A tag has been placed on Template:MLBAllStarGame2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>((transclusionless))</noinclude>).

Thanks. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please refrain from using the term retards in your edit summaries? Thanks, Kingturtle = (talk) 21:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have I used it more than once? Turkeyphan^t 23:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please refrain from future use of the term retards in your edit summaries? Thanks, Kingturtle = (talk) 23:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle, I notice that it says in the old intro on your user page that your first edit was made in 2002. However, there is a known bug relating to page moves over redirects, where the page move is recorded with the wrong date; see the second-last paragraph of this section about moving pages over a redirect. Therefore, your actual first edit was probably this one. Graham87 03:47, 21 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You probably moved the CamelCase page around the same time you made this edit. Graham87 03:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thanks. However the account creation date listed on the user list is an estimate based on the (incorrect) first edit date in the database, because you created your account long before the new user log was established in September 2005. Therefore the account creation date seems a bit suspect to me, but you know more about your Wikipedia career than I do. :-) Graham87 03:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did a little research, looking at my earliest profile writings, and other postings about my history. I've put back some of that original language. Seems like a million years ago. Kingturtle = (talk) 03:40, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool, thanks for that! Graham87 15:06, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem. I must have later discovered the Camel Case edit as the "first edit" and changed it. I am curious why this is of interest to you. Kingturtle = (talk) 15:45, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just found your comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship (which I completely agree with, BTW), and went to check out your user page. I've done quite a bit of work on Wikipedia history (see my user page), and through that work I've learnt far too much info about the idiosyncrasies of the different versions of MediaWiki and other software that Wikipedia has used over the years. I've learnt not to completely trust any info in the database from before MediaWiki 1.5, especially edits relating to page moves and, by extension, account creation dates. Graham87 04:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I am LightBringer from the Hebrew Wikipedia & Wiktionary. In order to complete my account migration process, I need to create an account in the enwiki. Unfortunately, my username is currently banned in your wiki (see User:Lightbringer), and I can't complete the process. Is it possible to let me use my username? Please note that my account was created on April 29th 2006, and I am in no way related to User:Lightbringer.

Thanks in advance, 87.69.140.87 (talk) 22:48, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay. All fixed. See my message on your new talk page. Kingturtle = (talk) 23:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for your dedicated help! Is it okay if I redirect User:Lightbringer to my user page (to perhaps avoid future misunderstandings)? LightBringer (talk) 23:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll do that for you. It is a good idea, because the search engine doesn't recognize capital letters. So searches for User:LightBringer go to User:Lightbringer. Kingturtle = (talk) 23:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Once again, thank you for your help :) I appreciate it. LightBringer (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nice job confusing the heck out of me. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry about that. Does it all make sense now? Or can I clarify anything? Also, do you have any suggestions on how to make this less confusing for others?Kingturtle = (talk) 05:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added some lines to the article on Goethe. I need help with formatting Goethe's sonnet that I quoted. Currently, it runs continuously.

I would like it to be displayed like this;

Willst du die Blüthe des frühen, die Früchte des späteren Jahres, Willst du, was reizt und entzückt, willst du was sättigt und nährt, Willst du den Himmel, die Erde, mit Einem Namen begreifen; Nenn’ ich, Sakuntala, Dich, and so ist Alles gesagt. —Goethe

As I am new to wiki editing, I am a bit confused, as my learning curve is a bit slow. My apologies. Nmarbus (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By putting a colon at the beginning of each line, each line becomes indented. I made the alteration. Take a look at my edit. And then take a look at Help:Wiki markup for more formatting tricks. Cheers, Kingturtle = (talk) 04:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hm... edit conflict, heh. But yeah I also tried to edit and used Template:Quotation instead for consistency with the rest of the article style, but it doesn't look that nice considering it's cut off. Feel free to revert. --Obsidi♠n^Soul 04:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks good. Thanks, Kingturtle = (talk) 04:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like I did not convey what I intended to convey ?

Nmarbus (talk) 04:00, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Let me take a look. Kingturtle = (talk) 04:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks very much for the help Nmarbus (talk) 04:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Let me know when you have more questions. Enjoy! Kingturtle = (talk) 04:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi

I do not like being the bringer of bad news, nor inserting myself into no mans land, but I feel I have to let you know this, and please do not take this as anything other than someone trying to help another editor on MoS in all good faith  :¬)

MoS also goes on to say:

Family members with the same surname

• To disambiguate between family members with the same surname, use given names or complete names to refer to relatives upon first mention. For subsequent uses, refer to relatives by given name for clarity and brevity. When referring to the person who is the subject of the article, use just the surname unless the reference is part of a list of family members or if use of the surname alone will be confusing.

I think you were wrong in this matter unfortunately. Chaosdruid (talk) 16:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the input here. I appreciate your comments. I don't take it personally that my interpretation of MoS was rejected. There will be times when my interpretations are supported and times when they not. I am satisfied with the rationale people have presented supporting the use of first names in that article. And again, I appreciate your willingness to come to my talk page to discuss it. Best regards, Kingturtle = (talk) 16:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle. I recently received an email from a user who had emailed the bureaucrat email list about RTVing a day or two ago and had not yet received a response. Is there any chance you could take a look at that please? (Feel free to email me for more details if necessary). Thanks, NW (Talk) 17:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not sure why I didn't get that email. I am looking into that. In the meantime, have the user email me via my userpage. Kingturtle = (talk) 18:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have emailed you with further details. NW (Talk) 19:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I am working on it now. Kingturtle = (talk) 16:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi KT. This was a marginal RfA, it was closed at at 1:24 pm, Today (UTC+7) and a further four supports were received after its official closure time of 09:02 (UTC+7). I had !voted 'oppose' but certainly do not feel strongly either way about your closure. However, would it be too much to ask, that as this was marginal, you could offer a few words of rationale as 'crats often do in cases of close calls? Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 06:39, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm in the midst of writing a statement. Just a few more minutes. Kingturtle = (talk) 06:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to write that note, KT. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 07:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(edit conflict):::Thanks KT. All noted and very much appreciated :) Kudpung (talk) 07:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kingturtle, as an opposer I thank you for a statement and judgement that was correct and proper. Jusdafax 08:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ditto. That was a well thought out and well written statement. Thank you.--Chaser (talk) 22:39, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Ted Kaptchuk. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. 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. Basket of Puppies 02:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, Basket of Puppies, I did explain in my edit summary, and I did explain my reasoning in the article's talk page. Please respond to my comments in that talk page. Kingturtle = (talk) 02:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please immediately cease in section blanking. If you continue then you shall be reported for violations of WP:3RR and disruptive editing. Basket of Puppies 02:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't threaten me with a 3RR when I've only reverted once. You, on the other hand have reverted twice. But rather than get into any type of war, lets discuss this in the appropriate talk page. Kingturtle = (talk) 02:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[1]

