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

User:Blnguyen/UB

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

User:Blnguyen/Recent

You are welcome to leave me a message or request admin action.

Blnguyen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has been an administrator since 29 May 2006 and an arbitrator since January 1, 2007.

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

User:Blnguyen/box

File:Blnguyen winter.JPG

Blnguyen is currently hoping for cooler times!

Archives

Straw poll for selecting photos of the Indian cricket team for use in articles

Yesterday, the YellowMonkey waddled down to Adelaide Oval and started clicking his camera furiously each time he saw something on two legs walking past in a blue shirt, ie, a member of the Indian cricket and its entourage. In some cases, multiple shots of the same subject were produced with an approximately similar level of photographic quality. Due to his deficiencies in photographic ability and his inability to work out how to control the buttons and the unwillingness of the Indians to stand still (or pose for contrived photos), the pictures have deficiencies, and various attempts of the same subject often have different types of deficiencies.

Now, the fun part is that everyone is welcome to help in selecting which picture is used in the respective player's article, and feel free to have a laugh and the random clickery of the monkey. Perhaps it is time to formulate a variant of the Infinite monkey theorem for cameras. No knowledge of cricket is particularly needed, especially since most are simple portraits and a fresh perspective from a person not familiar with the sport would be appreciated. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Random observations about the Indian cricket team

Coming soon

Voting section

Simply vote and comment as follows below the individual sections.

Comment (numbering pictures from 1, 2, 3 etc, left to right) and ~~~~

Help needed:Can you recognise these unidentified Indian officials???

Poll:Indian cricket team manager with moustache's portrait

Image on right is better lit. Left one looks like a steel torpedo is about to hit the guy's ear. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the right is better. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:This picture looks like M. V. Sridhar (not sure though, haven't seen his pic for many years). The Indian manager is supposed to be Chetan Chauhan but none of the three is him. Tintin 10:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Dammit. Or is it Lalchand Rajput. Tintin 12:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lalchand Rajput doesn't have hair, poor fellow. No idea. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The right hand one is better. --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll:Indian cricket team manager's portrait

Right one is better lit. Does he ever open his eyes? Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Great comedy value :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Can the really miserable Aussie be photoshopped out of it though? --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Dinesh Karthik portrait

Both are okay. Left one is a pretty good action shot. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer right, although the action is good. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have to use the left one, please crop it at waist level or people will think cricketers routinely wear tights. --Dweller (talk) 11:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Gautam Gambhir portrait

Far right: focus and lighting. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Far right, agree with Durova. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. In the left image, you can see his eyes and he's not wearing a bucket of sunblock. --Dweller (talk) 11:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Harbhajan Singh bowling

Far left. All pretty nicely framed. This one is sharpest. Too bad you were stuck behind the net. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the 2nd from the right (#4 on filenames). dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty good bunch. I'd also go far left, by a whisker. Some could be used as a sequence to illustrate spin bowling. Perhaps the software will allow for them to be used as a fast moving slide show? --Dweller (talk) 11:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Irfan Pathan portrait

Right. Background is less distracting. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree; right. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Irfan Pathan bowling

Left. Net is less intrusive, more interesting capture of the action. Try to get people in the middle of a move. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Left. Size, action, net, etc. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Ishant Sharma portrait

Right, for the focus. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't really like the right, but you can't go past the focus. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you could slightly lighten the image on the right, it'd be a walkover. --Dweller (talk) 11:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Ishant Sharma bowling

Right. Slightly better framed. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either is good. Go right; left has some other guy's arm. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Ishant Sharma fielding

Left. Very good to have the ball in the air next to the player. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Left; very nice. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that one of those two-coloured practise balls they use to help ascertain seam/swing movement? Nice! --Dweller (talk) 11:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Manoj Tiwary portrait

Tough call. Center one has the best framing, but glass reflection is a minus. So I'll go with the far left. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like centre, it's not that bad... dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Manoj Tiwary fielding

