User talk:Good Olfactory

CSD#A3

Yep, my bad, I missed that. I think this is the first time I've removed an A3 tag except after an expansion in which case it's clearly not eligible and I must have missed the images bit when I checked the criteria. That said I still don't feel it was an A3 due to there being context and that was my original reason for removing the tag - the comment on images not being included was an attempt to justify it as easily as possible after I decided that I thought it was ineligible. I realise that all images convey information but in this case the image along with the title clearly had "context" and so was not deletable under A3. Dpmuk (talk) 22:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with what you did. I would have done it myself had I known the info was available elsewhere. Thanks, Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

No bots?

I can't exactly figure out why the categories you added to CFDW here can't be processed by a bot? From a cursory examination, it just looks like all of those pages in the categories to be renamed (which just happen to be categories themselves, but that doesn't matter) need to be edited. Which is what the bot does. Am I missing something? Thanks. --Cyde Weys 00:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

For the ones I looked at, the category in question that needs to be changed is applied in a template. It looks like this:

{{year by category |m=1 |c=9 |d=1 |y=5 |cat= in multi-sport events |sortkey= multi-sport events |parent=multi-sport events by year |subcat=1915 in sports }}

and we need to change it to this:

{{year by category |m=1 |c=9 |d=1 |y=5 |cat= in multi-sport events |sortkey= multi-sport events |parent=Years in multi-sport events |subcat=1915 in sports }}
Like zis. I didn't think your bot could do that kind of change. — Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yup, you're right, I wasn't investigating the issue closely enough. It can be handled by PyWikipediaBot's replace.py, but that would be a one-off job, not just something that the CFD bot automatically knows how to do. If I have some free time I'll look at doing it. --Cyde Weys 16:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I've asked User:R'n'B if his bot could do it—he said he might be able to get to it in the next few days. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Give it time

So other people can respond, those who have responded so far are mostly the same group of editors with the same view.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Pardon? What are you referring to? Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

[1] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The original discussion was "given time"—over three weeks to be precise. Your attempt at an end-run should have been speedily deleted on sight; there's no need for another extended discussion since it's essentially the same thing, with the caveat that it would be a subcategory of the one deleted. I've already explained this to you. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

links on disambiguation pages

This is the first time I have tried to use "talk" -- not sure I have it right...

Thanks for correcting my edit -- I had checked the Help pages relating to links, but I didn't look for Help topics relating to disambiguation pages, so I appreciate your pointing out that there should only be one link per entry. I'll keep that in mind. NameIsRon (talk) 03:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems you are using the talk page like a professional! Schwede66 03:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, NameIsRon—and welcome to the wonderful world of talk pages. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Mayor of Wanganui

Sorry about the confusion on Category:Mayors of Wanganui. Looking at my edit summary, I could have been much more transparent in what I was doing.

Given that you appear to be an expert with respect to work on categories, I thought I'd let you know that Help:Category#Moving_and_redirecting_category_pages wasn't very helpful. I had no idea what I was supposed to do, but given that the desired name already existed as a redirect, I just copied and pasted things. I have no idea whether that is what the help page suggests to do or not. Can the help pages be made clearer? Schwede66 17:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion on my part. It's good to hear some feedback on that help page; it sounds like it could really be improved. This issue probably should have gone to the categories for discussion process, but you attracted enough participation on the talk page that I'm not worried about this particular case. But you're right that things need to be made clearer. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Naval engagements of the Mexican-American War

Is there a reason why the "Naval engagements of the Mexican-American War" category should be renamed to the same thing, did I spell it wrong or something? --Az81964444 (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Just an en-dash instead of a hyphen. It's a very minor issue, and a redirect will be retained on the hyphen version. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Aaronic Order