Please, recall that the rollback feature should be used against obviously unconstructive edits only. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. It is always helpful to review old policies. Cheers, Kingturtle = (talk) 00:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for moving, dropping you a cherry vlaai :) --Brandmeister t 02:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I posted an edit to the JaGa RfA talk page describing an error I made, namely posting a !vote while you were closing the page. (When I opened it, it didn't have a warning flag and I didn't notice the deadline. Oops.)

Sorry!

Just wanted to let you know. Please advise if I need to do anything to clean it up. Thanks! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 18:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I chose to remove the edit you made after I closed the RfA. It is best to keep true to the closure edit. I hope that's okay. Let me know. Sincerely, Kingturtle = (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's fine. I just didn't want to screw up the process and I thought the best thing to do was speak up sooner, rather than later. Thanks! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 00:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect United Stats. Since you had some involvement with the United Stats redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 15:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see WP:REFUND#Mega Genius and User talk:Deadalus821. From the talk page, it is clear his relentless efforts to spam his company have worn out everyone's patience; but now (presumably after email contact with you) he has posted yet another draft at REFUND and seems to hope that we can develop it for him there. Without checking the history first (which was foolish), I wrote a reply saying he would have to register an account; I have now withdrawn that, but I am really not sure how we can proceed. The view of the blocking administrator and three reviewing administrators is that if he is only here to promote himself there is nothing to unblock him for, and in fact his talk page access has been revoked because the discussion was going nowhere. In those circumstances I do not think allowing him to develop his article via IPs at REFUND is a practical way forward; either he must be unblocked to have yet another try (and having read his talk page I would certainly not be willing to do that), or he will have to be told to get lost - in effect, banned. Advice, please? JohnCD (talk) 23:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

He came to me in emails thinking that as a bureaucrat I had some authority in this case. I informed him that I had no authority as a bureaucrat, but I could speak to him as an administrator. He complained to me in emails that he was being censored. I told him it was not an act of censorship, that at least eight different administrators deleted the articles in question, and that I found their rationales to be sound: 1) that the articles were for advertising / promotion, 2) that the articles failed to meet the guidelines for inclusion, 3) and that the articles infringed on copyright issues. I explained to him that because he refused to comply with the actions of the administrators, in spite of over a dozen warnings, the account was blocked.

He then asked me my opinion of the deleted articles. I told him that the articles were in my opinion promotional and not notable, and that in my opinion the admins in question acted with patience, and that their decisions were fair.

He wanted more clarification on the policies in question, so I directed him to Wikipedia:NOTABILITY, Wikipedia:PROMO#How_not_to_be_a_spammer.

He then sent me a long rant that I could not understand. I informed him that my opinion had not changed, and if he wanted another opinion to state his case at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion. If no one who frequents RfU thinks it is salvageable, then the issue should be put to rest for good. If you'd like me to tell him that, I am happy to. Kingturtle = (talk) 03:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have read through everything and replied further at WP:REFUND#Mega Genius to say that I agree with everyone else: there is not the independent comment required for notability, everything is from press releases, and I have no suggestion except that he should give up. I expect he will be back to you. JohnCD (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for further correspondences. Kingturtle = (talk) 00:28, 21 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The creator of the image is unknown, and I have updated the file as such. Kingturtle = (talk) 21:27, 12 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I please be a sysop. I have all the qualities for being one and I am the owner of RareWiki. I can be a really big help. Thank you. Get back to me ASAP. Slipknot Darkrai (talk) 20:27, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a process for becoming an admin on this wiki. It involves developing experience on this wiki as an editor and as a community member. It involves gaining from this community (through a specific procedure) a consensus that you are qualified enough and responsible enough for the administrative tasks and community involvement for this wiki. Generally speaking, you will need to develop 6 to 12 months of experience here before you would be seriously considered. For more information on what the expectations would be, read here: Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. Kingturtle = (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,

As an editor who was involved with the recent ELNO discussion, "Spam links becoming standard practice,"[2] I am inviting you to comment on the proposal to rework the definition of "Official Link".[3]

Regards, ELNO Checking (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle. Please take a look at the Ghurid dynasty article where two users fail to accept academic sources and the consensus among scholars. Instead, they vandalize the page, insult other Wikipedians, or use YouTube as a "proof" against common academic literary works. One of them may be a new sockpuppet of User:NisarKand.