Left, obviously. single player (no distracting background) going after ball in the air. One of the best shots in your gallery. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Easy left. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: MS Dhoni portrait

Far left. Best lighting balance. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Far left. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Munaf Patel portrait

Left. Both have distractions in the background. Natural lighing gives a better color balance and he's wearing his uniform. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer right, better focus IMO. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Piyush Chawla bowling

Far left: ball in air, net doesn't obstruct his eyes. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, far left. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both first and third are nice illustrations of "loop" Hmm... do we have an article on that yet?--Dweller (talk) 11:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We do now. Loop (cricket). --Dweller (talk) 11:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Praveen Kumar portrait

Left: facing the camera preferable to profile. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Left. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Robin Uthappa portrait

Far right: action shot, good focus. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Far right. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sreesanth portrait

Far right: focused, whites not blown. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Far right. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Sreesanth bowling

File:Sreesanth bowling 2.jpg Second from left: his feet are off the ground. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

#2 is the most useful. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Virender Sehwag portrait

Right: focus. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Virender Sehwag batting

Right: focus. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the pic misleading, or does his backlift really point towards approximately third slip? --Dweller (talk) 12:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Virender Sehwag bowling

Right: focus. Durova^Charge! 06:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 07:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser and sockpuppetry

File:Blnguyen banana.JPG

Deposit banana here to rouse the checkuser attendant!

Invincibles issues

Other stuff

sockpuppets

I hate sockpuppets at least as much as the next guy, having been harrassed by some confirmed sockpuppets. But I am missing out on how you know these contributors were sockpuppets. Are you one of the people authorized to do a Checkuser?

Forgive me, I thought there was a formal procedure for initiating checkuser requests.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 04:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I do have the checkuser function, so I don't have to go and ask a checkuser to do one for me. I was just reading through and RedChinaForever (talk · contribs) just got my attention from its username alone. And then when I looked at its edit history it looked pretty suspicious so I ran one. It appears that RCF/MichelleG have a veteran editor as their sockpuppetmaster that did a third oppose vote, but I'm asking for another person to take a look since it seems like a sensation. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to complain about your block of RedChinaForever. All of this user's edits are good—what is it about this user that makes you feel he or she should be banned on a sockpuppetry accusation when he or she makes only good edits? Everyking (talk) 21:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the CU showed that RCF and MichelleG and a third account triple voted on MONGO's RfA. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You indefinitely blocked all of the accounts just for that? First of all, I'd like for another CU to look at that and see if your findings are accurate. But assuming that they are, you can just block two of the accounts and warn the third. There is no need whatsoever to completely shut out a good editor over such a thing. Everyking (talk) 03:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is fairly easy to see who the puppetmaster is with just a little investigation. Dureo (talk) 15:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the third account - the main account which has made thousands of edits (unlike MichelleG and RCF, which made less than 300 combined) has not been blocked. I have only blocked MG and RCF so far. I did ask two other CUs by email to look at the case and the main account but they haven't replied yet.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I don't have a problem with that, as long as you don't block the remaining account (presuming there's no further abuse). Everyking (talk) 04:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Districts of Vietnam

Yes, it does, but not in a very machine-friendly format. You can find population and area statistics down to the commune level from this GIS server: [1]. If you can somehow screen-scrape this information it would be a boon. DHN (talk) 03:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like someone had taken the effort to compile the stats here. DHN (talk) 03:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to vi:Chính quyền địa phương ở Việt Nam, as of 2005 there were 64 provincial units, 671 district-level units, and 10876 commune-level units. DHN (talk) 00:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. More substubs.....lolz Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grameen Bank

Hi Blnguyen, all the reference issues of the Grameen Bank article have now been addressed and several new "independent" sources have been added. (Please note, just like any other company article, some reliance on the primary source is unavoidable and desirable). The lead section has been expanded to summarize the major points in the article. Could you please reconsider the assessment of the article if you are satisfied with the progress. Thanks and regards, Arman ^(Talk) 10:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vung Tau.ogg

