User talk:Redvers/Archive08
This is an archive. Don't reply here. Don't change it. Go to the current talk page instead. Do not pass go. Do not collect £200. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
RfA Thank you[edit]
 |
| Thank you!
Thank you, Red, for your support in my RfA. I appreciate your trust and support, especially when it came to your defense of my record. I will do my best to further help this great encyclopædia and community of ours. If there is anything that you feel I can do to help, please let me know. -- Avi 22:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for July 3rd.[edit]
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 26 | 26 June 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | |
|
| |
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.
Category.[edit]
Excuse me, Redvers. May I ask some questions? I have questions about organizing categories in each article. Could you explain to me how to organize the categories? Please, answer in my talk page. *~Daniel~* 20:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you[edit]
...for the barnstar, for brightening up my day, and for being a wonderful person. :) Regards, Sango123 03:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Kat Shoob[edit]
please notice there are several comments about reinstating her page that you have not replied to the last on the 20th of June (over 2 weeks ago) It seems there is high demand for the page to return and has recieved over 1000 google hits.
thankyou SenorKristobbal 12:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
yes it is a nice talk page. I only contacted you about the matter as it said on the page to contact the person who implemented the block. I apologise SenorKristobbal 14:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
BBC references[edit]
Thanks for starting off the referencing on the BBC article, excellent work so far, and it's saved me a lot of Googling. I've referenced the largest broadcasting corporation statement and will get to work finding references for as many of the others that I can (provided you don't get there first). One thing I thought worth bringing up is what format to follow. For the one reference I've put in I used {{cite book}}, but I've come to realise that this is somewhat controversial (on the one hand, it makes articles less subject to changes of policy regarding reference formats (as only the template need be changed), on the other hand it can make the wikitext harder to follow). To be honest I don't have preference either way (between {{cite}} or plain text), so I'll let you take the lead on this one if you wish.
Oh, and thanks ever so much for the barnstar. --Daduzi talk 13:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- {{cite}}'s absolutely fine by me. I actually didn't notice first time that you were using {{cite web}}. If we're working off of the same page that makes everything much easier. --Daduzi talk 17:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
While I'm here, just in case there's any confusion, my last edit to ITV was reverting the edit of the user before you, not your edit, but for some reason didn't come up as an edit conflict. --Daduzi talk 19:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks[edit]
Thanks for the barnstar, it's my first. I'm a little misty-eyed after receiving it, you like me, you really like me. :) One thing I don't like, however, is exorbant amounts of theatre stubs that offer no good information. Aside from their name and city, they're all looking the same to me! Metros232 15:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
BBC services charts[edit]
Nice work on the service reach charts (and the budget charts, exploding pie charts are always sexy). As you've probably seen I moved the service charts to the top of the service section but I'm not 100% happy with that layout so I've drawn up some alternatives here. Option A is the current situation, Option B is the 3 charts in a right alined table and option C is the 3 charts and the picture of Television Centre together in a right aligned table. I'm not sure which one I prefer so I'd appreciate your input. --Daduzi talk 16:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
BLHDA[edit]
i admit i am responsible for creating one page about the BLHDA but i didn't recreate it. However i will do everything i can to protect it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dean randall (talk • contribs) 20:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi!, I just noticed your block on this user. Did you also note he has a VP userbox showing, yet is not on the VP users list? Richard Harvey 20:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, again. There also appears to be a problm on the above article as the whole page seems to have just been wiped clean? Richard Harvey 20:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Warning about a possible sockpuppet[edit]
I'd like to warn you about Nicktaunt (talk · contribs). He's also been contributing to the article for Bishop Luffa School and may be a sockpuppet of the two users you blocked for personal attacks (his name is even the same as who is supposedly the "Headteacer" of the school, that I've removed from the article at least once). Ryulong 21:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks[edit]
Hey, thanks for the Barnstar. It's nice to know my efforts haven't gone unnoticed. :) But what do you suppose is Johnny the Vandal's beef with Hephaestos? I never knew him, but from what I can tell he never blocked anyone or was a particularly active vandal fighter. Cheers and thanks again, --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 16:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Political edit - advertising?[edit]
Hi, Thought you may like to take a look at this article that just appeared:- Ralph_Ferrucci. I don't know if this type of edit is permitted on Wiki, possibly political advertising, but it is just being put up from a new user. Richard Harvey 16:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well! considering that I don't care much for any politician, over this side of the pond, I'm glad to have spotted that one over your side and even more so an admin who can sort it ASAP. Glad to have been of help. Richard Harvey 17:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- 'OO'! Many apologies for the insult :-), I thought you seemed very decisive, for a colonial cousin <:)Its a good job User:Meegs is over there then to do things. Richard Harvey 17:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism[edit]
Just spotted some vandalism has been reverted, Shakira, that is remarkably similar to the type done by young Darren Randall or his friend. they may have got access after the block ended or via another IP. Richard Harvey 17:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Crude Jokes[edit]
I'm surprised the obscene version are allowed without word culling to protect junior wiki's;- There once was a man from Nantucket. Richard Harvey 17:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- I must have sensed that? Which is probably why I didn't press the rollback button. Anyway I've been online now for 11 hours and most of that on Wiki. I'm signing off and going for some food and drink. Richard Harvey 18:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Fucked Fucked Company Speedy Deletion[edit]
Long and complicated discussion with angry new user
Redvers, You recently speedy deleted the Fucked Fucked Company article that I put up. Within five minutes of you placing the delete tag I placed a hangon tag. Within 20 minutes of that three people expressed a desire to keep the article. Is this not enough to at least make the matter worthy of a normal vote? You deleted the article within one hour of creation and did not bother to respond on the discussion page or my talk page.