BTW: you have a received an E-Mail regarding another subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.137.253 (talk) 18:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

:-) --Lysozym (talk) 23:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sent you one. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 08:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

replied. Kingturtle = (talk) 16:39, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings, It was recently suggested that WikiProject US Presidents might be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. I have started a discussion on the projects talk page soliciting the opinions of the members of the project if this project would be interested in being supported by WikiProject United States. Please feel free to comment on your opinions about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 13:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Manifestdestiny.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I saw you were editing, would you look at this edit request for me, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 00:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries, another administrator has taken care of it. Regards. Off2riorob (talk) 15:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 01:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lousy stub, apologies. I just filled in the missing districts one day. I'll try to expand this shortly. Regards.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can we at least post that it's no longer lost, since we have the film it's self, even if you say links to the Pirate Bay are against guidelines? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Didshe (talk • contribs) 18:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First we need to find a reliable source the says it was 'lost'. Then we need to find a reliable source that says it was found. Hopefully, this story will be picked up by a news organization. It isn't Wikipedia's role to write the news story. It is Wikipedia's role to represent what the sources represent. Kingturtle = (talk) 19:26, 14 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, how about we say nothing about it being lost or found, but mention that it's available via torrent sites. Since, you know, it is. We have the actual tracker. That seems like a pretty reliable source. Didshe (talk) 07:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:27 Club#Unsourced entries need to be removed. Please feel free to participate and provide any insight or opinion that you feel relates to the unsourced entries in the list. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of most experienced baseball players never to play in a World Series 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/List of most experienced baseball players never to play in a World Series 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Who is the creator of the Tyler Clementi article do you know how I can find out? Helpthesouls (Helpthesouls (talk) 22:34, 24 September 2011 (UTC))Reply[reply]

It was I who started the article. Dozens of others have done important work in improving it. Kingturtle = (talk) 23:39, 24 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I understand this edit of yours, which removes an external link to a copyvio site. But I do not understand this edit of yours, summary "removing lyrics". (Similar edits by you are here and here.) Briefly quoting lyrics in an article about a song or poem is an established fair use practice, and is explicitly permitted by WP:LYRICS. Many FA and GA articles do such quoting, in various forms, as also mentioned in WP:LYRICS. So on what basis are these removals being done? Wasted Time R (talk) 10:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was making those edits based on "Most modern songwriters and poets have not released their works under an open content license and therefore their inclusion in Wikipedia violates their copyright". That trumps all, as I see it. Kingturtle = (talk) 23:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What you quote is why the entire lyric cannot be included. But being under copyright does not prevent fair use quoting of small portions in the article about the song, just like a small image of the single cover can be used in the same article. Are you aware that many FA articles about songs, including 4 Minutes (Madonna song) and Baby Boy (Beyoncé Knowles song) and City of Blinding Lights and so on, have 20-second audio samples in their articles? If those, which feature the lyrics, the singing, the chords, the arrangement, the everything, are permitted, under what interpretation would an equivalently small sample of the printed lyric not be? Wasted Time R (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of World Series starting pitchers 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/List of World Series starting pitchers 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

rename

Thanks for having renamed my account ! :) Have a nice day Gbrlhtclcq (talk) 07:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A I have a question user:{Wikisdirty} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisdirty (talk • contribs) 13:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Kingturtle/Archive9! 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

Hi Kingturtle, I'm writing to ask whether you would consider closing a contentious RfC (and monitoring it until then if needed) that is due to close on or around 4 November. It is here on whether to remove from the lead of Wikipedia:Verifiability that "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." The proposers want to remove "not truth" and some other words from the lead, and move them further down, to remove the emphasis.

There has been some concern today because an admin who had commented on one side in the RfC (Sarek) tried to close it early, though notification had not been wide, and consensus was arguable. There is some discussion about it here on AN/I.

We've therefore asked that it be held open for at least the full 30 days and closed by more than one uninvolved admin. Black Kite has volunteered. Would you be willing, as a crat, to join him in that effort? The reason I ask is that this is a key point of a core content policy, so I'd like to make sure the closure is as uninvolved and considered as possible, taking both numbers and comments into account. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 04:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: the link above in the second sentence should read that the RfC can be found at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#RFC - Compromise proposal re first sentence  Unscintillating (talk) 19:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slim, I just wanted to mention I've read your request, and I am reading up on the issues at hand. I am not yet sure if I will or will not participate in the eventual closing of the RfC. More later, Kingturtle = (talk) 20:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, thank you, and thanks for considering it at least. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 00:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kingturtle can you please let me be an admin and bureaucrat on wikipedia because I want to block vandals and spammers and I want to grant Users admin rights. AwesomeSponge —Preceding undated comment added 01:58, 21 November 2011 (UTC).Reply[reply]

I cannot. There is a process. You might want to start here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#Nomination_standards. Kingturtle = (talk) 02:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, you can't be an administrator with only four edits. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 13:58, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I know you from various baseball pages, and since you're an admin maybe I can pick your brain for an opinion. This has been bothering me for sometime, but the bullpen has consistently been used as a source on many articles, including its own template. This disturbs me because the bullpen is an open wiki itself and contains user-generated content. I can't see how this can be used as a source, and doubt it should be even used as an external link (with few exceptions, of course). What is your opinion of the use of that wiki on this wiki? --(Dynamic IP, will change when I log off. I edit sporadically, so I'll check back here for a response in a day or so.) 64.85.214.214 (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Busy at the moment. I will get back to you on this...possibly in a few weeks...after the semester. Kingturtle = (talk) 19:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, no rush. --(Dynamic IP, will change when I log off.) 64.85.216.55 (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article List of birds of Santa Cruz County, California has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Bird watching guide for a single small town in the US. Not encyclopedic.

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. Daniel 05:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article List of birds of Santa Cruz County, California (continued) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Bird watching guide for a single small town in the US. Not encyclopedic. For some strange reason a is "continued" from another article.

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. Daniel 05:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of birds of Santa Cruz County, California 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/List of birds of Santa Cruz County, California 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. Daniel 15:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TJeff.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 07:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey there Kingturtle, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Kingturtle/Temp.

• See a log of files removed today here.
• Shut off the bot here.
• Report errors here.
• If you have any questions, place a ((helpme)) template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Volume I, Issue III February 2012 Front cover | Feature | News and announcements | Humor | Want ads To contribute to the next newsletter, please visit the Newsletter draft page. ARS Members automatically receive this newsletter. To opt out, please remove your name from the recipients list.

re: RTV. Thanks. is there any chance you could also sort out the references on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Serine_protease_mechanism_by_snellios.png. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.107.17.214 (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 March 30#Usprimary templates. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Requested articles/Afghanistan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. Ncboy2010 (talk) 20:05, 31 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't redirect my user page again. I have good eyes. Thank you. Charles04 (talk) 04:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

3 1/2 years ago, a user with the name Charles04 requested that his username be changed. What you saw was the remnants of that. Kingturtle = (talk) 20:54, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, but I'm not that user and 'Charles04' isn't a sufficiently obscure username to construe as an attempt to create a sock or whatever Wikipedia call these things. What you did (and it was you and not a robot) was extremely annoying. It took me ages to work out what was going on, and even when I had and tried to correct it the system at first wouldn't let me until I had reported a "false positive". Charles04 (talk) 03:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed a user's name at his request 3 1/2 years ago. I do not understand what that had to do with you. Or are you Jcspurrell? Kingturtle = (talk) 12:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited John Curulewski, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Young (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) 11:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Hilary Michael Milko has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable person. Nearly all google results are mirrors of Wikipedia. Nothing to show Y&R role was notable, or even existed. Election results are just that. Results. Not significant coverage.