Could you re-record this audio clip? Use the /j/ sound that locals would use to speak the town's name instead of the /v/ spelling pronunciation. DHN (talk) 05:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like Diệt Nam, Diệt Cộng, Diệt Minh and Diệt Nam Cộng Hòa? Ok. I am aware that many people do say their V as d but my parents simply told me that only uneducated peasants do that. Is this to be applied to a certain region? In any case I will need someone to convert my wav files to .ogg - The last time I did it, I emailed them to Srikeit (talk · contribs) to convert since he had the software, but he is now inactive. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With Hanoi being the "city of culture", that's certainly a widely-held view. But you're going to feel silly speaking to Southerners with a southern accent but using spelling pronunciation. I know I did... See Vietnamese phonology on how certain regions differ in pronouncing different consonants. DHN (talk) 06:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can use Audacity to save your files directly to ogg format. You can also use it to filter out background noise. DHN (talk) 16:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:MichelleG

This user is requesting unblocking. I saw #sockpuppets above, but no further response there. She is claiming that the IP she uses is shared. Frankly, from her contributions (which go back to 2005! Long time) and from User:RedChinaForever's, I see no overlap until Mongo's RFA, and both accounts were created a long time before that RFA, and seem to have been making non-abusive edits, so this idea that they are sockpuppets seems wrong. I don't know what the IP address is, so I can't check whether it might be shared or not, but because the edit patterns here are so different and go so far back, and because the only even potentially abusive thing they did was to try to vote on an RFA (and have their votes stricken anyway), I think an unblock is needed here. Did the other checkusers ever respond? Mango juice^talk 15:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you're currently active. Any response? Mango juice^talk 04:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, they didn't. I only asked a few since a lot of checkusers voted in that MONGO RfA, so I didn't want to bother them, but my check seemed to show a direct hit. I think I'll go ask Alison now to Check MichelleG, RedChinaForever and the master account since the RfA outcome is now finalised. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And feel free to do as you please. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Civil Service Commissioner

Hi, you recently removed a prod-tag with no reason given - in fact, you used the admin-revert tool that's supposed only to be used for vandalism. Since the policy page requests that you explain your contestion of PRODs, do you think you could explain on the talkpage why you don't think it should be deleted? Thanks.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 08:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your information, I've nominated the article for deletion, noting that you haven't replied to my message, but have edited since receiving it.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user User talk:MichelleG has an unblock request, and it looks like several other admins have commented. I am inclined to grant the unblock, given that the user has a history of positive contributions, however me (and the other admins) would like to hear your input on the matter, since you were the blocking admin. Thanks for dealing with this. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See #User talk:MichelleG above. Woody (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:MHCON

Hmm. We've traditionally permitted editors to rate their own articles up to B-Class; I'm not sure if it's worth trying to impose a stricter requirement merely for the purposes of the contest.

The other issue, of course, is that the B-Class requirements make no reference to prose size, and so may not quite capture the true weight of articles that are potentially too short to stand on their own in the long term; but that's neither here nor there.

(Certainly, if it turns out that there are persistent attempts to game the contest results, we can take steps to deal with it; but I'd prefer to hold off on that for as long as reasonably possible, since introducing harsh formality into something that was intended to be a "fun" activity isn't really a good direction to move in, in my opinion.) Kirill 02:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added another column to the scoreboard which should dampen away the effects of any such self-rating, incidentally. Kirill 02:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So long as they're in different months, that's technically permitted (and was factored into the initial contest plan, actually); the scores are completely additive, so you'll get the same number of points for getting an article from level X to level Y regardless of how many steps it takes. Kirill 02:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NEU

sorry, but with no doubt I reverted your edits on removing the neutral wording for following reasons:

South Asia article clearly states that Tibet's status as South Asian is controversial. Thats why we need to clarify here.
The Tibet article clearly states that, with reference, Qing's authority over Tibet had been affirmed by all three involved parties: DL/PL, the Britain Mission and of course the Manchu court(who even installed the 4-kaloon Kashag). Thus further actions taken by the Peking court should not be classified as "invasion", (unless you are from Dharamsala) - MainBody (talk) 08:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK!

