User talk:Captain Assassin!

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

How to Review Articles

Main page: Wikipedia:Reviewing

Step-by-step "how-to" for reviewing multiple edits

Go to Articles with edits awaiting review page and start reviewing but keep in mind the following:

Note: When reviewing multiple edits, bear in mind there may have been a good edit that has been removed by subsequent vandalism. Do not rely solely on what you see in the "pending review" page.

1. Check the page history regardless of whether the version you see contains vandalism.
2. If all the edits were made by one editor, and the most recent edit is vandalism, it is reasonable to assume they are all vandalism. Return to the review page, undo the series, and you are finished with your review. Go to 7.
3. If the most recent version is good, you can review the previous edit in the series from the page history, and accept all edits that way.
4. If the pending edits were made by multiple editors, review each edit individually from the page history. Undo any edit that is vandalism, a BLP violation, or clearly unacceptable according to review criteria. Each undo will create a new edit under your username, but will not be automatically accepted. Leave good edits in place, unreviewed.
5. Once you are satisfied that all inappropriate edits have been undone, you will be left with good edits. Check the most recent pending edit to be certain you've removed all vandalism. Review that edit.
6. This will clear the backlog of pending changes.
7. Don't forget to breathe!

Burhan Ahmed | Penny for your thoughts? 10:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't care with iaasi

Don't care with user "iaaasi". He is famous for his primitive type of chauvinist edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.2.98.93 (talk) 19:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC) - Note: The IP 84.2.98.93 is under sockpuppetry investigation(Iaaasi (talk) 12:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC))(

March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive a week away

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 00:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive

On behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, we would like to take the time and thank you for your contributions made as part of the March 2011 Good articles backlog elimination drive. Awards and barnstars will go out shortly for those who have reviewed a certain number of articles.

During the backlog drive, in the month of March 2011,

• 522 GA nominations were undertaken.
• 423 GA nominations passed.
• 72 GA nominations failed.
• 27 GA nominations were on hold.

We started the GA backlog elimination drive with 378 GA nominations remaining, with 291 that were not reviewed at all. By 2:00, April 1, 2011, the backlog was at 171 GA nominations, with 100 that were left unreviewed.

At the start of the drive, the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 101 days (Andrei Kirilenko (politician), at 20 November 2010, reviewed and passed 1 March 2011); at the end of the drive the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 39 days (Gery Chico, at 24 February 2011, still yet to be reviewed as of this posting).

While we did not achieve the objective of getting the backlog of outstanding GA nominations down to below 50, we reduced the GA backlog by over half. The GA reviews also seemed to be of a higher quality and have consistently led, to say the least, to marginal improvements to those articles (although there were significant improvements to many, even on the some of the nominations that were failed).

If you would like to comment on the drive itself and maybe even make suggestions on how to improve the next one, please make a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011#Feedback. Another GA backlog elimination drive is being planned for later this year, tentatively for September or October 2011. Also, if you have any comments or remarks on how to improve the Good article process in general, Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles can always use some feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles.

Again, on behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, thank you for making the March 2011 GA backlog elimination drive a success.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 21:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Formanites

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Formanites. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Forman Christian College. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Forman Christian College - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Quiggers1P (talk) 14:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

The information on the page was already included in the main article of the school. If you want to add alumni or any other information, you should add them to the article of the school. Quiggers1P (talk) 14:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

The Ravians article should not be on Wikipedia and I will get that merged into the main school. I understand your concern but there is no point in having two near-identical lists, you can mention the nickname on the school's article without any issues. Quiggers1P (talk) 14:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Rejathsopanam

Hello Assassin's Creed. I am just letting you know that I deleted Rejathsopanam, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (Assassin's Creed) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it sounds like a reference to the video game, Assassin's Creed. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account and use that for editing. Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus 01:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

AfD

At this moment, could you please stop nominating article for deletion. Instead, familiarize yourself with articles already nominated. See why and how the process is conducted. Please read Wikipedia deletion policy and Wikipedia:Guide to deletion before nominating deletions. You must give a reason why the article should be deleted. Also, remember to Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers... putting up and AfD 10 minutes after the article is created for having no references is not good. Bgwhite (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

You obviously don't agree with this by removing it from your talk page.

Please see WP:BEFORE on what to do before doing an AfD. Especially note where it states, "If the article was recently created, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, an associated WikiProject, or on the article's talk page, and/or adding a cleanup tag, instead of bringing the article to AfD. If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD.".