I assure this article is no joke or prank. I have since recreated the article as there has been no discussion at all yet on the matter. Did you even see the discussion page? If you would please get in contact with me, it would be appreciated. Thank you! MrGorman 18:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
RESPONSE TO TALK PAGE
What I do not understand is that you say this wasn't just yourself, however it was deleted within about 30 minutes. I looked under the deletion log and did not see any others commenting on this. Can you direct me to the discussion where people besides yourself discussed this? Which people are these and how many? Why exactly was it deleted? Is it possible that you might be misunderstanding something and taking it out of context not knowing the nature of the thing in question? For all I know you saw a naughty word and deleted it because of that. It is ridiculous. It seems logical to have a discussion. Giving out three pages that consist of 5,000 words is not a discussion. It is merely throwing out URLs, completely one way. The most I requested here was that this not be deleted speedily but instead be handled through normal deletion priceedures so that it can be discussed and that myself and others can see and participate in the discussion. MrGorman 19:21, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- Replied on talk page with details of deletion timetable and note of how 6 or so long-time, good-standing editors and admins agreed with decisions taken. ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:25, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Response 2
The only reason I recreated it was because I had ZERO communication from you about it being deleted despite putting on the HANGON tag and publishing my reasons in the discussion page as requested. Not only did I do so, but also at least three other people. You then deleted even the discussion page as well.
Why would you delete the discussion page?
No I am not going to retry to recreate the article at this time and would have stopped had you have had the courtesy to respond to me after I placed the hangon tage and took the time to publish reasoning on the discussion page (which you apparently deleted).
Regarding soliciting votes, you do not know what you are talking about. I asked people to come and express themselves about it - to educate you - for all I know you have never even seen the site and saw the "bad words" and thought "this isn't real and is a joke". I wanted you to see that it was not a joke.
Regarding the deletion and recreation, please explain again why the discussion page with three other people's comments was deleted? In the Speedy Deletion tag wiki expressly asked that a person who disagree places a "hangon" tag and then discusses it on the discussion page. This was done. However you deleted that too.
It honestly seems to me that Wiki is beginning to look like a circle jerk where there are a few elite members who care nothing about the internet community -- the ones who actually view your content. That you would not have taken the time to at least have discussion with me, a new contributer, after specifically asking for it prior to deleting the page shows this. Likewise you also ignored the people who voiced opposition, not even addressing the concerns. It isn't a vote, no, it appears it is a dictatorship where feedback is not even listened to. I know if I were an admin or such and someone honestly took the time to question Seppedy Deletion and wanted a chance to speak, I would have at least had the courtesy to do so before deleting the article ten minutes later. If nothing else, you appear to have a very significant communication problem here at wiki, but I also suggest ego problems as well. Take care.
Regarding these Deletions, if you will delete comments from well meaning users and my work without discussion, I'm not sure if I will bother working with you. I may just start a digg article and create a more free competitor who actually allows community input and does not legitimate delete articles in 30 minutes without discussion. Thank you. (discussion archived at external sites and on my talk page) MrGorman 19:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- As long as you get the last word, darling. And I look forward to being an editor in your more free competitor to Wikipedia, possibly adding nonsense and PR puffs rather than removing them. It'll make a nice change. Good luck with your digg! ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
"Having the option of settling a dispute by taking a poll, instead of the careful consideration, [b]dissection and eventual synthesis of each side's arguments[/b], actually undermines the progress in dispute resolution that Wiki has allowed." MrGorman 19:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- Um, I'm sure you had a point to make there, but frankly I can't see it. But thanks for the quote. I shall treasure it always. ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
What were my arguments and what were yours? Or the people who kept deleteing this article. I don't even know who they are other than you. There was no discussion but after the fact here and now -- after you have threatened to ban me and have protected the page from recreation. That is the point. It is really sad. I'm not a spammer - that isn't my site either. I was just a new user who came to wikipedia.
