Ohai dere! This is Angel caboodle's Talk Page. Feel free to leave her a message, and she'll be sure to respond as quickly as possible. Just remember to sign your posts with ~~~~ so she'll know who you are! :-)
No problem at all! And if you run again in the future – something I highly suggest – be sure to tell me, and I'll once again give you my support. --Angel caboodle02:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unconstructive? I was summarizing the bio of a character that was too long! The previous writer had just written out an episode summary of Episode 2 of Series 2, which is too much information, so I summed up the main points. How is that unconstructive? Angel caboodle (talk) 21:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does he need his own article, when there's so little information about him? Many shows don't have pages for each recurring character, including powerhouse shows like SpongeBob. If Degrassi Community School was deleted as non-notable, I really don't think Lucas would stand a chance if he was ever brought up on AfD. The fewer the amount of articles, the safer. -- Zanimum (talk) 00:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point, but at the same time, his information was previously on the Jane Valieri article, when it shouldn't because they're two separate (although related) characters. I moved the information to a new article, seeing as searching for "Lucas Valieri" just redirected to Jane's article, but if enough people are against this, I have no problem with the article's deletion. :-) - Keng - t | c - 14:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Angel caboodle, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Acalamari17:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just rolled back your edit to this article, as it looked like a vandalism with a bogus edit summary. Upon further examination, it appears that in doing some spelling corrections, you inadvertently removed an entire lengthy subsection. I hope you will continue to do spelling corrections, and wanted to clarify that no ill-will was intended here. --Orange Mike | Talk14:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my, thanks for letting me know! I don't know how I could have done that!! I'll fix the spelling of those words without removing a section haha. - Keng - t | c - 14:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well done on your work on List of serial killers by number of victims:) It needed someone to finally take it seriously! I have a question though: what's your position on the inclusion of someone like Dr John Bodkin Adams? Another editor in the past has opposed my attempt to include him here, saying that he was acquitted (which is true). Basically... Adams was tried in 1957 in the UK but the trial seems to have been deliberately lost by the prosecution (who didn't want a doctor to hang for the murder of a patient). Police archives suggest he was the likely killer of 163 patients. Do you think he deserves inclusion? I would say yes since critical consensus is that he was guilty, but the other editor says the acquittal overrides everything (despite it being considered doubtful by almost all sources). Bearing in mind the guy died in 1983, BLP hardly applies and I say we should go and include him. What do you think since you seem to have your head screwed on right (unusual for the people editing the serial killer list;) )? Thanks. Malick78 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well from the information you've given me, in my opinion that name should be added. Even though he wasn't found guilty of the murders, there was reason to believe (by police and otherwise) that he was responsible, and thus should be included in the article (just as Moninder Singh Pandher was, who at this point in time, still has a "proven victims" figure of 0). - k|e|n|g - t | c - 17:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If the vandalism (and that includes made up, irrelevant, or clearly erroneous edits) please consider filing a vandalism report at WP:AIV or let me know and I will do it for you. – ukexpat (talk) 18:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. I had assumed good faith (perhaps the user was just new to editing, or maybe their additions were mere speculation that must be removed), but obviously the problem has escalated lol. Thanks. - k|e|n|g - t | c - 18:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well done for your good work on fixing spelling errors. Remember though that on an article about a UK-based subject like The Verve, we use UK English spelling conventions, like "travelling". Best wishes, --John (talk) 05:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh... sorry, my bad. I'm Canadian and was always taught that it was spelt "traveling"... but then again, Canadian spelling is kind of a mixture between American and British. Sorry about that! :-P - k|e|n|g - t | c - 05:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I was brought up in Scotland and now live in the US so I am very aware of these things. Keep up the good work, --John (talk) 05:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! Thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify. We're currently recruiting help to clear a massive backlog (14,000+ articles), and we need your help! If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends.