On 4 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xa Loi Pagoda, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congrats! Plus the coveted pictured slot, too! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gillchrist

When reverting edits isn't is necessary to put a note on a users talk page. [[2]]

While I think the change this person made was unnecessary, and understand why it was removed it certainly seems that it deserved clarification per [[3]]

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the matter, as I am new to wikipedia I could use more understanding. Is there a time when this proctise is okay? Erick880 (talk) 02:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, in general it isn't necessary to warn the editors to stop, unless they are explicitly vandalising or spamming or aggressively or repetitively doing something bad. This user has a history of doing proselytising-type additions, but they only come in on random occasion, so their edits aren't really mass changes, so it isn't really necessary to say too much at this time. If they persist in adding it over and over, then a discussion would be necessary. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Review

I've got a couple of College football articles (2007 ACC Championship Game, 2008 Orange Bowl) up for FAC or nearly there, and I was wondering if you'd be willing to read through them and let me know which areas — from the point of view of someone completely unfamiliar with American football — are unclear or difficult to understand. I'd really appreciate that, as it seems to be the primary objection from the two people who have thus far objected to the first FAC. Thanks. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're fairly busy, but I did see that you took at least a cursory glance through the first. Any glaring problems? JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did eventually. All in all it looks pretty good. However, the picture captions are hard to understand. Is there some obvious way to identify the player in the photos. I presume that since you didn't explicit identify the player, I suppose he must be the odd one out standing behind the line. But I am not sure and that could be clarified. Apart from that it is probably alright except it could do with a copyedit probably. Secondly, have you been interpreting the match and putting personal comments in there? Because, I took as a random sample, and looked at the description of the closing game where it was talking about doing hail marys and long throws/passes, and the attached source only gave a sparse description of two fumbles and 35yds, rather than analysing the chance of a touchdown or discussing possible tactics of scoring and their viability. It would be good if there was a news source describing the tactical options that were available to the teams at that stage, or at least a reference from a textbook or something saying that from 35yds a touchdown would be unlikely unless some fluke happened. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch for taking the time to read through the article. I'll see what I can dig up citation-wise, and I'll work on the captions as well. I can probably clear those up a little more. I did see that you left a comment in the code. I tried to address that, but I wasn't quite sure what you meant. I don't think I understood what you were asking for. JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that in a cricket article, when I say "took 3/61" I would normally link to cricket score like "3/61" so that a person can see that it means 3 wickets were captured and 61 runs were conceded. I think that a lot of people woul dnot understand what "18 for 27" means. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poverty in India

You unprotected this article and the edit war over the images resumed so I reprotected it. Please look at the edit history. I'm not sure how to proceed here. Do you think blocking the edit warring users would be a more effective solution since edit protection doesn't seem to be helping. --Richard (talk) 06:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that the consensus is pretty clear and I would enforce it like an AfD personally. Especially if you check the track records of the people on either sides of the fence. Check how many blocks and lack of FAs/GAs/DYKs the image advocates have, and compare it to how many FAs/GAs and the lack of blocks on the oppose side and make up your mind about who has the better track record of good article work. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the point of rewarding obstructionism to be honest. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, your comment about "rewarding obstructionism" is a bit too cryptic for me. Who do you view as being obstructionist?

I confess that I could not find anything in the block logs of User:Nikkul, User:Otolemur crassicaudatus and User:Adam J.W.C.. I also saw no mention of FAs/GAs/DYKs on any of their user pages. I have seen User:Otolemur crassicaudatus around before and, while I don't have any particular impression of him, I at least don't have any bad impression of him. The other two are completely new to me.