Nice work re-wording a few things today at Aaronic Order. There is some surprising and controversial material I'm debating whether to add to the article, info well-known among the Aaronic Order and students of it, but not otherwise. I may post it w/sources on the Discussion Page and let others have at it before it is worded acceptably to the article. #1 James E. Talmage and Joseph Fielding Smith both denounced Maurice Glendenning at the April 1931 church conference, both their denunciations are available in full online, and both dramatically affected the whole church's discourse about who could receive any divine revelation....to this day, when Mormon missionaries unknowingly tell potential converts what Talmage and Joseph Fielding Smith said about Mr. Glendenning at the April 1931 conference. #2 The Levitical Writings contains mention of Book of Mormon and D&C concepts and words, such as Moroni, Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods, and... 3. Celestial Marriage. At least two sections of Levitical Writings (154 & 223) echo themes and injunctions in LDS D&C 132, not in a way which screams 'plagiarism,' but in a way which argues Glendenning received from the same spirit-world source as Joseph Smith a century earlier. While neither LW section appears to condone or encourage polygamy, D&C 132 does appear to be condoned by LW as being much more than a concoction of Joseph Smith or of Brigham Young. Aaronic Order (talk) 23:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Any of those could be useful additions, I think. I wasn't aware of #1 but is very interesting given that apparently Glendenning wasn't promoting this as revelation for the church as a whole? Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

your CFD closure for Orlando

Thanks for handling the CFD and recognizing that there appeared to be some sort of unresolved conflict. Hopefully, you noted that there had been the exact same discussion ("Orlando, Florida" city limits vs "Orlando, Florida" area) per Category talk:Visitor attractions in Orlando, Florida#To Delete or Not To Delete, and that there appears to be, from a casual observer viewpoint, some similarities in the arguments and edit history by the banned user/sockpuppet Miamiboyzinhere and the editor who raised this particular CFD. Not saying that they are the same, just that there are enough similarities in discussion points to make editors familiar with the former to raise an eyebrow a little bit. SpikeJones (talk) 02:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It's certainly possible, but at least you have the comfort of knowing it's not just you against him. The discussions got a reasonable amount of participation from other editors, so hopefully the arguments are being assessed on their merits rather than just on who is making them. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Help please: How to withdraw a CfD?

Hope you don't mind my asking, but I tend to see your user id all over the place when it comes to WP Categories. How can I remove, withdraw, whatever my request for a CfD? There is nothing in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion? You seem to be an expert user at this WP Categorising thing. Reply here please. Thanks again. Argolin (talk) 20:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Just make a comment in the discussion—identify yourself as the original nominator, and state that you wish to withdraw the nomination and ask that an administrator please close it. If you want, you can also strike through the original nominating statement, but that's not necessary. The main thing is just to make it clear that you want to withdraw it, and sooner or later the discussion will be closed by an uninvolved administrator. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh my lol! Can you hear it? That is so easy. Why isn't it in the documentation? Is that part of your bailiwick? Thanks for the help. Argolin (talk) 22:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Do I remove the CfD at the page Category:Juno Awards? It says not to while the discussion is in progress. I have posted the withdrawl request as above. Does my withdrawl request mean the discussion is over? Maybe it can be spelled out on the template? Please advise here. Thanks again. Argolin (talk) 23:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, you can if you want to, but again you don't have to. The closing admin will do it if you don't. I don't think there's any harm if you want to do it though since you are the nominator. Maybe we need to create a section on "how to withdraw" a nomination—you're correct that it's not explained anywhere that I know of. As you can see, there's not really a set method. Usually nominators just announce in the discussion that they are withdrawing the nomination, and then the withdrawal pretty much kills off the active discussion (if any) and it is eventually closes. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

My two cents: Yes please create a section. The process for adding a CfD says the nominator must place the template. It seems entirely reasonable therefore after the nominator has posted the withdrawal notice on the discussion page to have the nominator remove the template from the category page. Also, there may be too much of a time lag between the admin actually closing the discussion and the template removed? I acually thought there was another WP document out there somewhere dealing with how to withdraw. Thanks. Argolin (talk) 00:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

