User:Blnguyen/Top

    This user is a cricket pundit for the Times of India, the world's largest distribution daily English language newspaper. Details/disclaimer

    This user is a cricket pundit for the Mint Wall Street Journal - [ http://www.livemint.com/articles/2008/12/05231402/A-captain8217s-legacy.html]

User:Blnguyen/UB

• User:Blnguyen/Contributions
• User:Blnguyen/DYK

FOR ANONS, I WILL DEFINITELY REPLY HERE. FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, THIS MAY BE HERE OR AT YOUR TALK PAGE. IF IT IS A MULTI-PARTY DISCUSSION, THEN DEFINITELY HERE

Requests

• Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park - Genghiskhanviet (talk · contribs)
• Economy of the Republic of Vietnam - Genghiskhanviet (talk · contribs)
• Michigan State University Group - Kevin Forsyth (talk · contribs)
• Nguyen Tri Phuong - Magnifier (talk · contribs)
• Phan Thanh Gian - Magnifier (talk · contribs)
• Vietnam War - Wandalstouring (talk · contribs)

Everything else

Left comments. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:30, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't got yelled at yet. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

?? What for? Me or you? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You, for nominating Booth. :) Aaroncrick (talk) 07:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, feel free to chop off the six part if you feel it is relevant. I don't know the ground at all YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American would be best I believe. BTW, you'll see that I'm using conversion templates for distances and etc... The tags automatically use BrEng, and I don't know how to change that without removing the template altogether. Thanks for your help. --Sherif9282 (talk) 04:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Re. the third point, it may be because I am not a native speaker, but still confused a bit:

Some observers felt that the personable Booth would have been more popular among the playing group than Simpson, while others thought that he would not have been hard-nosed enough in pursuing his team's competitive interest.

Should it be "Some observers felt that the personable Booth would have been be more popular among the playing group than Simpson, while others thought that he would not have been be hard-nosed enough in pursuing his team's competitive interest ? Tintin 07:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scratches noggin'. Rather dim, is the primate. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does Haigh say what his source for Indrajitsinhji incident is ? Tintin 07:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't have notes, just a list of books :( But he does seem to agree with the theme of borderline cheating umpires, per the second on 1959-60 as well. In Australia it seems to be standard that subcontinental umpires were a joke in the old days, to the point of resembling crooks in movies like Lagaan etc. eg, the same thing is in Pollard's collection, Harte about services in 1945 and a whole pile of others. I dunno whether they just got it off Whitington's book where he said that the Indian umpire wouldn't give catches at second slip. That's the problem with autobios/player comments if people just copy it without checking the raw footage if available. I think Gilly said that when he got dismissed in the Bhajji hat-trick the ball pitched a long way outside leg, which I don't think was the case although the edge definitely was. Or Ponting saying that the "the same things" in Sydney 2008 reversed themselves in Perth 2008 after Sehwag said he claimed "half-volleys" when there were no disputed catches in Perth. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the page Mark Waugh you appear to have made a revision as of 05:40, 16 June 2008 by adding text and citations to the article. One of those citations is causing a cite error. Could you please go back and fill out the full source information for the reference tag <ref name="debutcard"/>? Thanks. 75.69.0.58 75.69.0.58 (talk) 02:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third Test, 1932–33 Ashes series has the same issue from 05:14, 3 June 2009 with <ref name="debutcard"/> and from 06:27, 9 June 2009 with <ref name=sc/> 75.69.0.58 (talk) 19:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And Ricky Ponting has a cite error apparently beginning at

06:59, 27 August 2009 and caused by the reference tag <Ref name=testlist/> 75.69.0.58 (talk) 05:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC) All done, thanks YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And Alan Davidson (cricketer) beginning at

Revision as of 05:31, 23 September 2009 and caused by <ref name=ww/>. 75.69.0.58 (talk) 19:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey YM,

How's that ce coming?

Cheers. --Sherif9282 (talk) 02:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The artcile's long so we could be here a while..... I also left soem questions in the text that need clarifying YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops... Indeed he does have a first name. I'm not sure how I overlooked that.