The consensus seems to favor User:Nikkul's perspective which is to remove the image in question. This would argue that User:Otolemur crassicaudatus and User:Adam J.W.C. are editing against consensus and should be blocked if they continue to do so. Do you agree? If so, I will document the above on the Talk Page of the article and unprotect the article.

--Richard (talk) 07:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant by obstructionism, I felt that people were obstructing Wikipedia by reverting against consensus, which appears to me to remove the picture. When I meant about the relative contributions of the editors, I wasn't referring only to the three guys who were reverting, I meant the 10-20 people who had expressed an opinion on the straw poll. You can see that the people who are advocating removing the photos have a much longer record of positive constructive encyclopedia building, eg Dineshkannambadi 10 FAs, Nishkid64 8 FAs, and also see User:Anonymous_Dissident/List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_DYKs and WP:WBFAN to see how the two sides on the strawpoll compare in terms of contributions and recent blocks. I agree with your final paragraph. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But there is a question of WP:CANVASS. Most of the people were previously informed. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 09:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Update

Hate to bother you, but the new DYK is once again way behind in updating. If you or someone you know can update, it'd be appreciated.--Bedford 07:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's not much incentive to update when it bumps your own article off the pictured slot :o, ok updated. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it makes you feel better, one of my DYKs was bumped off too. :D --Bedford 07:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide Wikimeetup 3

Adelaide Meetup
Next: TBA
Last: 6 March 2020
This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Blnguyen - after some planning we've decided to hold the third Adelaide Wikimeetup on Sunday, 17th February, 2008. The meeting will be held at Billy Baxter's in Rundle Mall at 11:30AM. Further details and directions are available on the meetup page. Please RSVP here by 20:00UTC on 15th February 2008 (that's 6AM Saturday for our time zone) so that we can inform the restaurant about numbers. Hope to see you there!

You are receiving this message because you are in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia or are listed at WP:ADEL#Participants. If this has been sent in error, please accept our apologies!

On behalf of Riana ⁂, 11:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response please :) By the way, it's now Saturday. Daniel (talk) 04:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Bostic (American football)

What does your comment at Keith Bostic (American football) mean?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I was referring to the reviewer's first comment where he failed that article but siad it passed all aspects of the criteria. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ottawa Senators GA review

Thank you for taking the time to review the Ottawa Senators articles. Could you update the GA 'box' templates on the Talk pages for the articles? I suppose the templates could be deleted from the talk page, or maybe they should be kept, according to the rules. Alaney2k (talk) 16:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention about one comment you made. The 2004-05 season is absent from the article, because the season was cancelled due to a labor dispute. Alaney2k (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, now wonder. Ok I will update the GA boxes. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tết

		Happy new year
		Chúc anh và gia đình Tân xuân hạnh phúc

Magnifier (talk) 16:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chúc anh năm mới an khang thịnh vượng, thành công về mọi mặt trong cuộc sống. Chúc anh sẽ dẫn đầu danh sách những thành viên viết nhiều FA và DYK nhất. Còn nhiều lời chúc nữa em muốn gửi tới anh nhưng sợ nhiều quá thì khó thành hiện thực được. :) Có lẽ anh ở Úc lâu rồi nên không cảm nhận được không khí Tết ở quê nhà và do cách biệt địa lý nên em cũng không thể chúc anh vào đúng thời điểm giao thừa. Mong rằng một ngày nào đó sẽ được gặp anh ở MEETUP ở Việt Nam. Thân. @pple complain 17:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser

Hi, I selected your name at random from the list of Arbitration Committee members, so you will have a neutral viewpoint. Can you have a look at what's going on here [4] please. I feel that the admin involved in the case may be a little too close to the subject I requested an RfCU on; certainly, the process seems to have ground to a halt. Anything you can do would be much appreciated. Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's closed now. Has that IP engaged in rude/abrasive dialogue or simply was it combative in its approach to content disputes? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vote

User:Earthbendingmaster/Poll I like the thing on your user page. Basketball 110 Clinton, Obama, McCain, Huckabee, Romney, or Paul? 00:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Montreal GA review

Thanks for your review. We're chugging away on the article.