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. DarkAudit (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hilary Michael Milko 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/Hilary Michael Milko 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 high-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. DarkAudit (talk) 14:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Suicide of Tyler Clementi 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/Suicide of Tyler Clementi (2nd nomination) 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 high-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. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle, it worked, a new version of the drawing without a signature is available. All the best, Chrisurlaub Chrisurlaub (talk) 07:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks so much! You do beautiful work. I hope you can do more some time for Wikipedia :) Kingturtle = (talk) 01:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're welcome :) cu later! Chrisurlaub (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Regarding your query in the talk page, I have put in something about subscribers. -Thoughtfortheday (talk) 13:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi I work at the Gerald Ford Presidential Library and Museum, and we are uploading materials to Wikimedia Commons. We have a number of documents that might be of interest to you - they are located at Wikimedia, Category:Documents at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum. If you are interested in writing articles/stubs, I may be able to provide you with pictures from our archives as well. We have a limited number of artifacts, also at Wikimedia, Category:Artifacts at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum. Let me know if I can help in any way, and please feel free to pass the word about these docs; I'd love to see some content generated around them....thanks! Bdcousineau (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate that you and your library value the significance of Wikipedia. I'll try to find some time over the holidays to look into your offers :) Kingturtle = (talk) 01:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very much appreciated. Happy Thanksgiving. Bdcousineau (talk) 02:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Can you comment on the status of the project that you initiated to create the Portal:Baseball/Anniversaries pages? It appears that it was never finished (with 94 out 0f 366 days created) and no one seems to be maintaining them (as a whole). -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 20:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The concert is still ongoing, five hours after it began. It would be helpful (with edit conflicts and everything else) if you could wait until after it's over to start enforcing Wikipedia policies in such a strict way. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 05:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is helpful to inform people what the policy is so they don't waste their time entering info that is against policy. I'm sorry we feel differently about this, but it is a Wikipedia article, not a blog or a news site. Best, Kingturtle = (talk) 05:28, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is just a friendly reminder to use Edit Summaries when making edits. It is helpful to other editors. Thanks! Kingturtle = (talk) 17:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. My edits are generally cosmetic and/or minor grammar fixes. They are usually not particularly substantive. Thus, I generally assume that the edit content is self-explanatory. Hence, I am not typically in the "habit" of typing an edit summary. So, I am just letting you know why. Thanks for the suggestion. Was there any edit in particular that concerned you? In fact, when I do indeed make a "substantive" edit, then I will provide a summary. (As I did when I removed the word "reported" from the count of "wounded" in the Info Box of the Sandy Hook shooting article.) Please let me know (at my Talk Page). Thanks again. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was reading through the edit history of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Rather than have to look at each edit, it is easier to read the edit history and the summaries. If you are just making grammar fixes, then you can just click on 'this is a minor edit'. Then we can see the m next to your edit, and we know it was just a grammar thing. :) Kingturtle = (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I will try to get in the habit of marking my minor edits with that "m". Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Following the drama at BN, I'm trying to come up with a statement all Crats could agree to. Please take a look, below. I am quite content to do this onwiki -we have always worked transparently, except where secrecy is essential (ie RTV). I think we should be able to wordsmith a statement acceptable to all, and I think it's an important thing to do.

1. In my opinion, this issue has come about through an unfortunate proliferation of documentation: policy, guideline, how-to etc
2. I am not convinced that there is community consensus on all of the points encapsulated in those various pages
3. I am unhappy at what may be described as some or all of: inconsistencies, inaccuracies or lack of clarity in that documentation
4. I do not believe that any of the issues we have faced have been caused by Crats trying to widen their powers
5. I would like to see the issues clarified, based on consensus, and for the documentation to be updated accordingly
6. I'd like to thank Griot-de for generously withdrawing the rename request

Signed [crat sig] Lmk what you think. Many thanks, --Dweller (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and thanks for tagging this for notability back in 2008. The article has survived 2 AfDs, but both were pre-2008 and guidelines may have been different / the standards for inclusion may have been lower. My preliminary checks on Google scholar didn't confirm notability, but some of the comments at the AfD suggested his work is commonly used in US schools. I'm loath to remove the tag as I don't think notability's clearly demonstrated. You may want to take it to AfD or the Notability Noticeboard to resolve it. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 18:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Based on my skimming his work again, I removed the notability tag. The article needs some major work though. Kingturtle = (talk) 20:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for looking at it again. Boleyn (talk) 09:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Kingturtle/Archive9,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.

