This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

For when you get back: per WP:RELIST, users relisting a debate for a third (or further) time, or relisting a debate with a substantial number of commenters, should write a short explanation (in addition to the ((relist)) template) on why they did not consider the debate sufficient - "final relist" is not really sufficient as an explanation. Just a heads up. ansh666 02:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Orange County. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Minor barnstar
	Thanks for your time and efforts in relisting AfD discussions, an oft-unnoticed task that helps to keep matters running smoothly. North America1000 02:42, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Northamerica1000: Don't mean to rain on your parade, but I and many others don't share that sentiment. Mass-relisting discussions that have received no recent discussion - especially uncalled-for third relists - instead of letting an admin clean up only serves to clutter up logs more, not make things smoother. ansh666 03:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My barnstar to this user stands. Discussion closures based upon a formed consensus are superior to unilateral decision-making by users. No comment about third relistings. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:30, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Gadget/proposals. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Pull quote. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of senior officers of the Argentine Navy. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Music1201, I remember at some point, you've performed round-robin page moves. Thought I'd share a script here (js) that semi-automates page swaps for convenience, and thought you may want to try it out if you ever encounter the scenario. You'd simply click "Swap" and enter a page destination, the script performs the 3 moves as necessary (saves time having to manually go through the move form 3 times). (It doesn't correct redirects afterwards, that's still manual)

Anyway feel free to adapt this script as you see fit, cheers :) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 02:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jane Austen. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Came across this AfD by accident. Looked at the article, went to AfD it myself, saw it had just been closed, and I think I'd like you to review that close. How do two delete votes, with no keeps, with valid delete rationales, equal no consensus? If you want to re-open it, I'll add a third delete - that article is atrocious. MSJapan (talk) 01:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I second MSJapan above. I think Music1201 closed it due to low participation, but usually relisting for a third time helps. Music1201, if you don't mind could you relist? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree. It should have probably been relisted, closed as delete by an admin, or if no consensus then mention WP:NPASR. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:19, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you mind relisting? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 05:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also am struggling to understand how a discussion with two "delete" votes, no "keep" votes, and a comment was closed as "no consensus." Rebbing 11:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC for patroller right. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:New York. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Music 1201,

Just curious why I was chastised and accused of vandalism when inputting biographical information without citing, when all other biographical information has no citations what so ever. I did revise and cite what is arguably general knowledge as per your instructions and am happy to do so if required by all. Just checking.Teacheristudent (talk) 14:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page observer comment: Your addition is inappropriate because we try to avoid needlessly disparaging people. The reasons for Mr. Roger Ailes' departure from Fox News are irrelevant to his residency in Garrison; all that needs to be said is that he is a former CEO of Fox News. (Notice that the entries for other residents don't go into details.) Some of your other edits to that article, for example, adding that Mr. Ailes is "quite the ladies [sic] man" (diff) or changing the line to read: "Roger Ailes, Fox News, and self proclaimed 'ladies man' lives in Garrison" (different account; diff), are clearly unacceptable and could lead a reasonable editor to believe you were trolling, deliberately vilifying a living person, or otherwise acting in bad faith. Rebbing 14:55, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. The statement, "Roger Ailes, and self proclaimed 'ladies man' while agreeably is snarkey, the comment is about Mr. Ailes own actions. That there are a multitude of accusations against a person who is accused of abusing power in the most demeaning way should be notable. If someone is going to use Wikipedia to brag about their place of residence, or the place of residence is going to brag about the person and list their positions of power, then all accomplishments AND failures are fair game. What I hear being said is, "It is okay to display a person's accomplishments or positions of power, but not their failures or abuse of power." In other words, the powerful are not accountable. In this world, Richard Nixon was just president and Hitler just was a leader. And yet, also, noted on that page is Patricia Hearst's bio with a note about her life not in the kindest light either, with no footnote or citation. So, is Wikipedia wanting it both ways, or is there just a bias in favor of protecting some over others?

Another problematic issue bringing to mind fair and balanced; I answered the call to provide a citation when writing biographical information, and now suddenly, that is not good enough, so the entry is once again deleted?

You're now creating a moving target, which is absolutely unfair. Be consistent. I think the constant deletions smack of total bias and could be interpreted as censorship. Honesty and freedom comes at a cost as sometimes it is not at all flattering to those who brag they are out to protect those values.

And finally, Mr. Ailes is no longer with Fox News so at the very, very, very least, be accurate. That FACT should be noted. Teacheristudent (talk) 18:46, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Help talk:Hidden text. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]