In the past I also watched other admins delete a listing for a notable religious group. Of course the deleting admin was a devout Christian (as were a majority of the admins voting) and the group was something other than christian and could be percieved as controversal. Anyway "you" (wiki admins) did delete that article within a week with the same excuses "not notable enough" and that people were "voting" and being "solicited" (when popularity was your main excuse for deleting the article in the first place).
I really do feel that with each passing week you snub more and more people (you certainly did just now to myself and all three users whose comments you did delete without even discussing). In the end I think this will add up. Likewise your users come here trying to find information on something and they do not find it due to it being deleted. As such I do think there is a growing need for a wiki competitor, especially as it concerns alternative and controversial topics which for one reason or another get deleted on wikipedia. Allowing people to post information is not necessarily spam. I will tell you that in this case spam was not the goal. The real objective was to simply share information and allow others to do so. Something which you stopped cold by your actions. I'm not anti-wiki, I'm just sad to see the censorship and close-mindedness. Apparently even from some of those who should know better. I guess this is not the place for such criticism so I will stop. Side note, I don't mean this to be personal either. You seem alright to me. MrGorman 20:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
RATIONAL EXAMINATION OF REASON FOR DELETION I found the original reason for the proposed speedy deletion which was "no value, obscene and threatening". I will examine these one by one.
OBSCENE- This is the name of the forum and the site. The place it came from Fucked Company also has an existing Wiki page and has been up for years. Other than the word "Fucked" which was used only in the title, I cannot fathom how it is obcene?
THREATENING- What is threatening about the entry? There is no threat to anyone. Besides, have you seen the Wiki page Last Measure yet? It is a page about browser bombs. If you think Discussing a forum and culture is threatening, what do you think of the Last Measure page? LOL
NO VALUE- Ok. Maybe there is some truth here. It is a perspective thing. Many people might see value on this. I will give you this one. But I think at the least further discussion on it should be warranted. For starters the board is a spinoff from another forum wghich was ran by the ex-Adbrite CEO and founder Phillip Kaplan who already has a wiki entry.
And here is my rational response to those charges. But of course, the article was already deleted and copy protected and I never had much of a chance to address those charges until now. This would have been brought up if the article was AfD instead of Speedy Deletion. Most troubling is the charge of being Obcene. That is utter nonsense given the content of the use of the word "Fuck" as explained above! Coem on, I know Wiki isn't owned by the Christian Coalition! MrGorman
Comment[edit]
sorry for deleting text. The page seems a bit crowded. thts why i did it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dean randall (talk • contribs)
vandalism[edit]
I am sick of being accused of vandalism i am not associated with. I do not approve nor practise vandalism. I did not vandalise the shakira page, neither did my friend to my knowledge. Dean randall 20:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
btw 15yrs old isn't tht young
Review request[edit]
Would you mind taking a glance at HPV and its talk page Talk:HPV? I'd like to get an outside party to take a gander at the discussion there (just a forewarning, the HPV page redirects to HPV (disambiguation) which is what the discussion is about. I (and a couple of others who I don't think have been around in awhile so they haven't participated in the discussion yet)believe that the page should redirect to the human papillomavirus article as that is the most popular search term by far but another editor thinks it should go to a disambig page because of a more-obscure human powered vehicle article. Would you mind sticking your head in and looking? I want to see what someone from the outside thinks and also to make sure I'm not "biting the noobs" because I think some of my comments might be interpreted as such when they're not intended that way. Cheers, Metros232 21:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
account[edit]
please ignore the request to delete mine and jimothytrotter's accounts. he felt forced into doing it in fear of getting into trouble about re-creating BLHDA, which he did, not me! Please do not contact the school as he has promised not to edit the Bishop luffa page again, (even though his recent comments have been made in good will.)
Dean randall 21:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC) btw i am not homophobic. i just find it unusual
64.26.170.69[edit]
I see this IP which originates from the National Library in Ottawa, has made two edits.[[1]] One of the edits you have striked out.[[2]] I think the other edit should be struck out too?[[3]] Am I elgible to vote on the Articles for deletion page? Pete Peters 21:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Persistent Realms LLC[edit]
I'm not sure how much you know about the mudding scene, but in many ways it's quite different. There are VERY few companies in there, the majority of the games are made as hobbies. Iron Realms Entertainment, ourselves, Simutronics, and EdgeE games, and Medivia are the only major ones. Our names are all well known within the community, and many of the others have had pages on Wikipedia for years without problems. I know TMS and TMC(Top Mud Sites and The Mudconnector) are probably not the type of rankings you all have in mind, but those are all that we have. They are highly used and respected websites within our community. We have held steady at 27th for 2 months, and before that were still within the top 40 since being added to the list.
