 05:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

October QOTDEdit

I just noticed that the redirect to the October QOTD is a broken link. I also see that someone vandalized the page. Can you fix the link please, from the main page, upon clicking the archive and going directly to October, it should allow us to see the entire month's suggestions, but instead it links to a double relink of the same page without anything on it. - Zarbon 16:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I see Kalki has fixed this. BD2412 T 02:12, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes, Kalki fixed it. Thanks for keeping track of it my dear comrade. - Zarbon 13:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


Call me picky by all means but I think the "nom" for admin should have CU run on it. Like you I would be very surprised if there was not a connection. I'm "rusty" here but will you ask Aphaia? I took the liberty of removing the "15,000" edits tag from that user...:) Cheers --Herby talk thyme 14:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Frankly I don't see the point. The "user" appears harmless. BD2412 T 19:26, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

VfD vote mixup?Edit

The reason that you gave for your vote at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion#Doug Larson appears to have been meant for Wikiquote:Votes for deletion#Kyle Dunnigan. - InvisibleSun 00:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. BD2412 T 02:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for your kind words supporting my nomination for adminship. I will try not to make a mess as I learn to use the tools. ~ Ningauble 02:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome, and never hesitate to ask a fellow admin for advice! BD2412 T 04:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


I am bringing this issue up because I don't particularly like the way Kalki is handling the situation. For one, he removes the votes of some users such as waheedone...fossil, but leaves the votes of some other users such as lyle. I am not against the removal of their votes, I am in favor of it, but when a basis or rubric and basic guideline is applied to voters, where a user would need to show contributions, and many before voting, so to speak, some of these users have no history whatsoever. I'm glad that Kalki takes initiative at removing some of the votes, but what angers me is his constant derrogatory reference to these users as "sockpuppets" of mine. I already said that I don't have any sockpuppets and this was proven through checkuser, in fact. But this continued effort of his at defaming my reputation is what annoys me. Also, the very fact that he leaves the votes of people such as lyle, who also have absolutely no contribution at all other than the qotd suggestions, proves that he only wants votes cast that seem to coincide with his suggestions. Basically, he has been removing the votes of some users because they seem to agree with many of my suggestions, for the most part, and he is leaving the votes of other non-contributors just because they rate his higher. This is a discrimination, if you will, of opinion. Here's what I believe should be done to clear the situation. I believe that the votes of all users who do not have any history other than the qotd suggestions should be removed. There should be this simple rubric that only long-time and constant contributors and administrators should be voting in the suggestions. That is also why I would like your own votes cast in the qotd suggestions, because I'd much prefer the genuine votes of people such as yourself rather than random people who come just to vote. Please help me to execute this guideline thoroughly by your personal participation and have Kalki remove votes by other non-contributing users as well. Zarbon 16:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I understand your concerns, but I have rarely participated in QOTD and it is really not something I'm interested in getting involved in at this time. I do agree that all votes by non-contributors should be struck (not deleted, though, just struck). BD2412 T 03:20, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad you agree with me to that extent, but Kalki still won't acknowledge these issues. He basically removes whoever he feels and leaves others. I've brought this up a few times already. Maybe it would do more good if you told him to strike the contributions of all non-contrubutors. We seem to agree about how this fundamentally should be handled for the most part. Zarbon 03:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

Thank you for your formatting help at the page Crime. Cirt (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Quotability of video gamesEdit

You got that right! I have been tempted to suggest removing the category link from the browse bar on the Main Page because it is an invitation to read and contribute to an almost uniformly awful category of articles. Almost, but there are a few quotable games. ~ Ningauble 14:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Please do suggest that - I can't recall a single instance where I have ever heard anyone actually quote a line from a video game! BD2412 T 18:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I did suggest it at Talk:Main Page but, although a few folks have visited the page, no one took an interest in this proposal. Meh. ~ Ningauble 16:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I rephrased the proposition as a negative checkoff. :-) BD2412 T 19:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. To borrow from Keynes (apparently), I was trying to "push on a string" when I should have pulled. ~ Ningauble 21:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


Hey there, could you take care of CAT:CSD? They have been in there for a while now. I wouldn't want those pages staying here for too long. The quicker they are speedy deleted by an administrator, the better. – RyanCross (talk) 08:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Done! BD2412 T 19:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Two more waiting if you can get to it. Thanks, RyanCross @ 07:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Ovechkin VFD discussionEdit

You wrote:

I wouldn't call it a "speedy" keep - from my view, that implies that the nomination was faulty. BD2412 T 03:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the term speedy keep is meant to signify that improvements made to the page make it an obvious case to be kept, and there is really no longer a need for the full review period. It does not make any comment on the original nomination (the original condition of the page defintiely justified its nomination). We have used this before with success. ~ UDScott 22:42, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Angry Video Game Nerd pageEdit

Could you please explain why the AVGN page was deleted? Thanks. -- 02:41, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "BD2412/Archive 1".