Best regards, — Hex (❝?!❞) 12:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC).Reply[reply]

that the link to Family tree on your user page led to a wikipedia article rather then your family tree. I also feel (because men have feelings too) that if I had uploaded File:Oliver-bin_261.jpg it would have been up for deletion as being a copyright violation within a day or two. I am glad that yours was not. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've done extensive genealogy of my 'bloodlines'. Sadly, in this day and age of identity theft, I keep all that private. As for the Bob Feller sculpture/mural, it may have survived because it is public art. Copyright issues are complicated. Believe me, I've had my share of uploaded images deleted (File:HazelCarter.jpe, File:Annahowardshaw.jpg, File:Zog2.jpe, File:Gasmask.jpe, etc.) and article creations deleted (Alfredo Witschi-Cestari, Mohammad Saleheen, Hilary Michael Milko, Three-letter vowel-less English word, etc.). It's all part of the process here. No need to take it personally. It's never an attack on your soul. :) Kingturtle = (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speaking of which, I actually got asked about that image at Feller's FAC (just noticed it was back in the article now). Would you be able to provide more info on the pic? I think it might be okay, but freedom of panorama is one of those things that remains confusing to me copyright-wise, and not one I like tackling. Namely, is it a mural or a sculpture? I think it's the former, and if so we may be in the clear; in either case an author would be helpful. Wizardman 01:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I put it back when I noticed it was removed. It had been removed without mention of why in the edit summary. It is a mural-style sculpture embedded into a wall of the Bob Feller Museum. That part of the wall, going from the base up to brick-change is about 10 or 12 feet high. This person's photo online gives you an idea: http://www.triphip.com/uploads/view/77/-1.jpg

I could email the museum to find out more. Kingturtle = (talk) 04:25, 21 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you're able to do so that would be very helpful. Doesn't help that since this is a sculpture that's a part of the building, it means the freedom of panorama status utterly up in the air now that I've delved further into it. Wizardman 00:50, 26 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have emailed the museum to find out who owns the rights to the mural's image. Kingturtle = (talk) 14:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have learned for myself that your beliefs are not true. Seeing what you're doing right now, I think that you will regret living your life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.187.97.22 (talk) 00:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle. I hope I am doing this right. You welcomed me but I know very little about Wikipedia beyond the very very basics. I am writing because I created an article, James McGregor Stewart, and also the same article with lower case letters, James mcgregor stewart. I would like the latter deleted. Someone has already proposed merging it but really speedy deletion is all that is required. However, it is crucial that the right one be deleted as I have been improving the correct page. Thanks. Rmalhotr (talk) 06:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks like GiantSnowman fixed the issue. You should be able to go back into each of the articles histories to find any phrases that got lost. Let me know if you need help figuring out how to do that. Kingturtle = (talk) 13:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi i just wanted to request a article to be labels as de orfand ed i helped to it, it's been a long time that's why i had to start all over again, becuase my user expired a long time ago and since the past week i had to rebuild Lego gun (Postmahomeson (talk) 21:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Postmahomeson (talk • contribs) 21:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I went ahead and made some changes. The article is improving slowly. Thanks for your work! Kingturtle = (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have deleted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mainstream_films_with_unsimulated_sex for an obscure reason without any recent discussion. The last discussion from 2009 indicated that the page should be kept. I strongly advice you to undelete it. Deleet (talk) 09:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article was deleted as per community consensus in late 2009. What was left was List of mainstream films with unsimulated sex as a redirect to the article Unsimulated sex. It is my estimation that it is highly unlikely that someone would come to Wikipedia and search for "List of mainstream films with unsimulated sex". So I deleted the redirect. I consider it a maintenance deletion, and I am sticking to that decision. If you would like to take further action, please take the issue to Wikipedia:Deletion review. I am happy to state my case there, if need be. Sincerely, Kingturtle = (talk) 13:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There was no consensus in 2009. Please read the discussion. The ratio of keep to delete was about 3 to 1. If anything, that's a consensus to keep. Deleet (talk) 03:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Admins don't count !votes; they assess the arguments and base their AfD decision on reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments, which Juliancolton (the uninvolved admin) laid out in his statement. His arguments seem to me to be rational, and with policy in mind. Nevertheless, what I deleted recently was not the article. It was merely a redirect to Unsimulated sex. Kingturtle = (talk) 12:26, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Massive open online course, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mook (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) 18:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Fixed Kingturtle = (talk) 18:46, 9 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My original description was "Avalokiteshvara sandstone statue, Khmer Empire, pre-Angkor Period. Late 7th Century." What more do you want? Kingturtle = (talk) 18:19, 13 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "missing description details" message was triggered due to a lack of author information: "This file has no author information, and may be lacking other information." Cheers, —Theopolisme (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been identified as someone who does a large number of renames. If you could visit meta:Rename practices and explain your renaming practices and policy, we would appreciate the effort. We are making this request to help us better understand local renaming practices as we work towards SUL finalization. Thank you for your time and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. MBisanz ^talk 22:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gladly. I am at an education conference right now. It will have to wait until the weekend. Thanks, Kingturtle = (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Bot, your claims are so vague, I cannot determine what your issue is with the image descriptors. Kingturtle = (talk) 16:20, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wanted to let you know that I've redirected the 2013 London attack article you started to 2013 Woolwich attack which had become far more comprehensive as of the time I encountered both articles (ca. 03:00 GMT on 23 May 2013).

I copied the link to the telegraph report [4] which was cited in your article to the Woolwich-titled article.

However I didn't incorporate the 2013 London attack article's text into the Woolwich article as doing so seemed it would be somewhat redundant and I'm falling asleep and not really wanting to analyze what would and wouldn't be redundant, and I'm wary of adding information reported shortly after the event which might not turn out to be entirely accurate.

So yeah of course you should re-add any valuable information I've incidentally removed due to the redirection-without-copy&pasting of the article's text. Riyuky (talk) 06:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. To be honest, I looked for such an article before I started that one, but could not find it. A search for "Ingrid Loyau-Kennett brought nothing; there was nothing in current events or wikinews. I was surprised that I couldn't find anything, and that's why I started my version. Thank you for discovering my version and making the appropriate adjustment. Kingturtle = (talk) 10:29, 23 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• As a listed DYK participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions00:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi king turtle I would like to ask you to do me a favor and edit a semiprotected article about Miely cyrus cuz it needs some updating cuz I know ur a admin also please exuz my English

 Postmahomeson (talk) 22:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle. I saw your name listed on the DYK page as someone who can help with paraphrasing, copyediting and DYK reviews. I was wondering if you could review this DYK nomination and provide your feedback. I'm looking for additional opinions and curious with your specialties, if you agree that the Stanford section is considered close paraphrasing or if anything else in the hook or article needs improvement. Thank you.Hmlarson (talk) 23:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited London Chess Classic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Howell (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) 09:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Kabul Soccer Club has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication club has played in a national competition as required by WP:NFOOTY let alone received significant levels of coverage to pass GNG.