Hey, just so you know, rollback should only be used to revert instances of vandalism as the rollback feature doesn't issue the user with the option of leaving an edit summary. This diff is an example of when rollback shouldn't be used. Just giving you the heads up as many admins are really harsh when it comes to misuse of rollback rights ——Ryan | t • c21:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the head's up. I thought I was using it correctly; the user had made two consecutive edits that weren't constructive (both edits contained information that was either an opinion, was already stated in the article, or was just too much information), so I used Rollback. I didn't know that Rollback was solely for vandalism. Thanks! - k|e|n|g - t | c - 21:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's a big difference between being unconstructive and 'blatant vandalism.' I witnessed a case a few weeks ago where an admin revoked the right to rollback simply because the user used it to revert a basic NPOV edition. Harsh ——Ryan | t • c06:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah thanks. I'll have to think of a way to alter the barnstar in some way. Hmm... thanks for the head's up, though! :-) - k|e|n|g - t | c - 03:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, thanks, I'm already aware of that. I was the one who started that discussion on the Talk page lol. - k|e|n|g - t | c - 16:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am going aroung taking a survey to see if users I know would support me in a campaign for adminship. If you could post your answer here that would be great. Looking around my userpage could also help make a decision if your having trouble. Thanks! MeisfunnyGab16:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Me again. I noticed how good your ability to use photoshop and create barnstars on it is, and I was wondering if you'd create the barnstar for my WikiProject. If you look at the main page, you'll notice the main color is navy and the secondary color is teal. If you could create a somewhat catoonish, baseball-looking barnstar using those two colors saying: Seattle Mariners on it, that would be great! I'll create the template and everything, I would just need you to upload an image. I understand if you have bigger fish to fry though. Thanks! MeisfunnyGab23:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem at all!! Just give me a day or two (it's been busy at work, and I have a lot to do), and I can make one for ya!! :-) - k|e|n|g - t | c - 00:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is this image okay? I tried to go the "cartoony" route like you had requested, but it wasn't appearing very good. I instead made a sleeker Barnstar with the Seattle Marines' logo. Tell me what you think. :-) - k|e|n|g - t | c - 00:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's awesome! I love it. Thanks a bunch. Just a minute...
It sure is! Your barnstar looks great! I just awarded you with the Barnstar Creator's Barnstar just now on your Talk page! :-) - k|e|n|g - t | c - 02:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks nice yes, but its a copyright violation. You have modified a trademarked logo, and are using it in a template. Unfortunately it can not be GDFL/CC licensed, and would have to be Fair Use, and Fair Use images can not be used in templates, userboxes, or awards. Sorry. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log)17:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh... okay then. I looked into the logo and it was on Wikipedia, so I figured I could use it. I'll alter the Barnstar when I get the chance. :-) - k|e|n|g - t | c - 17:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. We have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and/or the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. —— RyanLupin • (talk)22:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was just eating some Oreos and looking them up on Wikipedia while I munched on them when I stumbled across your photo of one. It's a totally gorgeous shot. Good composition and everything. IMFromKathlene (talk) 06:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because any information that has been talked about thus far is only speculation. Wikipedia is not a place for interpretation, subjective ideas, or speculative theories. Until the episode has been aired where Peter is gay or bisexual, it does not have a place on Wikipedia. — KendraMichele — 22:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, like Possum said, signatures containing text tHaT iS wRiTtEn lIkE tHiS isn't appreciated on Wikipedia, and I advise you change it. I like the colours, though! :-) — KendraMichele — 00:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for giving me advice on who to go to on how to, but i just looked at my edit count and i have a low chance at succeding.--Degrassi.21:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My recent edit of this article is not at all a disruptive edit, I was just adding something that I read in a magazine, and I couldnt find the source. So dont be threatening to block me or anything. Ripper404 (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had to remove that bit of information, though, because it's a subjective opinion. Unless you have a source for it, it simply cannot be added to Wikipedia. — KendraMichele — 13:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
File:Close up of an Oreo cookie.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Close up of an Oreo cookie.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Close up of an Oreo cookie.JPG]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I was wondering if you could look through this article List of Degrassi: The Next Generation characters and give some input I look at it and I think its horribly written asking question and making presumptions Im not sure what should be done with it but it asks questions to the reader making it very non-encyclopedic not all are like this just some and it has lines that are completely unecessary The Movie Master 1 (talk) 22:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! I don't actually heavily-edit articles on Wikipedia anymore; I have a really busy schedule now, and usually only make edits as I come across them. Sorry! — KendraMichele — 00:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
