User talk:Wknight94

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This user [1] an administrator on the English Wikipedia.
Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1 | October 19, 2005-January 13, 2006
  2. Archive 2 | January 14, 2006-April 2, 2006
  3. Archive 3 | April 3, 2006-July 22, 2006
  4. Archive 4 | July 23, 2006-September 23, 2006
  5. Archive 5 | September 24, 2006-November 19, 2006


Contents

[edit] Destination Hotels & Resorts

Can you please help me figure out what needs to be wikified on the Destination Hotels & Resorts article? If you can point me in the right direction I’ll be more than happy to wirkify the ariticle. (K107)

The last section is the only one that is wikified. All of the city names and such throughout the rest of the article can be wikified. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

One reason I didn’t wikify all the city names is because I didn’t think it was necessary to do so on any repeating city through out the article. Isn’t once enough? I wikified the city names on the property section which I thought would be enough considering most of the city are repeated else where. K107 17:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Generally, items that are wikified are done the first time they appear in an article. Articles are usually read from top to bottom. If I saw a city name near the top and said to myself, "now where is that city?", but it wasn't wikified there, I'd edit the page and wikify it - then it would be wikified in two places which is not generally good. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I edited the article to the best of my knowledge and made sure not to repeat any internal link twice. K107 17:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jose Esquevar Sanchez

The article on Jose Esquevar Sanchez is neither inappropraite or a hoax. It is a true story of a real luchadore and if you would just give me time I will post my resources. I think that you should atleast give me a chance to create a detailed and informative page on Jose's short life. He is an athlete, plenty of athletes have pages. Why can't Jose have one? To consder it a hoax is proposterous. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Honorjose (talk • contribs) .

[edit] English Independence Party

Please go to WP:DRV for English Independence Party instead of creating it again. This was the second time you've recreated it. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I can guarantee this is NOT the second time i've recreated the EIP article, this was my first time. Anyway I can also guarantee I personally won't be trying to recreate it. R Johnson

[edit] Rachel St. John

Why are we salting Rachel St. John when it keeps getting recreated by the same user? Just block him/her. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, I didn't think of that. I'll do that next time. (P.S. It may be time for you to archive your talk page) —Mets501 (talk) 02:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • (crosspost from ANI) Unless there is evidence of vandalism or other nastiness, I'm not in favor of blocking a user that posts a bit of self-promotion. I believe that if we don't "bite" this user but point xem to some indication of what is good content for an encyclopedia, we could turn this person into a good contributor instead of chasing xem off. (besides, if the user is truly bent on adding this article, this is far better stopped by protection than by a block which can be evaded through sockpuppetry). I urge you to overturn this block. (Radiant) 08:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Thank you for doing that. I agree with everything you say about people who post disruptive nonsense, but I tend to hope that someone who just wants to write about xyrself isn't malicious (as opposed to e.g. people who add pictures of genitalia to random articles). I'll keep an eye out for this Rhcp; I hope I won't be disappointed in xem. Yours, (Radiant) 14:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
      • The problem is, if she's going to sockpuppeteer over it, then blocking those isn't actually going to help because she'll just make a new sockpuppet. Wouldn't salting then be a better solution? (Radiant) 12:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Thanks. I had the page watchlisted but because of your swift and efficient reaction I hadn't noticed a change. Both pages are now locked. (Radiant) 12:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beckett Media Company

I'm pretty sure there was a long article about the compnay, but i can't seem to figure out what happened. Does this mean that the article never existed? Thought you could help me on that one. //Tecmobowl 17:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

There was a Beckett Media article that was created in late August and deleted on October 12 because it was a copyright violation from http://www.beckett.com/mediarelations/aboutbeckett.html. Does the text at that URL look familiar? I don't see a Beckett Media Company article by that exact name though. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't believe the article was a straight copy, but then again, i don't remember. I just wanted to make sure i wasn't going crazy so thank you.
I While you're floating around, I'm helping someone with their edits to Baseball card. The person had created Dr. James Beckett which I have moved, per WP:NCP, to James Beckett. After looking at his version, I don't think it is ideal. What is the best way for me to help this person learn about creating biographies? I have tried to point him to WP:LIVING. He (i think it's a he) is an enthusiastic contributor and that's a good thing. // Tecmobowl 17:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Well thanks for the tips. I have tried to balance the "take it slow" with the idea that a lot of the stuff on hear is in pretty bad shape. I know Sandy Koufax is a featured article right now, and i cannot see why. Thanks for the tip. // Tecmobowl 18:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Operation Bolo

i checked up my history on my article operation bolo and saw u looked at it so i have to ask how did u like itTu-49 21:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't lose hope!