While all constructive 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. Fenix down (talk) 13:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kabul Soccer Club 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/Kabul Soccer Club (2nd nomination) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Fenix down (talk) 13:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi Cousin, Very nice profile! I'd love to talk with you about an admin I am having fits about, yet I think he is stalking me so I can't "talk"..egads. Anyway bravo on your work here. Cubaking (talk) 19:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not stalking you, reverting your additions of your self-published book all over our articles by using a search. Dougweller (talk) 08:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

.......:-) I am not going to sully this page with a back and forth, the conversation speaks for itself. Have a nice weekend KT! Cubaking (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cubaking, I've reviewed the case and I see no incidents of stalking. Wikipedia maintains its integrity through the hard work of dedicated volunteers. I would have reverted the same edits of yours if I had encountered them. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your own work. If you need more clarification on this, please let me know. Kingturtle = (talk) 20:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw that you had contributed to the article about Dr. Bodo Otto. I am curious- would you happen to be one of his descendants, by chance? I'm just curious- several of my neighbors are direct descendants of the doctor... 76.6.156.148 (talk) 03:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When I saw your page it was truly inspirational. Thank you so much for all the articles you've contributed to.

Hi Kingturtle, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:World coin gallery has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magioladitis (talk) 03:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear global renamer,

You have not yet subscribed to the global renamers mailing list. Considering the diverse background of all renamers, and with the intention to create an efficient platform for direct internal assistance and discussion, we strongly encourage you to do so. Please subscribe here and send me or Trijnstel an email to confirm it is you requesting it. Should you have any questions or comments, please let us know.

Thank you, Savh^ñ 23:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Hi. Can you please look at your inbox? I've send you an email. Trijnstel_talk 09:30, 11 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi Kingturtle. We've received a subscription for the global renamers mailing list. Can you confirm that it's you who requested that? Can you please send me an email so I can confirm the email address is used by you? Thanks. Trijnstel_talk 21:47, 19 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Welcome to Night Vale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fault Lines. 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) 09:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kingturtle. You have new messages at Gourami Watcher's talk page.
Message added 03:47, 7 March 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.Reply[reply]

--GouramiWatcher^(?) 03:47, 7 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 24 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elizabeth Bauer Mock, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Elizabeth Bauer Mock was the first former Taliesin fellow to join the Museum of Modern Art staff? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Bauer Mock. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Heather Mercer 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/Heather Mercer 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 14:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(asking important Wikipedians)

Hi Is it worth trying to obtain contact details for the victim's family, to get their approval for the Wikipedia entry on Kylie?

Given that, unlike some other famous cases, there is no Kylie Maybury Foundation or such founded by the family, they may value their privacy. Paul Austin (talk) 09:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

no permission is needed, nor appropriate. This is an encyclopedia. As long as the article sticks to facts supported by credible sources, and as long as the article maintains npov, then the article is fine. Kingturtle = (talk) 01:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

freedom award and free lunch
Thank you, veteran editor interested in Afghanistan, baseball, birds, and event calendars, and believing in the power of non-violence, for quality articles such as Freedom Award and Elizabeth Bauer Mock, for images and service as a bureaucrat, for listing under awards first the ones you gave, for "There is such a thing as a free lunch. You just have to offer it", - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (6 February 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow! Thank you. That's so kind of you. Have a great day. Kingturtle = (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Alexander Stepanov page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle, I would appreciate if you would please consider restoring the main page blurb as it was at the beginning of the day. Your revision has not in my view helped the prose. As a non-sysop I cannot alter it myself. Cheers and thanks. —  Cliftonian (talk)  09:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry. I was afk all day yesterday. Didn't see your message until today. Kingturtle = (talk) 19:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's okay, thank you for replying anyway. Keep well and have a nice day. —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Ebkassler.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Message to all bureaucrats)

There is an ongoing discussion about implementing some kind of standards for administrative and bureaucrat activity levels; and activity requirements for bureaucrats have been explored several times in the past. I've prepared a draft addition to Wikipedia:Bureaucrats that would require at least one bureaucratic action every five years to retain the bureaucrat permission.

In the past, I've been hesitant of such proposals but I believe that if the bureaucrat group as a whole is seen to be actively engaged, the community may be more willing to grant additional tasks to the position.

Please let me know your thoughts. I'm not sure if this actually applies to any of us, but if you have not acted as a bureaucrat in over five years, you might consider requesting removal of the permission or otherwise signalling that you intend to return to bureaucrat activity. –xeno^talk 14:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Message to most bureaucrats

A bureaucrat chat has been opened by Maxim at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rich Farmbrough 2/Bureaucrat discussion.

Wikipedia:Bureaucrat discussion suggests notifying bureaucrats on their talk page as well as BN, hence this courtesy note. –xeno^talk 16:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cyberpower678/Bureaucrat discussion

I would welcome input from other bureaucrats in relation to the outcome of this RfA.
Many thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) for WJBscribe (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place regarding a proposal to create a community and bureaucrat based desysoping committee. The proposal would modify the position of bureaucrat. Your input is encouraged. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators/RfC for BARC - a community desysoping process. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Liz/Bureaucrat discussion

I would welcome input from other bureaucrats in relation to the outcome of this RfA.
Many thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) for WJBscribe (talk) 12:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Queen sized bed. Since you had some involvement with the Queen sized bed redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - TheChampionMan1234 10:02, 8 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Following a community discussion ending August 2015, consensus was reached to remove the bureaucrat permissions of users who have not participated in bureaucrat activity for three years.

To assist with the implementation of this requirement, please see Wikipedia:Bureaucrat activity. Modeled after Wikipedia:Inactive administrators and similar to that process, the log page will be created on 1 September 2015. Bureaucrats who have not met the activity requirements as of that date will be notified by email (where possible) and on their talk page to advise of the pending removal.