Can you recommend two city articles which we could use as style and content exemplars? As Vancouver is a FA, that would give us a set of three to compare and contrast.

As a side note, when you point out use of "clearly" in Sports, where the article says "biggest...following...clearly belongs to hockey", that's a tough one for Montrealer's and Canadians to deal with, because, well, it just clearly does!! But yes, we need to find a better way to convey the national passion. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 04:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good if you can look up the TV figures or the grassroots player registrations and say things like "has three times as many registered players/TV audience as the next sport." Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For modern articles which would pass in modern times, Mysore in India is one article which is an FA. Another GA in recent times is a town in England called Altrincham. Wikipedia:GA#Geography_and_places will give you a selection to look at. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoaib Malik

Hello! Mr. Blnguyen! I want to ask why you reverted my edits on the article Shoaib Malik twice? I am also citing the reference. If your concern is that his marriage is not confirmed by any source than please change the heading of the para, but whats the reason of deleting the whole para. Waiting for you reply! Thanks! --SMS ^Talk 09:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read the article and I see nothing in there that says that the bride's father is upset with the marriage, when in fact the article quotes the father in law as saying that he thinks Shoaib Malik is a good person. There is nothing in there which says that the father in law is upset with Shoaib for allegedly doing any fraud. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But Shoaib Malik is denying that Mr. Siddiqui is his father in law, so isn't it a controversy? --SMS ^Talk 08:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the source saying that?!?! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marcela Agoncillo on hold

Done? Thanks for the review. Its been months there. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 06:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Tết

Chúc mừng năm mới! I visited Vietnam in the summer of 2006 on some family business (đám giỗ bà nội). In that trip, I also went sightseeing in Hanoi and met some Wikipedians in Hanoi, Hoi An, and Saigon (around 6 in total). It wasn't an organized event, I just put my contact info in the my userpage and people started calling me and we made plans to meet up for lunch or to go to a museum. There were several organized meetups in Hanoi and HCMC among vi Wikipedians several months ago; I think the biggest one had about 15 attendees. Where did you hear about our meetups? DHN (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I just went to Wikipedia:Meetup, saw that there was one in HCMC with a photo. Then I clicked on the photo and followed my nose and ended up on the Vi.wiki meetup page and saw you on there. I was pleasantly surprised. I didn't know that a wiki of 30k articles would be enough to sustain meetups. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although vi.wiki has 30k articles, it has 60k registered users, 160k pages in total, and more than a million edits, much larger than many wikis much larger than it. At vi.wiki we try to improve quality, not quantity - I think vi.wiki has the largest average article size and fewer than 500 bot-created articles (366 for days of the year and 60 for the sexagenary cycle). DHN (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. I noted that it had about the third highest depth of all time, but I couldn't find where there was a listing of average article size. From checking around the iw for the Districts of Vietnam, most of them seemed very impressive. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block this IP address

Hi! I think this IP address 125.164.255.116 must be BLOCK as soon as possible. For what? Because this user always vandalize the profiles of non-Indonesian beauty queens and much higher height for Indonesian contestants without any sources!

Thank you so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 09:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello could you please tell me the reason for reverting the Belgaum wikipedia page , please do let me know if the information is not adding any value to the page i would be glad to remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strydon (talk • contribs) 09:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One Pillar Pagoda DYK

On 8 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article One Pillar Pagoda, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Raja

Blnguyen: You were an involved admin wrt User:Wiki Raja. A discussion thread on WP:ANI has been started, and please feel free to provide your inputs for the discussion. Thank you, - KNM ^Talk 18:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carnatic music