My last CfD

Good Olfactory, I don't really think I set the CfD properly. Please go toCategory:East Coast Music Awards. The link 'speedy renaming section does not point to the actual discussion. I think I realise what I did wrong. I added it myself to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy first then posted the template on the cat page. I thought I followed the procedure outlined in the document. Or maybe its not supposed to link? Did I set it up properly? Please reply here. Argolin (talk) 00:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want to rename a category speedily, you use Template:Cfr-speedy. If you want to rename it using the normal procedure, you use Template:Cfr. The speedy procedure can only be used in a limited number of circumstances, so if you're questioning which to use, you should use the normal one. It looks like with that category you used the speedy template, when you should use the regular one—Template:Cfr. But, you did everything correct for a speedy nomination. It just doesn't link directly—you have to scroll down and you will see Category:East Coast Music Awards listed in the list. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm completely lost now. The section it points to is the add section not the discussion section (on a different page). I added the request on the request page. Then I added a section on the discussion page. Was I supposed to do both? I never got around to starting a discussion on the discussion page for the other 4, 5 (can't remember now how many). Thanks Argolin (talk) 01:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

No, you never do both. First, you choose whether you are going to do a speedy rename or a regular rename. Then you choose the appropriate template. Then the template (either Template:Cfr-speedy or Template:Cfr) will give you a link to click on which will take you to the correct page where you add what the template tells you to copy and add. You might want to play around with the templates in the Sandbox for a few minutes to figure out exactly how they work. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Let's back up a little.

• Step 1: Pick the appropriate template (got that)
• Step 2: Place the template on the category page
• Step 3: Follow the link from the newly placed template on the category page
• Step 4: Add your request.

Easy. The documentation didn't really spell it out. I did not do it in the above order. Is there any hope of adding something like a summary or checklist to the documentation. Otherwise, I'll have to remember to come back here. Yeah, I realise pro's like you don't need the doc's. Thanks very much for your time. Argolin (talk) 01:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look at what it says in the instructions and see if it can be simplified somehow. It's true that these instruction pages are often difficult to decipher. When I try to start a non-category-related nomination for something, I too am often lost in the process, so I wouldn't feel bad. It seems that often the only way to really figure it out is to do it a number of times. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks I feel better. Yeah, I sort of thought let's dive in see how it works. I have another one in mind (I'll do later). We have music groups by location and a musicians by province categories (sorry no link) can't remember which way round it is. Inconsistencies like this drive me bannans. Thanks Argolin (talk) 01:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:French Canadians

I noticed that you added 'Category:French Canadians → Category:French Canadian people' to the working queue a few moments ago. In light of the recent renaming of Category:People of French-Canadian descent and its subcategories (from an unhyphenated form to a hyphenated form), I was thinking that the new name should be hyphenated, i.e., Category:French-Canadian people. Do you think it's a change that can be made on the CFD/W page or would you suggest another 48-hour CFD/S listing? Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we can probably change it right away. I can do it. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 03:32, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

as Canadian as possible

Nice to see someone else remembers Peter Gzowski. CBC has never bee the same since he left. Bellagio99 (talk) 12:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

If only the SOB wouldn't have smoked so much, he'd probably still be around, and now I could podcast him to boot ... Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Croatian SK Sub Cat

Hi. I noticed you changed the way the Sub category I created (Croatian serial killers) was linked. At first I had thought you way was how it was done but checking in another page the "Fooian fooers" template was used. What's the difference ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zubrowka74 (talk • contribs)

Either can be used, but the template you used made the immediate parent category Category:Croatian people by occupation whereas I changed it to category:Croatian murderers. I thought it made more sense to make serial killers a subtype of murderers rather than making serial killers an "occupation". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:42, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, it is an "occupation", just not a good one :). But indeed, you sorting is the right one, I hadn't noticed. Thanks! Zubrowka74 (talk) 14:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

SchmuckyTheCat

Could you help take a look at what User:SchmuckyTheCat has been doing around? [2] Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.162.88 (talk • contribs)

WP:RBI. User:Instantnood. All the look you need. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Deleting Category:Canadian musical recordings