If the notified user does not return to bureaucrat activity and the permissions are removed, they will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFB. Removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon the affected user in any way.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. –xeno^talk

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Comprehensive health insurance (Maine) 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/Comprehensive health insurance (Maine) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 14:39, 24 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:EltajSarfarli-August2013.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:05, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:The Taliesin Fellowship, A Directory of Members.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:16, 9 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

13:38, 31 March 2008 Kingturtle (talk | contribs) deleted page Face-pic (G11: Blatant advertising: advertisement)

I have recently become aware of the fact that there was a social networking cite called 'Face-pic' that predated Facebook by at least a year. I think that this information should be reflected on Wikipedia somewhere as it pertains to the history of social networking (e.g. Friendster has a page). I went to start a page with this name and noticed that you had deleted it. I cannot see the old page, so don't know what its content was, but Wikipedia asked me to ask you before creating the new page. Tibetologist (talk) 03:16, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will copy and paste onto your talk page the text from the last edit before I deleted it. Best, Kingturtle = (talk) 03:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, I will try to salvage something of historical interest and reopen it. Tibetologist (talk) 05:29, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kingturtle...its been awhile. I am in the process of updating Harry Dennis (musician) wikipedia page. I am having trouble adding info directing into the container that houses his image. I want to add affiliated names, groups that he was a member in and the record labels he was produced under. I searched Wikimedia Commons with no success. I tried inserting using the symbols displayed for the current text that displays. Can you help me with this endeavor? --DA01 22:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DLOFT01 (talk • contribs)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect True bat. Since you had some involvement with the True bat redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 14:37, 19 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A year ago ...

freedom award and free lunch
... you were recipient no. 1184 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. I had no idea I'd earned such a wonderful distinction. Most thanks, Kingturtle = (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:14, 16 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi K. A user, who was community banned as a result of this discussion, has been systematically evading his ban. Among his activities has been widespread admin-shopping, targeting your talk page among others. I have reverted him a couple of times, but as he persisted, I semi'd the page for a week. Sorry if this is against your wishes, but this guy has been getting on everyone's nerves for years now. Regards, Favonian (talk) 19:34, 20 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I saw that post. It was obvious to me what it was. Poorly crafted too! Anyway, thanks for keeping house. :) Kingturtle = (talk) 20:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cracy. Since you had some involvement with the Cracy redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --BDD (talk) 20:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kingturtle. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

In the article First Lady of the United States has been written:

The First Lady of the United States is an unofficial title and position traditionally held by the wife of the President of the United States, concurrent with the president's term of office.

However, in the article List of First Ladies of the United States says:

This list included all persons who served as First Ladies, regardless of whether they were married to the incumbent President or not...

Well, how it is really with:

  3: Martha Wayles Skelton (or should be as Martha Jefferson?) Died nearly nineteen years prior to his presidency → Thomas Jefferson

  7: Rachel Donelson (or should be as Rachel Jackson?) Died after election, prior to husband's inauguration → Andrew Jackson

  8: Hannah Hoes (or should be as Hannah van Buren?) Died eighteen years prior to his presidency → Martin Van Buren

21: Ellen Lewis Herndon (or should be as Ellen Arthur?) Died nineteen months prior to his presidency → Chester A. Arthur

Finally, how about Jane Wyman, if "regardless of whether they were married to the incumbent President or not"? She was the first wife of Ronald Reagan 1940-1949.

--85.76.78.121 (talk) 16:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingturtle.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kingturtle. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Godsy/Bureaucrat chat

I would be grateful for your input in the above discussion. Many thanks, WJBscribe via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:33, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of US actions since 1945 that have been considered imperialistic. Since you had some involvement with the List of US actions since 1945 that have been considered imperialistic redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Amusingly, since I've never archived any of my talk page, it still has a note from you about a school deletion debate ;) and now there's a village pump proposal to set aside WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES for secondary schools . . . some things never change! Great to see that you've stuck with making this wonderful project what it is. Glad to see you here upon my return after a decade or so off. . . cheers! Chris vLS (talk) 03:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GoldenRing/Bureaucrat chat

I would be grateful for your input in the above discussion. Many thanks, WJBscribe (talk) 12:15, 7 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User:Gears of War/Sandbox/Ubidays. Since you had some involvement with the User:Gears of War/Sandbox/Ubidays redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Lordtobi (✉) 13:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'm Aunva6. Kingturtle, thanks for creating Upper Westside, Atlanta!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. you can run WP:Refill to fill in bare URLS, but it's best to fill out the reference at creation. I use proveit to edit refs

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

-- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:25, 3 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article List of corporations in Gdańsk has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:LISTN. Only one notable company

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Ajf773 (talk) 05:30, 8 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of battles 2001-2100. Since you had some involvement with the List of battles 2001-2100 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 09:26, 23 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kingturtle. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Earth in science fiction 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/Earth in science fiction 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 03:00, 14 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hazel Carter 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/Hazel Carter 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Kingturtle. You won't remember me, but you were kind enough at one point, over ten years ago, to suggest I apply for the mop. I was not interested then (and am even less so now), but you were the first to ever make that suggestion, so I've always remembered you fondly. Anyway, I was looking at some names of people I admired from the days when I was regularly a Wikipedia editor (2005-2009), and noticed that you have not edited for about four months. I just wanted to say that I truly hope you're doing well, and will be back to your work here soon. Merry Christmas to you, Your Majesty Chelonii. Unschool 04:17, 26 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. You are now listed as missing. Should you ever return or choose not to be listed, you are welcome to remove your name. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I never left ;) Kingturtle = (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You stopped editing for six months. It seemed to be a fair assumption. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indeed. I understand. :) Kingturtle = (talk) 03:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And when I saw that my comment to you had been autoarchived, I too assumed that you might be gone. Good to see that you are not. Unschool 00:59, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello fellow bureaucrats, in regards to a current RfA that has met its time, I would like your assistance in judging the community consensus presented in the discussion at Jbhunley's RfA. Your input would be most welcome at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jbhunley/Bureaucrat chat. Best regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:37, 7 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I was wondering why WP Nonviolence had become inactive...would there be a better way to add more content about nonviolence on Wikipedia? Please reply here and ping me. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 00:26, 28 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kingturtle. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Famous suicide. Since you had some involvement with the Famous suicide redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just as a heads up, I raised a thread about 'crat activity review at the bureaucrat's noticeboard, and mentioned you in it since your last 'crat action seems to have been around Feb. 2016. Hope all is well. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Newsletter Nr 6, 2018-12-25, for WikiProject Genealogy (and Wikimedia genealogy project on Meta) Participation: This is the sixth newsletter sent by mass mail to members in Wikipedia:WikiProject Genealogy, to everyone who voted a support for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise. (To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) Now 100 supporters[edit] At 3 December 2018, the list of users who support the potential Wikimedia genealogy project, reached 100! A demo wiki is up and running![edit] You can already now try out the demo for a genealogy wiki at https://tools.wmflabs.org/genealogy/wiki/Main_Page and try out the functions. You will find parts of the 18th Pharao dynasty and other records submitted by the 7 first users, and it would be great if you would add some records. And with those great news we want to wish you a creative New Year 2019! Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! Hello Kingturtle, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply] Spread the love by adding ((subst:Seasonal Greetings)) to other user talk pages. Cheers from your WikiProject Genealogy coordinator Dan Koehl. To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