As for the MiGs, they were simply upgraded with new parts. --Sherif9282 (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for how many years exactly, I'm not wholly certain, but I guess that can be counted as the first victory since the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. --Sherif9282 (talk) 14:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 23:07, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should start a PR instead of a GAN, which will take a long time in the queue. Also, you should ask them if they think the article is too detailed. I am a bit wary of copyediting and having some stuff deleted, as the preparation section and training is very long YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I already did a PR. One user told me the preparations and preceding sections needed trimming. If you can do that in addition to your copyedits, OK. Otherwise, just complete your ce, then I'll see to summarizing the article.

P.S., forgive me for being so slow to respond. I am very busy now, which is another reason why I'm asking you to complete your ce before I turn to summarizing the article. Cheers.

You can just fork it to a preparation daughter article and then prune doen the summary in teh main page YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, I could create a Background of the Yom Kippur War, and include in it everything from 1967 upto 1973. What do you think? --Sherif9282 (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're not very active with the article. Shall I ask someone else for help? I understand this article isn't within your scope of interest and/or work on Wikipedia. --Sherif9282 (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask someone for help. Although you haven't forked the bits you want yet YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding bits on your favorite cricketer. ;P It's just going to get way too long. Even if you try to keep it short. You could make sub pages; such as Early Career of Ricky Ponting but they make even get deleted. The page is already 114kb long. I'll removed all the table and put them into another article. I could still expand by up to 50kb. Bit like Tendulkar, if anyone bothered to write a GA/FA about him. If I cleaned up the article and added refs and nominated for GA it would probably pass if someone who knew nothing about cricket reviewed it. But that would be lazy. I can the article being taken to FA at 150kb, consequently being way to big. Aaroncrick (talk) 03:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The fork won't get deleted. Apart from a few people who only get excited when there is some big issue to get involved in, it won't matter, and it will survive anyway. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just going through recent series there is no/limited coverage of: 2007 World Twenty20 and One Day International tour of India, Bangladesh home ODI's. Parts are in a strange order and tour of Bangladesh needs minor expansion. Then we have the old series. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I added something about that one in 2006 where he hit a 100 and they won by 3 wickets after condeding a lead. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doing major moves. Looks like a mess at the moment. Have only properly wrote 1998 tour of the subcontinent Aaroncrick (talk) 10:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if the 98 confrontation at Sharjah is on youtube but I'm pretty sure Bhajji did not give him the middle finger, but an index finger. Like when a lot people just wave it about when they get a wicket, although it must have been clsoe range. Sometimes autobios can be a bit deliberately ambiguous in a misleading way, to be a bit self serving. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:11, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't say what finger. It's written by Staples with quotes and bits from Ponting. Poor book really; just photo copied from library. Hopefully the stats ref stays for York Park. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/York Park/archive2 isn't really attracting a crowd so no replies. hmm... Was looking for info on the Tasmanian Devil and looks like it could be coming up for FAR soon... I Better start reading up and sourcing. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might do, although people have stopped nomming FARs mostly. In the old days the attitude on FAC was so different. In late 2005 one guy voted in about 50 FACs in a day, once every few minutes.... These days with the sparse reviews, it depends so much on whether people follow the author, or whether the topic is popular, else you can wait for a month :( YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Assessment Monkeys copyedit. Aaroncrick (talk) 06:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you survived the floods. ;) Did your uni survive? Aaroncrick (talk) 06:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

??? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flooding in Adelaide .... University Of South Australia got flooded? Aaroncrick (talk) 07:08, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, Fowler opposed Loxton. I don't agree with the reason and it shouldn't be considered. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:20, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a chance to look at Brian Booth's autobiography (Booth to Bat by Brian Booth & Paul White, 1983, ANZEA Publishers, Homebush West, NSW. ISBN 0 85892 224 X) and oddly he only refers to his father by the nickname "Snowy" (by which the father was known throughout the Bathurst region) (p. 9) and never refers to his mother by name. He does say that his father had a reputation as one of the top batsmen of the region in his youth but played irregularly due to his market garden business (p. 10). The book has no index and is a bit heavy on his religious calling but if you can think of anything else you need, I'll see if it's there. --Roisterer (talk) 04:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know if he has sisters or anything? Or bits about school, or anything outside cricket. You could just take a digital camera of it and send it over. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thought this might interest you. Himalayan 15:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted thanks, pretty over teh top YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YM, what do you think of taking List of India women Test cricketers to Featured list status? The lead needs to be expanded with some decent content and cleaned up, and I'm struggling to think of what else to add there. I believe the tables and referencing is sufficient. What's your opinion? cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 00:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe demographic stats like which states have the most players. Also it s:eems from the table that India didn't win a single game from the 1980s to 2002, and hoe many games they play a year, the most capped player only has 20. More stats and all that. Referencing is complete for what is there YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to find anything on demog stats, and can't add anything without synthesis. Other than that, I've expanded a little with some stats, infrequency of matches and gap between wins. How does it look now? Do you think it's good enough for a Featured list nom? cheers -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 00:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can just look at the players cricinfo profiles and see which states have the most people. There's no OR in adding numbers unless you then editorialise it. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Bombay - 15 of the 71 players, and another seven from Maharashtra too. Also cleaned out the women part. Let me know if there's anything else missing or clean up needs etc. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 00:28, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be worth mentioning whether the team is professional, as with the men's team, and if so, since when. Nev1 (talk) 00:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, I think the team isn't pro yet. But I'm not sure if they can be classed as semi-pro. Let me dig around, gnews doesn't seem to help, so I'll have to look up some books and add it. cheers.-SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 01:55, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do the women have one selector per zone like the men?? If so, it's easy to add it since we know which state is. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can compare other stuff to trends in teh men's team, I guess YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me search around for any info on the pro status and selectors. I'll also look for some trend comparison to the men's team. Unfortunately, women's team press coverage in India is worse than Australia or England, as if that were possible! cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 04:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those details are covered by their respective articles. Anything that would cover the reception of the character would also fit into any of the three main articles, so what benefit is there to having a bloated plot summary? TTN (talk) 01:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have seen a few academic textbooks explain the motifs and bits about the various cahracters, so when the article is done properly, it would be 4-5 times longer at least. eg, the book itself does not explain RPM -> mechanical nature of the character, or "Ratched" -> Ratchet is about the mechanical coldness of the system, and a whole pile of other metaphors YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Googling on Randle McMurphy or Nurse Ratched or the Chief brings up thousands of hits in a variety of areas (eg academic psychology, google books etc). I am reluctant to add any of these as it is easy to get into an 'is/isn't reliable source' squabble but I would be very surprised if these 3 (at least) are not independently notable. (I am also surprised that TTN succeeded in redirecting all of them some weeks ago without protest.) Occuli (talk) 11:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Such sources can only go so far, especially for characters from a single work. Given that the article on the novel hasn't even begun to have been fully fleshed out, it is very likely that all of the information will fit there nicely. In the case that it doesn't end up fitting, it can be split out appropriately afterward. Don't you think that is slightly more reasonable than having an article that has been in the same state for just about five years just keep sitting like that? TTN (talk) 16:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You would be surprised actually. Easily 6k+ prose on each of Bromden, RPM and Ratched YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the basis for that statement come from (I assume that you're saying that each could easily obtain that amount of real world information)? I certainly don't doubt that there has been some discussion on the characters, but I really don't think that you're going to get three or four paragraphs of analysis per character. Take One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (novel)#Themes and properly fill it out properly, and I'd say the characters probably would not take up much more than four paragraphs in total. But in the case that the information provides undue weight, it could always be split out. That's why I'm wondering why exactly an article that is currently just five paragraphs of plot information needs to stick around when there is no definite case for its improvement. TTN (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it's easy, we could find as many motifs as required, even when I was in high school. We had to do six pages of questions on all of them, about 30 questions IIRC, and at a higher level there would be even more. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Hi, could you specify where actually? I thought it was restricted only to Arbcom members. Cheers, --Eurocopter (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been leaked publicly all over the Internet. And is probably being passed around hand to hand as well YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you did a fair bit of work on this article last year. I've been going through trying to fix the citation needed tags and generally clean the references and article up to nominate it for Good Article, but it probably needs a bit of work on the lead too. I wondered if as you presumably know a fair bit more about Waugh than I (and a good deal more about Wikipedia!), you might be able to lend some assistance? Regards, Harrias (talk) 15:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. All these guys with long careers, Bob Simpson, Benaud, Lawry, Border, M Taylor, S/M Waugh, K Miller got them all big and dtill haven't finished :(