Our page on Wikipedia was actually added by someone whom appears to be an editor, 68.226.61.4, is the ip that was attached to it. It was pointed out to me, and I put some basic information on it. After that, others have added the information themselves from our highly active forums and blog.
You have a large list of mud and mud company sites listed on Wikipedia at Category:MU* games why are they still there without a problem, many of them are unknowns.
We will respect your choice, but I hope that you are able to see all of the facts about ourselves and the mudding Oncommunity before making a choice. PR Baram 03:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I understand what you're saying, and I feel we have shown that it is not original research(as the material in the article has come directly from the company site and not the editor's own thoughts) and the fortune telling(as the material are things that is already part of our products). Notability is really subjective, what is notable in the MUD community is quite different. On the two major sites TMC and TMS we are known and already notable. Outside of the MUD community all companies are basically unknowns. How does one prove notability in such a case? I am in the process of having some articles that I have written published on the TMC website, which is one of the new major sites for our genre. While they are my own writings, the idea's contained within are major parts of our companies philosophies and methods. PR Baram 14:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC) On another note, is it Ehheh that will be the one making the choice? If so, is there anyway that another admin type person could make that choice? While I don't know, I have a feeling he is a player of IRE, our main competition. A week ago there was a big fuss about how a player run Wiki dedicated to IRE games added information about us, and a whole section for us, to it. Also that player, whom is interested in our first game, also asked me to be a sysop as I'm a programmer and can help him add features to his wiki page. Right after that happened, our page(that was created by someone not part of our group of people, and edited many times by people outside of our group) got put up for deletion. It could be 100% coincidence, and maybe we can't show notability now, but I know we would feel better if someone else made that choice. PR Baram 14:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the information, I will pass it on to one of the people that have been writing them. As a company officer I would rather have someone that isn't me or my partner write it, so it doesn't come across as self promotion. PR Baram 15:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 10th[edit]
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 28 | 10 July 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | |
|
| |
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. --Randy Johnston (‽) 04:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Puppetteer removes cat tag from IP[edit]
Also please take a look at this. The IP admits he is the puppetteer User:Subhash bose. He insists on removing the suspected sp category links. [4]. Check out his language too. [5] [6] [7]. The IPs have a common subnet. He may have enabled DHCP on his system. Hence the slight variations in the string. Incidentally another user has removed the cat tag [8] from his user page without explanation. Check out this threat too. He is also quite busy campaigning for support for his agenda here. What action ought to be taken? Anwar 15:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Diadora[edit]
I spotted Inappropiate comment left on the Diadora talk page. I came accross it by coincedence and i can assure you it has nothing do to with me. Dean randall 15:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Re:Good work![edit]
Thanks! I can't claim it was the hardest thing I've ever done on Wikipedia (helping re-design and then acting on reports at WP:RFI takes up much more of my time), but still nice to see someone appreciated it :) Petros471 17:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Looks good. One problem though- you talk about using it in "the only decent browser invented" - it works fine in Opera as well - you just tick "Show in panel" as opposed to "open in sidebar". Also, to save people having to save it, and to make it so that only one person has to update the file, I've loaded it onto my website so it can be bookmarked easily. Locations: plain, admin. Petros471 17:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. If you do visit the opera link I gave you above- I disclaim all responsibility for the quite horrendously cheesy set of models they used for their latest promotional photo's! Petros471 18:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
jedforest instrumental band[edit]
I dont get this. ???
The jedforest instrumental band is a historical and charitable organization serving southern Scotland dating back to 1854. (predating Pink Floyd by 100 years;)
Many of the festivals associated with the Scottish Borders reigion heavily feature this 'group'
why was it deleted.
Is there a problem with server space ?
thanks for the rigtht to reply regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John_kirk (talk • contribs)
- Copyright violation, deleted (correctly) by someone else. Replied on user's talk page. ➨ ЯEDVERS 10:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
hello[edit]
Thanks for your input, I sumbled upon the page when I found the link on top. I though it the person who posted the page would be offended if the page was deleted. Henry Bigg 1986 12:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
jed band[edit]
- It was a direct copyright violation from another website. Wikipedia accepts only original, verifiable work. We do not accept text copied directly from another website or source, especially when that source clearly states "© 2005 Jedforest Instrumental Band. All rights reserved." When you entered the text into Wikipedia, you were given a clear message that said "Do not violate any copyright! You agree to license all submissions under the GFDL. Use verifiable sources for encyclopedia content." You did not follow that instruction. # Articles on Wikipedia must be of encyclopedic merit. This means they must be about a notable subject and must assert notability for their subject. The copyright violation article in question did not assert notability for the group, so the deleting administrator also quoted one of our speedy deletion criteria, CSD-A7 (failure to assert notability). Additionally, although this was not quoted by the administrator in question, the article failed to meet with one of our standards for inclusion in the encyclopedia - quoted at this page.