People who want to see a change need to stick with it. What happens is a few of us are pushing at any given time, and then some of us give up, so there is never quite enough of us around to get it going. Please, don't give up, this is as close as we've ever gotten, and I think we're going to do it. --Serge 22:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

We're ahead 55% to 45% in the poll! --Serge 23:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] image chaes.jpg

Where does it say that my image is not free? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Levg79 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Sockpuppetry

Though I appreciate that the log is definitely one source of information, in most cases I think it's of limited usefulness. For example, when you sent me that message, I logged off, created this new account, and logged back on. Does it show up in any of your logs? It doesn't seem to show up in mine. --ElonkaBot 03:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

(reply) Ask me off-wiki, I'll tell you.  :) --Elonka 05:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:195.225.189.7

You've just blocked the above user for 24 hours. This looks reasonable since this is a shared IP. of the Warwickshire County Council. However, if you look at the last entry of this user : [2], you'll see that this wasn't just ordinary vandalism, but a grave accusation against a living person that could cause serious harm to Wikipedia. That entry occurred at 15.33 (my European time zone), while you blocked the IP at 15.34. So it is quite possible that you hadn't seen this edit. I've reverted it at 15.34, so that the possibility that anyone has read this is close to zero. In my opinion a much longer block is warranted, even if it is a shared IP. Even an OFFICE action could be warranted to erase the history of this edit in Chelsea F.C.. You better take a second look. JoJan 15:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] insound article

i noticed you deemed my recently created article (titled "Insound") to be written to promote a company. i created the article because i noticed that a band's wikipedia article attempted to link to Insound's but the article did not exist. i searched wikipedia for "Insound" and found this to be the case on multiple band articles. having had experience ordering from insound and reading about it online, and being a fan of wikipedia, i felt i could make a good attempt at writing the first incarnation of its article. after receiving your message, i re-read wikipedia's criteria for notability for companies and corporations. while these criteria seem a bit odd, i did manage to find two or three places in the print media where Insound was the subject of the article. it seems strange that a company/web site can be wildly popular in internet culture, including continuous mentions on many respected and praised blogs and web-based news organizations (for example pitchforkmedia, stereogum and tiny mixtapes) and not be considered notable. this is especially strange considering wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and that the audience which reads this sort of blog is likely a sizable subset of wikipedia's audience. regardless, i would still argue that Insound is notable.

i am slightly offended that my article was marked for speedy deletion which eliminates even the chance for discussion on this topic. i wrote it with the intention of sounding unbiased, and i would have been happy to hear advice as to how i could fix it if it did not sound neutral. Rwsdower 19:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Insound

I answered there. Is your big old gun on your page for vandal whacking.--Shella * 21:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Assistance

Hi, I'm having problems with this article and was wondering if you could have a look, especially at the talk page. It appears the author (alternating between user and anon IP, claiming to have no affiliation to the company) it using devisive tactics to make sure the article stays. I see you are an admin on duty, which is why I am asking. Thanks very much, if you have the time, that is. Bubba hotep 22:25, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to it. I was about to delete it per WP:CSD#G11. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

So I noticed! Actually, they redirected it, but hey! Vive le difference!. Thanks very much for your consideration anyway. Two (or three as it turned out) heads are better than mine I mean one. Bubba hotep 22:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and it's back again, by the way! Complete with G11 tag recreated. Bubba hotep 22:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You, sir, are what is good about Wikipedia

You have Barnstars, so how about your first STARBAR?
The Bubba Hotep Starbar is awarded to those whose efforts are widely acknowledged, but deserve to be acknowledged again in a unique way. Here is yours for being an great Wikipedian/admin, willing to chip in at a moment's notice. Thanks for the help. Bubba hotep 23:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know whether you have lots of barnstars (do you?) but this is the award I give to people who have responded to a call for assistance (and sometimes guidance) in this WIKId, convoluted world of Wikipedia. Enjoy, and think nothing of it. :)