Funny that, I was thinking about expanding Waugh the other day. Big project 120kb + bit like Ponting. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, these iconic figures can be quite taxing...as one always gets drawn into forks and daughter articels YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:09, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just wipe the transport section? No sources really, Aaroncrick (talk) 06:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I only see teh googlemaps used for the distance, easier to just say the metres and let people guess how fast they walk. A street directory works for that as well YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to get the (10:04, 1 December 2008 Bob Waller (talk | contribs) moved Kamau Kambon ... (Ġŏt ĤΑĠĞÊR？) (revert)) comment moved from the deletion history of this article? ‎It seems improper to leave a vandalistic smear there in view. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any complaints about my behavior at FAR? If you do, please be frank with me and let me know. I have tried to check with you regarding my nominations and such, but if this has been inadequate, please tell me. I have found FAR relatively pleasant lately, compared to the olden days. However, I want to learn of my mistakes, per my arbitration. I have tried to do everything "by the book"! Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 23:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. This was the arb decision: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Proposed decision. —mattisse (Talk) 23:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if things were out of control, I would have stepped in. It's very quiet in FAR (almost always) YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean there is nothing problematic with my participation there? If there is, would you be willing to report it at User:Mattisse/Monitoring? I would be very thankful for all feedback. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 12:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell if this User:Pahari Sahib is the same person as banned User:Siddiqui / User:Paknur? There level of English, editing style/behaviour, and area of editing is the same to me. He seems very Pakistani nationalist. This says Siddiqui/Paknur is operating from Montreal, Canada.--Kamran

Nice try NisarKand "There level of English, editing style/behaviour, and area of editing is the same to me." How ironic, what could I about say about you're level of English? You haven't been paying very close attention have you, a cursory examination would reveal we do have different interests, styles and editing patterns. I assume you are Nisar based on your IP Pahari Sahib 16:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, Siddiqui is in Canada, which he also says on his website etc, PS is not YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addendum, on the subject of nationalism (pot and kettle spring to mind), I first came across the above editor at the Pashtun people article an example of his thoughts can be seen here. He knows full well I am not Siddiqui, but as you blocked him it was just a lame attempt to get back at me after I reverted his edits on the Afghan refugees article. Pahari Sahib 20:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes yes YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind semi-protecting these pages since Nangparbat has been causing disruption there and seems intent to causing further disruption in the future?

• 2009 G-20 London Summit
• Indian Rhinoceros‎
• Bengal tiger‎
• Religious terrorism

Thanks in advance. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs)

A bit late but there was still one left for me :) YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some changes IN cricket infobox article cricket which are very true and do not come under vandalism. Please let them remain so. I request you.

Absoluteastronomy is a Wikipedia mirror and not a RS YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just check these guys: Flow Charter‎ (talk · contribs) and Fantasticly Scholarly‎ (talk · contribs). Seems to be socks.--Anish (talk) 06:47, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo! He had a few others I nabbed as well YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Didn't realize he was active again; I even welcomed one of his socks Time Boutique (talk · contribs). Will keep my eyes open for more incarnations since he, of course, won't just stop. Abecedare (talk) 01:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the Brahmin stuff is usuaully pretty obviuos for a person who has encountered him before YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True. The problem is that some of these articles are so replete with POV and OR (example) that it's hard to distinguish good faith editors from counter POV pushers. However, the sock ID itself should have given Maleabroad away if I had been looking out for him. Abecedare (talk) 02:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!...This joker does not get tired.--Anish (talk) 13:17, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the pitch a Johannesburg? Mark Waugh thinks Australia should declare at 70 and they'd still win. There's cracks everywhere and Paine and Ponting have been hit on the gloves about 10 times. Didn't know Kemar Roach bowled so fast (150+). Knocked Watson over with a big 145k in-swinging yorker first ball of the match. Stuart Clark reckons McGrath would bowl his 10 overs for less than 10 runs. Suppose it's the 9:30 start and the pitch has a tinge of greenness. Makes interesting cricket though. Aaroncrick (talk) 08:47, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw news snippets but I guess Australia were lucky they weren't playing against a tall and somewhat competent quick like Ishant who could have exploited the bounce and stuffed them, if India batted first. Still, interesting RSA cracked again YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pitch was alright in the afternoon, bizarre. Unfair really, anyway, are you still going to dabble with Ponting when you've finished with the Invincibles? I'm doing bit by bit. Easier to have the ODIs and Tests in the same section. Aaroncrick (talk) 04:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I don't thing having two chrono sequences for separate Tests and ODIs is good, especially as they used a combined team until late 1997. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it's confusing for the reader, particular if they don't know cricket. Aus V Ind will be interesting; different J'burg pitch though. Anyhow, match starts at 2:30 Local time so all moisture will be out of the wickets, maybe some evening dew. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think a two-part article will get opposed a lot. I know Yuvraj and Sehwag etc are like that and they were written in 2006 when I had no clue. Also sometimes guys get selected for Tests on the basis of ODI and vice versa, like Symonds making his debut and dropping Katich even though he made a century. I wonder why Dhoni didn't try Raina the other day when Yusuf and Harbhajan weren't on it. Raina was the most economical in teh SL triseries. Odd YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[2] [3] [4]