1. I own all the copyright for the website in question. I allow wiki to use any content found on www.jedforestinstrumentalband.org.uk (how do I make this legal?)
2. Notable merit of the JIB is vast. both in historic tearms and recent national achievement. Even to its continuous charitable status since its formation for the very first Border Games in 1854. (one year before the formation of the Dlack Dyke Mills band)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Dyke_Mills_Band
john kirk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.141.60 (talk • contribs)
Are you advising me he is allowed to keep spamming my User page ? Porky Pig 18:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hello, he is vandalizing my User page, second time today, he was already warned once, see he talk page, I believe this qualifies as vandalism. Thank you Porky Pig 18:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Now another editor is doing it, note they both have the Islamic Barnstar. I am under attack and require an administrator to stop it. They are mad about the ensuing debate at the Category:Anti-Semitic people talk page. Thank you Porky Pig 18:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
The Outer Limits episodes[edit]
Thanks for rejecting some of the speedy deletion copyvios. As I understand it, a new editor has recently created some The Outer Limits episode articles, and may have copied some information from tv.com. Unfortunately, another admin seems to have been a bit overzealous and speedied several previously existing articles that were mistakenly tagged as copyvios. You (rightly) rejected some... thanks. However, I was wondering if you could restore a couple of those wrongly speedied. The ones I've been able to identify quickly from the deletion log were:
- 2006-07-12 20:48:42 Mo0 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Lithia (episode)" (Copyvio)
- 2006-07-12 20:48:28 Mo0 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Double Helix (episode)" (Copyvio)
- 2006-07-12 20:48:37 Mo0 (Talk | contribs) deleted "In Our Own Image (episode)" (Copyvio)
Could you restore these... after satisfying yourself that are not copyvios, of course. Thanks. - Motor (talk) 20:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Article 'Todd drehs'[edit]
Sorry about that - seems to have been my edit to add a speedy tag coincided with the original page deletion...bad timing I guess. Regards, Chrisd87 20:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
RE: Revert[edit]
Hi. Just wanted to say that you're welcome regarding the revert, and thanks for the barnstar! Very rude of me to have taken so long to reply to you, sorry :( Cheers TigerShark 22:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Outer Limits episodes[edit]
This is going to look really crappy of me, but I wouldn't have noticed if you'd undeleted them and not told me about it, and if I had noticed it somehow, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. I don't want to say that I don't try to be thorough (although in this one particular case I wasn't, but it appeared to be just precedent between the articles), but I'm cautious enough about my actions that if someone undoes it I'm more likely to assume I did something wrong rather than the other person is.
So yeah, that was a long ranting speech and stuff, but I'm still a bit too rusty to be calling anything on anyone (back from a 3-month wikibreak!) Thanks for pointing that out to me, though. :) Mo0[talk] 06:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
How can I delete pages I created in error[edit]
Hi, while moving around the page on Henry B. Hollins I kept making typos. I would like to clean up my mess and erase these pages. How do I go about doing that? Please reply on my talk page. Thanks. --LongIslander 15:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
User page reverts[edit]
No probs, it's my pleasure. Thanks for the barnstar. Cheered me up a bit after a rotten day. Take care -- Samir धर्म 00:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
This rocks!! As a new wikipedian, I have been struggling with multiple tabs in Mozilla Firefox to hide stuff that I need handy. I never thought to put it into the sidebar. :) Thank you again -- MrDolomite | Talk 20:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Userbox templates[edit]
Redvers Hi! Are you aware of this moving about of userbox templates to userspace issue? I noticed earlier that the photography userbox on my page had become corrupted and clicking on it took me to the talk page of [[9]]. On checking it out I noted that the template page showed a redirect to a userspage, who turned out to be a 16 year old lad in Australia? The talk page had also been redirected to the users talk page, where I noted other users had posted questions asking what was going on. so I suspected Vandalism and reverted the change. I also noted another userbox on the same users page was corrupted so performed the same reversal of redirect on that as well. My edits have been reverted back and I noted a comment left by the user who did it. Correspondingly I have left a message on his talk page User_talk:MiraLuka I would be grateful if you could take a peek and advise who you feel is in the right. If I have misunderstood the issue I will accept it. I may not agree, but thats my right, but I will accept it. Richard Harvey 14:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oops! You beat me to it. I just noticed I had put the message on the wrong page sorry about that, my fingers were going faster than my eyes. Richard Harvey 16:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Userboxen[edit]