a Wired Magazine article that mentioned you (and me) for the first time in a while (New Year's Ting, maybe?) and was wondering if you were still here. Yup. Sort of me too. Carptrash (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kingturtle, in accordance with the Wikipedia:Bureaucrat activity policy it appears that you have been inactive from bureaucratic activity for at least 3 years (report). It is possible we missed a qualifying action, and if so would appreciate your help in updating the report. Should you wish to remain an active bureaucrat, please check in at WP:BN. If your 'crating days are behind you, you may formally retire by posting at BN or to the stewards at meta - or just carry on and we will process the removal in a month. Please note, this has no impact on your administrator access. In either event, thank you for your lengthy service. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 05:06, 1 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Awesome

Ten years!

-- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:05, 6 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kingturtle, in accordance with the Wikipedia:Bureaucrat activity policy it appears that you have been inactive from bureaucratic activity for at least 3 years (report). It is possible we missed a qualifying action, and if so would appreciate your help in updating the report. Should you wish to remain an active bureaucrat, please check in at WP:BN. If your 'crating days are behind you, you may formally retire by posting at BN or to the stewards at meta - or just carry on and we will process the removal in a few days. Should this removal proceed, you may request future access from the community at any time via WP:RFB. Please note, this has no impact on your administrator access. In either event, thank you for your lengthy service. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 22:52, 25 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SRP files

Hello again Kingturtle, in follow up to the above, your access removal has been requested at SRP (meta:Special:Diff/18908426) and noted at WP:BN (Special:PermaLink/885590568#Inactive_bureaucrat_removal). Thank you again for all of your prior service. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I noticed you removed a photo from Charlotte Church on the grounds that it is copyrighted. You are correct that there is a copyright notice in the photo itself! Well spotted! However, Wikimedia Commons archives quite a bit of copyrighted material, in fact anything that isn't PD is typically copyright. The thing of it is, that the photo in question, along with all the rest, is licensed under Creative Commons. That doesn't invalidate their copyrights, it just permits re-use. Every contribution you and I make to Wikipedia is copyrighted, but we've licensed it under Creative Commons to be re-used by the project according to those terms. Hope this clears it up - I've restored the lovely photo to the article. Cheers. 2600:8800:1880:FC:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 03:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are enough photos out there of her that can be used that do not have the copyright information on the photo. Kingturtle = (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 16 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:15, 4 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Kingturtle/Archive9,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 15:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Disappearing. Since you had some involvement with the Disappearing redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:21, 27 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Indian Ink/disambiguation. Since you had some involvement with the Indian Ink/disambiguation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. DannyS712 (talk) 06:10, 2 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of historical maps 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/List of historical maps until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article The Afghan Women has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as unsourced since 2009

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:46, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Victor Samuelson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:ONEEVENT biography, seems to fail WP:GNG/WP:NBIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:51, 21 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

I was wondering whether you could help in promoting Poverty Industrial Complex to the DYK section of the main page. It is a stub right now. I wrote it because I saw the netflix series on the trials of Gabriel Fernandez (boy who was murdered by his mother and stepmother while privatised social services failed to save him). It's somewhat part of a series I'm writing on commercial sexual exploitation of children. Please, let me know whether this will be possible for you. I'm not a native in English so I'll need proof reading etc. Best, --Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 12:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Jay Kaye. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 28#Jay Kaye until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Seventyfiveyears at 16:16, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Champion of the Common Man 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/Champion of the Common Man until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:31, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings,

Please do visit Talk:Cynthia D. Ritchie#Slander of Benazir Bhutto to examine discussed edits, if you find topic interested requesting your opinion, there.

For neutrality purpose opinion request is being made to users who significantly edited different sides of Pakistani political spectrum articles.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 12:17, 7 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Flower (American band) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable band

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flower (American band) 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/Flower (American band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.

Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Dunn Tire. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 11#Dunn Tire until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Aᴋʀᴀʙʙıᴍ ^talk 14:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Bullpen has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 19:35, 28 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello User:Kingturtle. I am writing to you, and to others, as I noticed you were one leading editors working on the List of Christmas Carols article in the past. The article has since gone into disrepair and I and others have been trying to bring it back to the status you had achieved, however, there is one particular editor who has continually reverted any edits made and who is currently serving out a block due to this type of behaviour on another article and who insists popular Christmas songs such as The Christmas Song, Silver Bells and others are Christmas Carols (you will get a better understanding by observing the talk page) in recent years. I would be grateful if you could collaborate and return the article to its pristine state that you and others had achieved in the past. Also, I would be grateful if you could give Christmas carol and Carol a look over too. I would like to see the articles achieve Wikipedia:Featured articles status in advance of the holiday. Thank you 37.18.134.184 (talk) 16:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]