Also states: "Before nominating due to sourcing or notability concerns, make a good-faith attempt to confirm that such sources don't exist." Bgwhite (talk) 05:09, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, I have read that and I'll never again do this mistake, mistake happen by me, I am agree for this. Thankyou for advice and helping me.--—AssassiN's Creed ^(talk) 05:13, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

You are new to AfD. Things like this will happen and we all make mistakes. You have made some good nominations for speedy deletion. I've also noticed you put the autobiography tag on some articles incorrectly. Teemu Metso's article stands out. The creator of the article is a seasoned editor who creates alot of Ice Hockey articles. Just slow down and learn first and you will be fine. You may be interested in joining Wikipedia:New pages patrol. They have tools to help out looking at new pages. Also, Special:NewPages is a great place to start looking at all the new pages created. Please, if you have questions on anything, don't hesitate to contact me. Bgwhite (talk) 05:30, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

• Bgwhite offered good advice above. I've just been looking at another article that you took to AfD today: Koron (music). You opened the AfD discussion 7 minutes after the article was created. As was noted yesterday on another AfD, it is debatable whether it is good practice to take an article to AfD minutes after its creation. In this case, I also note that during that 7 minutes you had edited 2 other articles. That is insufficient time to have read, digested and followed WP:BEFORE. AllyD (talk) 21:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Naujawan Bharat Sabha

I have edited the page. Kindly remove the speedy deletion tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajayuv (talk • contribs) 06:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I have edited the page and rewritten it in my own words please remove the tag. ! Rajayuv (talk) 06:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Kamal Atatürk

Sorry, you can't A7 a school. There are some quite arbitrary rules on speedying, and that's one - it actually says it on the pink box (near the top). You can use PROD or Afd on school articles. Peridon (talk) 10:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

VideoZer

Hardly spam... Have another look and another try. Peridon (talk) 11:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I think this is an advertising article.--—AssassiN's Creed ^(talk) 11:59, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Have you actually read it? It's borderline on attack! Peridon (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But I think this is like a video streaming website, and this is an advertise.--—AssassiN's Creed ^(talk) 15:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Not everything about websites is advertising. Yes, this is a streaming video site. But they're not being very polite about it... Peridon (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Autobiography tagging

Hello, I noticed you placed a tag on an article about someone who died in 1948. That tag called the article an autobiography and indicated that there were biography of a living person concerns. Please do not use this tag on articles about people who have died. Please be careful to use tags only when appropriate to the specific case. I removed the tag. On another matter, I see that another editor has expressed concern that your user name is the name of a video game. My concern is that new editors may be intimidated by your name when you are trying to delete their articles. I suggest you consider a username change. Just my thought. Cullen328 (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Robert Padulo

I declined your speedy deletion request. Notability is claimed as the founder of that company. However, it is highly questionable. I encourage you to list it at AfD. LadyofShalott 15:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But Sir, this article has invalid reference, [1] check it and tell that He is it or another man, I reference site name of person is "LOUIS PADULO". Thanks for guide.--—AssassiN's Creed ^(talk) 15:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

First, I'm not a sir (look at my username :) ). Second, the source you found is just for another person. It has no bearing on the subject of this article. question is for the father of the article subject. Third, the speedy deletion tag you used is specifically for there being no claim of notability, which this article does have. LadyofShalott 15:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok sorry Mam, but this biography article of a living person should be deleted for giving no references or giving improper references, thanks.--—AssassiN's Creed ^(talk) 15:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

As I said initially, I encourage you to take it to WP:AfD. LadyofShalott 15:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for encouraging...--—AssassiN's Creed ^(talk) 15:54, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I started Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Padulo. LadyofShalott 17:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate tags on article Norman Criddle

This is the second time in 48 hours you have placed inappropriate tags on an article I started. The article Norman Criddle clearly does not violate NPOV policy, and it has 5 references in 6 inline citations for 6 sentences so it clearly doesn't need additional references. Over the weekend you put 5 inappropriate tags on my article Carpenter's Chameleon. They were removed and evidence of my query to your talk page has been removed too. It's looking like you are the one who is violating NPOV policy and you are targeting my articles in a deliberate fashion. I would welcome your justification for your actions. Cohee (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

autobiography tagging

Please stop from using the autobiography tag. Roos Vermeij, Nastja Kolar, Juha-Pekka Pietila, Lee Yong-Soo (footballer), Hamdi Abu Golayyel and Norman Criddle were tagged by you today and not one should have been tagged. All were done by experienced editors that have no connection with the subject of the article. Also many were tagged with refimproveBLP. For example, Nastja Kolar is a tennis player. Two references were given to Tennis organization that prove she is a player and notable. Nothing about the article suggests the articles was edited "by the subject or an institution related to the subject"... thus it doesn't warrant autobiography tag. The two refs given prove everything in the article, thus refimproveBLP tag isn't needed.

Also you did another AfD that relies on not references given. As I said yesterday, doing an AfD solely on the article not having references is not a reason for an AfD. There has to be a reason why the subject of the article is not notable. There are plenty of references out there on the web about Chamberlain. The question is does he meet notability guidelines for golf? In Chamberlain's case, no. He has not been on the European tour for atleast a year and has not won a tournament... This is the reason to bring to AfD and not that references are not given. Please, please be more careful. Bgwhite (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)