Hi! Thanks for that, I had sussed that a 'new group' of people were forming up. I see it getting as messy as the traditional / Historic problem. I have decided to keep out of the issue altogether, after making my initial comments, on the two talk pages, to the blinkered ones. I have created a sub page myself to store the code of the individual user boxes I use and at the moment have put the photograpy userbox set on my userpage in place of the template, once I have played about with it I will replace my own uneditable boxes out. Richard Harvey 21:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
MUDs[edit]
Ok, our page got deleted. No problem, I'm sure it will fit in later when we've actually released out first game. My question now is why is it that other, even less notable than us, MUD and MUD company sites manage to stay? Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperian%2C_the_Sundered_Heavens one of Iron Realm Entertainments games. It's purely an advertisement, yet it stays(if you look someone had marked it for deletion and it was promptly removed). All of the IRE games are like that, many of their pages are stubs too. There's also Carrion Fields and Godwars which are both fairly un-notable, even in the MUD community. Just seems like double standards to me, but maybe I'm missing something. I'm directing this towards you as you have been the only helpful person so far. PR Baram 08:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again for the reply, while I do think that some of their pages don't fit in, I also know putting them on AfD would just look like I was being spiteful. I do just find it odd how some pages can exist, while others of similar level and type do not. It's not that big of a deal, later we will be able to fully meet the notability requirements and then will look at being a part of Wikipedia again. One last question, when that time comes, do we have to go through the undelete process, or can a new article just be written? PR Baram 09:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Unclosed AfD I found[edit]
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stelios kalogerakis 2
- Was speedy deleted, but doesn't have the nice box that shows that it's closed. Ryulong 09:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 17th[edit]
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 29 | 17 July 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | RSS 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. Treebark (talk) 23:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Imposters category[edit]
No, i'm not creating these, they've been created by quite small-minded "friends" of mine...pah. User:JoanneB added {{imposter|Garykirk}} to some of them, but since her assistance more have been created...please check Special:Log/newusers for references to I was on Millionaire, Garald/Garalina, "Oh Eddie" and so on. Sorry for the inconvenience. Angela suggested to me on Skype to report it on WP:AN/I. — Garykirk | talk! 16:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- User:I was on Who Wants to be a Millionaire is one too; I added the tag but can't block it myself. — Garykirk | talk! 16:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
All your blocks are belong to us. (talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log)[edit]
Heavy duty AOL denial of service vandal, massive amounts of collateral damage, basically hitting all of AOL--172.164.218.230 18:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism help![edit]
Hello Revers, Sorry to bother you but some nutter has vandalised the entry for Munchlax (a type of Pokemon) by placing images of a penis at the top of the article...
I can't find a way to remove them, could you help me out?
--Jack-McLangley 16:07, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
-Oops someone has already dealt with it...
Now that the BBC peer review has closed following precisely one response (and an automated one at that) I was wondering what you thought was the next best course of action. Do we try another peer review later on and hope an actual human being responds this time? Or do we try for FA status with the article as it stands? Personally, my gut is telling me it won't get FA at the moment, but we could get some actual feedback by going down this route, take it on board and try again later. Given that you have more experience in such matters than I, I figured it best to see what you thought. --Daduzi talk 19:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- First of all, apologies for the lateness of the reply; I'd written a lengthy response just before going out today but pressed the wrong button and lost it all. Gah.
- So, I guess a listing on FAC is probably the next best step. Given that I've got a pretty thick skin and am used to nitpicking criticism (academia ahoy), and that my edits to the article have been mostly superficial (orgnaisation, referencing, layout) rather than substantial I don't think the criticism will be too much of a problem. I think co-signing would be a great idea, maybe have me write the initial nomination and you do a co-nomination (along the lines of WP:FAC#Final Fantasy VIII), that way you can add your own independent tuppence worth. Hopefully the article will pass first time, but if not at least we'll get some actual feedback this time.
- As regards adminship I'd love to join the cabal, and have the time to dedicate to it at the moment (university year finished and dissertation all but finished). First though, I think it best if I spent some time pootling around the inner workings (AfD, RfC and the like) to get a feel for how they work. I've just started contributing to AfD debates and now realise that even though I'm pretty familiar with the relevant criteria my knowledge of precedent and how exactly it applies is lacking. I think I'll have to also work on my wrong button pressing habit, as that could have disastrous consequences.