Naadapriya has continued with disruptive edits to push POV and vandalize articles (despite warnings), including in the article Music of Karnataka, and once in another article via book-advertising. He fails to observe that there is no consensus by other editors when it comes to his proposals for Carnatic music and continues trying to push his Kannada/Karnataka (or should I say Knataka) POV on other users talk pages. Furthermore, his contributions (since his arrival at Wikipedia) have been non-constructive towards improving the encyclopedia. I request he be blocked so that further disruptive edits and pov-pushing on others talk pages will no longer be an issue for members of Wikipedia. Thanks - Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has now been taken hostage by the above editor, as well as User: Sarvagnya and User: Dineshkannambadi, who repeatedly remove referenced material (from verifiable sources) as can be seen here and here. The users who have engaged in this edit-warring also fail to demonstrate how these verifiable references are unreliable - Professor Sambamurthy is a prominent author of Carnatic music publications, having worked closely with exponents of Carnatic music, such as Ambi Dikshithar (ggrandson of Muthuswami Dikshitar of the Trinity of Carnatic music) and Carnatica.net is operated by prominent musicans S. Sowmya and K. N. Shashikiran. They have wrongly dismissed these as being false and self-produced on the talk page and in their edit summaries. Therefore, unless I have missed something in the verifiability policy that would mean that the references provided were invalid, these edits are POV-based, disruptive and could be considered as blatant vandalism as the references are valid. The editors have not produced valid references (let alone any references at all) to rebutt what is being said, nor have they made any positive contributions towards actually improving this article, even now.

In the case that I had missed something in the verifiability policy, sufficient time was not given to find other verifiable sources to further back up what is being said. I have continued trying to improve the article, whilst keeping the referenced material, and there was a clear demonstration that I was adding more references and further editing the sentences in question, yet the passage was still being removed repeatedly. Now, I cannot make any further reverts/edits as this would result in furious edit-warring and violating the 3RR rule. These editors (on the other hand) have managed to avoid violating this rule as there is more than one user supporting the POV-based position. In effect, they are able to assert ownership over the article.

Please help. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above, specifically on this article's talk page, Naadapriya has (yet again) misrepresented certain events that have taken place, such as the circumstances surrounding the reason why his WP:POVFORK was deleted. Although he hasn't mentioned your name, by referring to the 'admn' that deleted his WP:POVFORK, he clearly means you, and has become incivil regarding your decisions as an administrator - this is both inappropriate to post on an article talk page, and unsettling to read here, especially knowing how this would be wrongly perceived by others. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Lunar New Year

Cảm ơn lời chúc của bạn. Chúc bạn năm mới sức khỏe tốt, thành công trong cuộc sống và hạnh phúc. Mong bạn tiếp tục mang văn hóa Việt Nam ra thế giới nhiều hơn nữa.Genghiskhanviet (talk) 08:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote!

Hi! Please join us here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lianga13#Bingo.21

Thank so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 12:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

.:

RFA thanks

:.

Andover F.C. GA review

Hi. Many thanks for your comments. You raised some interesting points and I shall look into addressing them as soon as possible. Cheers, B e t t i a ^{t a l k} 09:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

Care to explain this edit? Relata refero (talk) 12:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little request!

Hi!

Please help me to add Lianga13 with his/her multiple accounts into WP:RFCU because I don't know how to do that and I am not an admin! So please help me, OK? Block that account for a year at least! Thank so much!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lianga13#Bingo.21

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 06:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Judges of the International Criminal Court

Hi Blnguyen, thanks for taking the time to review Judges of the International Criminal Court. If you're interested, I've left a detailed response here. All the best, Sideshow Bob Roberts (talk) 14:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jackp

Can you can your CU-privileged eyes over the request I made of Rebecca here. She seems to have gone AWOL. If I need to raise a RFCU to ascertain a decent range block then let me know... Thanks --Step hen 00:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well his known IP address is 203.57.68.20 and quite a few of them were on that one. The other IPS are too noisy and would affect too many people. Also, per IP correlation, Xanthoxyl (talk · contribs) and PaulxSA (talk · contribs) appear to be him. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks --Step hen 09:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Any chance you could post the update? I've got it ready, and it's a couple of hours late. Gatoclass (talk) 04:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, looks like someone just posted it. Thanks anyhow :) Gatoclass (talk) 04:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ichisada Miyazaki tagged for copyvio