Three pages to semi-prot, Elockid has so far had to break 3RR on two of these pages to keep Nangparbat's edits down. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These pages need protection to [5] [6] [7] [8] Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All beaten to it, except one. Also did you know that reverting banned guys is 3RR exempt, so no need to worry about punishments there YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. I noticed that you indefinitely fully protected this page on 16 July 2009. I was wondering if you think it would be safe to unprotect it now. Regards, NW (Talk) 22:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to double chack that this won't be construed as canvassing. By the way: if promoted, the nature of my "YM, help needed" posts may change, but their volume is unlikely to lessen. :-) Abecedare (talk) 05:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It won't matter, I think sometimes the WP:MHCOORD list RfAs on WT:MILHIST. As long as it isn't emotive or anything, nobody will care. I could just be hypocritical and secretly email people and then harp on about transparecny, but I think it's silly to do that. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Respected, I just wish to know, in article Ujjain, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ujjain&oldid=316619532 you removed categories,[[Category:Metro Cities of Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh]] & [[Category:Major cities of Central India]] Reason: rm subjective and unnecessary cats, the 1m+ template is already there, spam,). But these both categories which had been removed are authentic in their way of action, as Ujjain is major cities of Central India, As well as we can say it a metro, but at the same time the above removed Categories are irrelevant, subjective and unnecessary & should be nominated for deletion.we have 2 options either to place these categories in all cities of Madhya Pradesh as per their relevance or just delete these categories. what should be done on this.? same is the case with http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bhopal&oldid=316618835 .Also you stated"the 1m+ template is already there" but i am not able to find this 1m+ template.? Thanks. (  Abu Torsam  08:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I have removed your message, as it's a strong WP:CANVASS violation. Regards, ƒ(Δ)² 09:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing, yes. But inappropriate no. The message was neutrally worded and on a talk page where it will attrct editors who know the candidate well. However, no worries about removing the notice. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 15:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "attracting editors who know the candidate well" was the intention here. It was on a page frequented by editors most likely to support. The immediate effects/results of the notice are pretty obvious too (as I noted on the RfA page). ƒ(Δ)² 17:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the rather startling veiled accusation, I think it's an issue worth considering and discussing - see Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#RFA_announcements. Ncmvocalist (talk) 18:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi YellowMonkey. User:Alison told me to ask you for help:

Hazaraboys (talk · contribs) and Hazaraboyz (talk · contribs) are both the same person, both accounts are being used at the same time, both accounts are adding nationalist and unencyclopedic POV (see this comment by another user). He may also be identical with Time Buddha (talk · contribs). In the past weeks and days, this user has progressively destroyed the articles Hazara people and Hazaragi, adding masses of unsourced and partially ethno-nationalistic POV, totally ignoring the excellent reference works in the Encyclopaedia of Islam and Encyclopaedia Iranica. And for this, he gives himself an award. For the time being, I am not reverting his POV. But I have tagged the respective articles (which he reverted without any discussion). Your help is needed. Thank you. Tajik (talk) 15:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm teaching The Loom of Youth by Alec Waugh to my students next week. As they are American and woefully ignorant of the rules of cricket and cricket features prominently in the book, I thought perhaps you might know of a website I could direct them to which would give them a quick overview of the game? :) Awadewit (talk) 17:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]