- On the subject of AfDs I recently got involved with the discussion on the Angry Nintendo Nerd article. The debate was closed by Mostly Rainy with the reason given as "No consensus. The amount of comments about deleting and keeping are about even". At first glance this seams resonable enough, with 9 deletes to 8 keeps. Problem is that given the fact that of the keep votes 2 came from users whose first edit was to the AfD page, 1 from a user whose only edits were to the article in question and the AfD, 2 came from users with only one edit not to the article/AfD and 1 came from a user who'd deleted and/or edited the keep votes of others. Now I was arguing to delete, but I accept I didn't do the best of jobs arguing my case, and I also accept that it might have been a borderline case (the individual in question is notable, albeit only to a very select group (old Nintendo game fans)). If the debate had been closed on the basis that the subject was notable I don't think I'd have any issues with it, it's just that with all the shenanigans going on on the keep side, and quite possible sockpuppetry/vote harvesting, I don't think a closure based on number of votes really stands up. I'm tempted to list the closure on WP:DRV, but given the very low success rate of listings there and the fact that it might just be sour grapes on my behalf I figured it best to seek a second opinion. Sorry to trouble you with this unrelated issue, but I figured you'd have more experience in these matters than I.--Daduzi talk 23:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
My dear Redvers[edit]
My dear Redvers, what can I say, but that I'm completely in awe and speechless for your beautiful gift, but above everything else, for your incredibly kind words for me. Being honored in such a way by one of those Wikipedians whose name I've become so familiar with (and I think everybody else has) is more than I think I'd ever deserve. Some time ago, I expressed my interest about the culture of India to Gurubrahma, an editor whom I hold in the highest respect, and his own words were that I should come to you instead. I've seen tour name ime and time again, and always attached to great ideas, to helpful thoughts, and most important, to respectful and kind words towards everybody. It is for all these reasons that I feel undeserving, and at the same time so heart-rendingly grateful to you. May this be but the beginning of a friendship, my dear Redvers - nothing would make me happier and honor me more. A great big hug, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 10:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Username[edit]
Hi I've had my username changed to Gary Kirk to prepare for m:Single login specification and have been advised to recreate this account (Garykirk) and request it be indefinitely blocked to prevent impersonation - and you know what problems I've had with that! So, please assist me :) Garykirk 12:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
porn[edit]
I came across this explicit picture and was not sure if it is allowed in wikipedia, Although the creator tried to link it to Deep throat (sexual act)i thought it might be innapropiate Dean randall 22:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue V - July 2006[edit]
The July 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot.
Stalker[edit]
I seem to notice you in the history of pages shortly after i have edited them. Are you closely monitoring me? Although i do create articles requiring close attention afterwards i dislike the fact you are always putting my work down. Dean randall 17:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough[edit]
i read your letter (in it's entirity) and i accept that some of my writing is not up to standard. I will do my best to ensure my articles are written to a good standard. Dean randall 19:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 24th[edit]
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 30 | 24 July 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | RSS 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. --Michael Snow 04:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Image of Dave Thomas[edit]
I have written to the editors of the Burnley website and asked for permission to display the picture of Dave Thomas but i am still waiting for a response. So in the mean time i will take the image off. Is it legal if i print the picture off then photograph the picture or even better, take a picture of the man himself. Dean randall 17:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi.[edit]
Hi,
Sorry for doing so however I am very fustrated that I tried adding a valid article to the 'BBC' page which I tried quite hard on putting together and some moron removed it. I wanted to become someone who was quite involved with the work of the English Wikipedia and maybe possibilly help out but no one seems to appreciate my work.
Calum
(I do have an account but can't be bothered logging in yet)
RE: Pokémon[edit]
Well, yes and no. I really am not the best person to ask about the newer serieses (okay - how am I supposed to write that?) but that article was clearly content-less, so I speedied.
Anyway, yes, please do add me on Skype (username: "Celestianpower") and we can use text chats. I would love to talk to you in reality though, so do consider getting a mic - cheap ones go as low as £7 ($12-ish). I'm rabbitting though, so see you around!
Thanks and kind regards, —Celestianpower háblame 20:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- Haha! I wish. I'll look forward to it (and I've had plenty of experience with bad quality headsets, so it should be a problem :) ). —Celestianpower háblame 21:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Paignton reverts[edit]
Thanks for doing this. I've placed another warning on the talk page of the IP address and advised administrators. Cheers Nigel 15:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Personal attacks[edit]
I may be being a bit "dim" when i say this but i was just wondering how "removing excrement" could be seen as an attack? It appears to me to be a humourous comment and not one which should be seen as an insult or anything which is in anyway harmful, maybe its just because I myself have a more developed sense of humour than you after watching hours of situation comedies on the old plasma screen that i can see that this was purely a joke comment and should not be seen as anything more.
As far as i'm concerned the world is a bad place without a bit of houmour, whether misplaced or not, comical moments are the moments that stay with us for life and should be treasured, if you still fail to see this then I hope you find a cure for your problem soon.
If you feel there is a proper and sufficeient reason for the blocking of my friend darren then would you please make it clear and all will be well. In the mean time I will be contacting Darren and asking him if the comment 'after being warned' is a true comment or not, as i myslef am unaware of any warning. cheers your pal ➨ JIMOTHY T
p.s Always look on the Funny side of life!
Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history Coordinator Elections![edit]
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 11!