[edit] DW Article

I noticed that you unprotected the David Westerfield article. You stated that there was no discussion. That is because discussing anything with User:196.15.168.40 is futile. He believes the article is the "David Westerfield is innocent" article. He includes bias and controversial statements that contain no secondary source. He wants Westerfield to sound innocent and that we should feel sorry for him. User:196.15.168.40 edits are in bad faith and he will continue to engage in the same behavior. You will notice that he doesn't care about any other article too. There will be another revert war between us. [[User talk:Fighting for Justice|<sup>(talk)</sup></font>]] 04:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

All right I will notify you then. I don't know what is wrong with my signature. I think I did something to it by accident in my preferences. I do not know how to fix it however. [[User talk:Fighting for Justice|<sup>(talk)</sup></font>]] 04:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

When you unprotected the David Westerfield article, you said there had been “zero talk activity”. In fact, there was plenty of “talk activity”, but it was on the Biographies [living persons Noticeboard] and the Steel359[[3]] pages, not the Westerfield Talk page. I suggest you read those other two pages, you should find them most enlightening.196.15.168.40 04:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roger Needham

Yep — every time the page was unprotected, an IP-hopping vandal would step in adding a line saying "Horrid old man, I hope you died in pain" or a variation on that theme, both on the page and in the edit summary. We semiprotected the page, and he started using aged sockpuppets (see Talk:Roger Needham#Sockpuppet list). I asked for a checkuser, and it seems he's on a shared IP. Every time we remove the protection, he comes back. So it seems we're stuck with full protection. As you figured, Centrx purged the page's history. The vandal is extraordinarily persistent. Not sure what else we can do. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Gavin O'Brien

You may want to consider protecting that article against re-creation: the one you deleted was attempt number 3. --Rrburke(talk) 06:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC) I might try attempt number 4. user_talk: pookie1996. 13:12 28 november 2006 UTC

[edit] 195.194.74.26

I reported 195.194.74.26 (talk • contribs) at WP:AIV for continuing to vandalize after still another last warning earlier this week. Since I have found it so hard to get vandals blocked even when they meet all the criteria listed on the WP:AIV page, I went ahead and gave him another "last warning". You then declined to block this vandal with the comment "1 already warned. LIST MT". I have reverted my warning -- can you go ahead and block this person. They will be back again tomorrow, and the day after that and the day after that ad inifitium. It would be nice to get a break of at least a few days from cleaning up after them. --A. B. 16:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, check out the evolution of this article over the last 48 hours. This is what Wikipedia looks like when multiple vandals attack an article. Bots and recent change patrollers revert the most recent vandalism, but there's so much that they end up just reverting back to more vandalism. This stuff is profoundly discouraging for non-admin, rank-and-file editors, especially when it goes on unchecked.
I'm going back to cleaning up after their work. As promised above, I have removed the warning from 195.194.74.26. If you decide not to block him, can you reinstate that warning? That way at least there will be a record of another "last" warning for the next 7 days.
Thanks in advance for looking into this. --A. B. 16:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
When you step through the history of Lanlivery, you'll see it was a coordinated attack by muliple editors to convert the article into a personal attack page directed at two, non-notable real people, one named Phillips (linked to the Satan article) and one named Bonney (incorrectly linked to the Wanker article). --A. B. 16:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Clark

Have you read the recent history of the Jim Clark article? There isn't going to be any "talk activity". The whole problem with Pflanzgarten is that he refuses to discuss changes - just reverts back to the version he updated in June. It has to be at least semi-protected, so that he loses one of his sockpuppet accounts each time, if nothing else! -- Ian Dalziel 17:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the rapid blocks on the Pflanzgarten socks. I do hope you manage to keep up with the level of his disruptive activity! I'm in agreement with Ian above that semi protection might be a better idea - at least it stops the ip socks that he has used many times in the past. M100 09:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Challenge X copyvio?