You recently reverted changes I made to this article, which said that the character called Doug will return for Series 5, making him the only character to appear in every series. I know this was unsourced, but I know it to be true, because I am an extra in Skins and I have spoken to the cast, so I know he will be returning. If that's not a good enough source, that's totally cool, but is there a way I can source that? George.millman (talk) 11:11, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! Well, congratulations on being an extra! That's so cool, and I'm completely envious of you!! :-p But unfortunately, that's not a good enough source. The kind of source you need for this is, perhaps, a news bulletin or official Skins blog entry. The information could also be added once the series airs, as it will be evident to all viewers that Doug has, in fact, returned for the 5th series. Good luck! :-) — KendraMichele — 14:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you are either a participant of WikiProject or the October wikification drive or have signed up to participate in the planned December drive, this probably concerns you. Discussions that have been inactive for a couple weeks regarding the December drive have been reactivated, and we would like you to participate in these discussions, and also consider joining the December drive. We have taken upon ourselves a massive workload, encompassing a backlog reaching June 2008 and comprising 0 articles. Barnstars will be awarded to participating editors, and also, please invite your friends to join! Please do not reply to this message here. Either reply here, here or here.
Hi there! I thought you might be interested in the December 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We're currently recruiting help to clear a massive backlog (22,000+ articles), and we need your help! Participants in the drive will receive barnstars for their contributions! If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks!
You are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Wikify. As agreed upon by the project, all members will be required to confirm their membership by February 1, 2010. If you are still interested in assisting with the project, please add yourself to the list at this page—this will renew your membership of WikiProject Wikify.
So you are a Mariners fan. I can forgive you that fault... But seriously, the reason i explicitly avoided the word "air" in The Kennedys is because it is being shown on cable channels not broadcast networks. Picky of me? Maybe. The channels are available via satellite too. If you happen to know of anything to expand the production section, maybe a little on the casting, or maybe why this is mini-series was made in the first place then please do. There is so much on early criticism that could be added but trying to not bloat it too much with why people preëmptively hate it leaves little else as from what i have found it is mostly not-publicly-disclosed. If you have any ideas or content please do come back to the article. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~08:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Haha I only used "air" because the previous phrasing (I believe "shown" was used) sounded awkward. I guess "broadcast" would have been more appropriate. In either case, the grammar of the first paragraph was off, which was my first intention of editing the article. Also, I unfortunately know nothing about The Kennedys other than that it's been abandoned by The History Channel in the States, so I can't really expand the article much. Hopefully more will be added once the series starts. :-) — AngelCaboodle — 14:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A page you created, Geoff Mann, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how they are important or significant, and thus why they should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for biographies in particular.
A tag has been placed on File:Wikipedia title.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 02:20, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Allaroundamazingaward.png listed for deletion
Hi Angel caboodle! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.
As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
This duplicates the existing article at List of deaths in rock and roll - a longstanding article, where concerns are discussed on the talk page. "List of deaths in music" is a meaningless and redundant concept for an article.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Deaths in Music, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dave Williams and Chest infection (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carly Craig, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Maxim, Tom Arnold and Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Canadian Geographical Society, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Bateman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.
Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
Hello, Angel caboodle. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Angel caboodle. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Angel caboodle. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Angel caboodle. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You're very nice, and you deserve this barnstar. Dragon 280 (talk) 17:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