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 19:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Oopsy[edit]
Hey there. Just thought I'd drop a line apologising for my misuse of the edit summary over at AIAV. I got edit conflicted, did the edit again, took out more, and mistakenly used the same summary. Sorry about that. Anyway, hope things are good with you. :) All the best -- Banes 19:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
John Ketcham (1782)[edit]
You have suggested that my article be deleted. I have posted the references and the individual John Ketcham (1782) is my ancestor. How much more information do you need other than a passed down account? I you should have left a message. Noles1984 20:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
If you look at the page history, I imput the url, but it wouldn't show up in the template. No clue why, but be a glitch. I even looked at the template to see if it had been changed, but I didn't see any. And I've been using that template all day.--Esprit15d 19:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I was creating doppleganger accounts with those names to prevent impersonation by actual vandals. Ryūlóng 20:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. I notified the users at #vandalism-en-wp, but you all got to it before I could tag the doppleganger tags. Ryūlóng 20:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
lol[edit]
You got the one previous to it... That one I saw, went to revert, and you had already reverted, and blocked the vandal. Syrthiss 21:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Confused[edit]
I was blocked by you, but I don't understand why I was blocked. It said that someone by the name I love cats used my username, so was my account hacked? I wasn't doing anything wrong, I was just editting the Nightwalker page to put up some pictures... --Sakano 22:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- AOL Collateral damage, see ILOVECATSWITHWHEELS (talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log) --64.12.116.71 23:07, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
The White[edit]
Thanks for taking the time for explaining procedures and etiquette. I'll improve the information in the article as soon as possible. It is obvious that the band meets the WP:BAND criteria by this point alone: "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)." But this information was already present in the article when it was set for speedy deletion, so I'm a bit confused here. I'll add other details that match the criteria to make it more solid, anyway. The other thing I don't understand is, when you mention "a source for what you're saying", is the band's official webpage a source good enough? A third dim matter: what has the WP:CORP has to do with this article? It's a band what we're talking about, not a corporation, so I don't get it clearly. Thanks again for your patience. --Trencacloscas 13:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi there again! Alright. I did some reformation on the article and provided some references. Also put some considerations in the Discussion board. Is it enough or something else is required? --Trencacloscas 06:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Colloquis[edit]
hey redvers, long time no see lol. NOT! Your so persistent, your edit summary for my conversagnet article was rather upsetting, the fact that conversagent changed its name could be simply backed up by a google search, and the fact that you made out as if the whole article was some type of joke by impylying that you think the article isn't even a real article is not what I call funny either. I read the article through and it does not appear to me to be an advert, maybe we should get a second opinion... at your discression!
I know we've had our differences in the past but if we could please try to move on in our lifes that would be great, as for the colloquis article... I have tried to add some links and do some other stuff, feel free to take a look.
reply[edit]
Thanks for the reply redvers however I still fail to see which part of this article reads like an advert?? If i wasn't busy packing for my holiday 2moro I would be happy to spend more time debating this with you...if you would be so kind as to submit if for peer review for me I would be most grateful! I look forward to getting abck from holiday and seeing this has been resolved!
Hi Redvers, You may remember this user for the warning you gave him for the personal attack on my talk page. The personal attack didn't bother me much (or at all actually, I've had much worse), but I am a bit worried that they seem to be going off the deep end somewhat. After I reverted another attempt to add a link to the user's pet site to Heaven [10] I recommended they add content rather than links [11]. They did so, but the addition was, frankly, not greatly encyclopaedic [12] and was fairly unsurprisingly reverted by another user [13]. This is when Earthheaven1 seemed to go off the deep end, blanking the article and replacing it with this text, and leaving this comment on the talk page. I've issued them with a vandalism warning, but given that it's the users first real instance of vandalism didn't feel it warrented posting to WP:AIV. I thought I'd give you a heads up, however, so you could keep an eye on them and/or offer some words of wisdom. --Daduzi talk 00:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Vandals hit your page[edit]
Your Page got vandalised so here is a star to show it stood its ground. Æon Insane Ward 06:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome[edit]
...and thank you for the D of the W! If there's one thing I strongly believe here, it is that personal attacks should never be tolerated, for they make it a toxic working environment. Keep up the good work, and happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
copyright[edit]
I have commited no copyright infringement as i have carefully reworded the text. Also there are no terms on there website preventing people from borrowing pictures or text. ➨ Darren
Re:Barnstar[edit]
Wow, two in one day alone. Thank you for the defender barnstar, it really does mean a lot to me. I hope you good fortune, and I hope that that crazy whatsit who was attacking you yesterday has decided to give up and get blocked/banned. Cheers. Galactor213 16:49, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Wikimania[edit]
I noticed the upcoming Wikimania is taking place in America. Is there an annual meeting in England? ➨ Darren
Thanks for the reply. Plz see my comment about the criteria in my usertalk section. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Tomtermite 02:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Tomtermite