Howdy, the article Ichisada Miyazaki was tagged as a copyright violation of the main reference. I don't think you were previously informed, so I thought I would let you know. JackSchmidt (talk) 05:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Username

I want to draw your attention to the Signature of the User:AjitParkash which you can find here on my talk page. Its really confusing, because first i was reply to you at your talk page for that comment at my talk page! --SMS ^Talk 20:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Thanks for putting Michiko Maeda up on the DYK page, Blnguyen! I notice a typo though: "that Michiko Maeda, the first Japanese actress..." should read "that Michiko Maeda was the first Japanese actress..." Cheers! Dekkappai (talk) 00:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops-- no, you're right! Sorry! Dekkappai (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hu Blnguyen! Do you think it's fair to fail the Zinta article because the reviews are from Indian newspapers? I tried my best to add NYT reviews as the reviewer asked me to, but there are no other reviews describing her film performances (the NYT usually do not discuss performances). The one I found, makes its presence on the article. I also have two reviews from Variety. But he still asks for it. I can't see the point. She is an Indian actor, not an American, and using reviews by critics from Indian sources (leading websites and newspapers), is an obvious act.

Apart from this, when I tried to address all the reliability issues (back in the FAC), especially reviews etc., I looked for reviews from mainly newspapers, and when I found them, I did an analysis to prove that the reviews on the page represent the majority view (even though new FAs, like Reese Witherspoon contain only positive reviews, except for one).

Please tell me your opinion on the matter. I did my best to address neutrality, reliability issues. One reviewer already gave it a review (see talk page) and conluded that it's definitely a GA, but now it fails because of some unexplained reasons which are not even supported by the WP:WIAGA criteria. That's so unfair.

Regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 06:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 7	11 February 2008	About the Signpost

Petition seeks to remove images of Muhammad	Foundation's FY2007 audit released
Vatican claims out-of-context Wikipedia quote was used to attack Pope	Best of WikiWorld: "W"
News and notes: Working group, Wik-iPhone, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Basic dispute resolution	Dispatches: Great saves at Featured article review
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mysterious answer

You'll see why I was doing all the mushrooms if you watch Einstein Factor on May 18th....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christian spamlinks?

Hi! Please visit my last edits in "Demographics" of Japan about Religions in Japan. Do you think it was Christian spamlinks? Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Japan#Christian_spamlinks

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OMG

		The Running Man Barnstar
		For all those great shots of the Indian cricket team! ~ Riana ⁂ 02:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Way better than my crap, lol. :) ~ Riana ⁂ 02:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hear hear! Excellent uploads, man. :) Nishkid64 (talk) 03:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your pics

Thanks for uploading the shots! Your FPC talk query suggests you're looking to improve, so here are a few pointers:

Own a big memory card. Sports shots are hard to nail; everyone misses a lot. A big part of the secret is to just keep shooting.
Scope out the location before the action begins. Position yourself in a location that serves as a good background where action is likely to happen.
Experiment with camera height. Sometimes crouching low or even lying on your belly produces a much more exciting shot.

Durova^Charge! 06:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:SGGH

Thanks for the vandal dusting! SGGH ^speak! 09:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miller

How bout we resume next week? --Dweller (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request unlock of John Howard article

Hello Blnguyen. I request the John Howard article be unlocked. You have in the past been involved in the content of this article. Also, it's an article with multiple active participants (not just 2), so locking penalises others. Regards, Lester 13:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see Lester acknowledge that after two days of talk, there is no consensus for his preferred addition before unlocking, otherwise he's liable to sneak it back in when he thinks he can get away with it, as he has done before with his copra plantation tale. --Pete (talk) 17:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]