Good Olfactory, I submitted a request 1 May 2010 for a Category to be deleted Category:Canadian musical recordings. Guess what: I got it wrong!!! I think I used the wrong template: the one that uses the ObsoleteCategory {{subst:Cfd2|ObsoleteCategory|text='''Delete'''.}} I was going to use {{ subst:cfd2|Cfd|text='''Delete'''.}} but at the last minute changed to the obs one: I thought that was a more correct category for deletion. It is on the documentation: so I used it. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 May 1. It has a bad smell :) Argolin (talk) 06:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Seems to have been fixed OK in the interim. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Should your group ever get around to updating the doc's, I'll help. Does it happen in 7 days if it is unopposed (including no comments from anyone)? Can't remember if that is in your doc's or someone told me that? Argolin (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it stays open for 7 days minimum. If no one opposes it and it seems like a reasonable suggestion to the closer, he can choose to proceed with it. Or an administrator may relist it to ensure that someone contributes. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I'm picking up the lingo: Me: nominator. Closer: an administrator (someone with the wiki tools processing the requests, doing the work). Another administrator (also working may see my request) and relist. lol Argolin (talk) 09:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

That's right, you got it. I voted in your nomination, btw. It seems like a good idea. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 09:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind answering what some might call my inane questions. Isn't there a notice sent to the discussion page of affected projects (or sub work groups) that "Hey, one of your category items is being considered for deletion"? Join the discussion here... It was on User talk:Moxy's page but has mysteriously vanished. btw, thanks for the vote. I did the homework on who created it and when, other similar named items in the tree, what hole would it leave if deleted. Argolin (talk) 02:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Jewish people

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Jewish people. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. IZAK (talk) 08:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks; I don't have a particular interest on the merits, but I will keep an eye on what happens. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 10:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

UNSC resolutions

Thanks for that, I noticed there was a problem but I thought it was just down to my internet settings. Will go back and fix them. Midway (talk) 11:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that earlier, it worked a couple of times but doesn't anymore. For now I'm still including external links to the resolutions at UNHCR because of this reason. If you can let me know when you come across a fix I'll be very grateful! Thanks for your barnstar comment too. Midway (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Category:Centrist political parties

[Category:Centrist political parties] - hi, please undelete this category that you deleted out of process. This is as valid a category as Category:Nordic_Agrarian_parties is. There was no consensus for deletion, just a few persons - none of them active in contributing to politics topics here- voted delete, with me, the original creator of one of the categories, not even being notified of the discussion. Remember, Wikipedia is not about voting, but about finding consensus and good arguments. In addition, the argument that 'centrism is difficult to define, hence let us delete the category' is one of the most incredible arguments I have seen here. There might be difficulties in defining, which party is centrist, soc dem or conservative, this does not mean we should delete the relevant categories, no? IMNSHO opinions of the people who really contribute to Wikiproject:Politics should have some weight here, not some random people who check each XfD process. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog | woof! 16:20, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Check his category here, to get some background information on which political categories are helpful here on wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Political_parties_by_ideology. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog | woof! 16:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I can't—nor can you—unilaterally override the consensus that the closer said existed here. I suggest you take this issue up with the closer of the discussion. I did not delete the category "out of process", because it was deleted completely within CFD process in the first place, and re-creation of a category that was deleted within process may lead to speedy deletion, which is what I did. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

May lead to - you say, hence, it needn't. Why were you wasting my and your time. I think it is enough of my examples and arguments here to show that the category was valid. It is just a matter of time the vote for undeletion takes, as I'm convinced my colleagues who edit political topics would agree with me (none of them happened to vote last time, that only some XfD trainspotters really spotted). --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog | woof! 00:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, it was speedily deleted, and rightfully so—so dwelling on that is itself a time waster. If you want to avoid wasting time, I suggest again that you approach the closer of the CFD discussion, since there's nothing at this stage I can do to override the consensus. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Categorisation of dependent territories

[3] I'm afraid I'm unable to respond to the discussion up there. What can I do? 18:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.237.153.52 (talk)

I'm not sure what you mean when you say you are "unable". Do you mean you are technically not able to, or that you can't rebut the accusation that you are an IP incarnation of a banned user? Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Whatever I posted, the posts will be reverted by User:SchmuckyTheCat. The same is happening across several talk pages and Wikipedia policy pages. 04:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)