Did you check to see if Challenge X was really a copyvio before you removed it from T:DYK? I was checking and wasn't convinced. It's good that you took it off just in case but I think maybe it should go back up. What do you think? —Wknight94 (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, yes, I was in the process of doing that (I had to go get my A/C adapter, and I was distracted momentarily by some Black Friday browsing). I wasn't convinced either. -- tariqabjotu 02:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, not to have copyright paranoia, but does having copyrighted logos on the car pictured in Image:IMG 0887.jpg invalidate its public domain designation added by the photo creator? -- tariqabjotu 02:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Quadell provided a lengthy response to the copyright question (which amounts to the image being OK). -- tariqabjotu 05:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The text was a slightly reorganized cut and paste of the listed website - which has a very clear copyright statement.--150.203.36.136 03:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

In doubt, I removed it. The lack of any references at all should have prevented it to make it to DYK in the first place. Besides, I was expecting the template to be refreshed anytime when I noticed it turning into a stub link. Circeus 03:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New account

Thanks for the help. I'm somewhat lost. I did move my talk page and user info from my old account to the new one, but I would also like to delete Reynoldsrapture for good. Is this possible. I've seen tags I believe would do this, but should it be a user deletion tage, or an article deletion tag? Veracious Rey 05:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Whatever you think is best. Basically, I want my old account deleted or disapeared as much as possible. If no one new my old account ever existed, I'd be happy. Veracious Rey 05:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Another question, now if someone sees my old name in a prior discussion, and they click on it, couldn't they in theory edit my old user page and add anything they wanted to it? Veracious Rey 05:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Can you block my old account from being edited? I see now that anyone technically could edit the page if they so desired, so a permanent block would be the only solution. This would be similar to protecting an article from vandalism, right? Veracious Rey 05:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. Good to have handy editors around like you. Veracious Rey 04:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

Got it, thanks. (Radiant) 13:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:POINT

At Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television), we are attempting to have a polite discussion about the wording of a poll -- a poll which multiple editors have requested be re-run, since the original version was very tangled.[4] I understand that you do not agree that the poll should be re-run. However, this does not give you the right to accuse me (again) of disruption, nor to accuse me of violating WP:POINT.[5][6]. Can you please explain just exactly which clause of WP:POINT you believe is being violated? Just to be clear, it is my opinion that your repeated statements against me are falling into the realm of a personal attack. Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Elonka 15:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't say anything against you at all. I said starting this poll would be a disruption - asking zillions of people to look at a poll question which has already been addressed by dozens of people. You need to read both WP:POINT and WP:NPA. Your accusing me of a personal attack when nothing was directed at you personally is itself a personal attack. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anaheim Hills

You are not discussing why you keep reverting it. I kindly ask you to revert it back, and discuss why you are doing this silly revert stuff like the rules state. I did explain myself, but you kept reverting it anyways without any information to back yourself up. What gives? Are you too special to explain yourself, but others need to, or what?68.111.174.76 16:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Personal Attack...

I think you should see this diff.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 21:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for deleting all my articles recently :D not being sarcastic. Nareklm 02:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

. Wknight94 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Lessing Lake" (WP:CSD#R1 ---- content was: '#REDIRECT Lake Kari' (and the only contributor was 'Nareklm')) 02:22, ...,(and the only contributor was '[[Special:Contributions/Nareklm|Nareklm]) 22:26, 18 November 2006 Wknight94 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Russians in Armenia" ..., you diddnt delete those if not Never mind. Nareklm 02:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Pretty much it was copyright since i dont know to many of the rules but now i do :) plus you should delete this to lol Shushi Massacre
Hahaha thanks, Im getting used to this for now i've been going smooth :-) Nareklm 03:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello again

Hey i re-made the article but i did not copy except for the quote i dont think were supposed to re-make quotes right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shushi_Massacre

Also is there anywhere on our user profiles or contributions that say how many edit's we made etc statistics?

Thank you alot.Nareklm 04:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully this article will come through smoothly. Nareklm 04:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
LOL, thats funny editits, haahahhaa i need 3 times the number i have now to make the top ten :P wikipedia is a new addiction other myspace.my iq is going down, Nareklm 05:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Only2

Discussion at User talk:Quarl.

[edit] Maza, North Dakota

On the United States article, under the infobox at the top of the page under Largest City (New York City, NY) could you kindly add the Smallest City, which is Maza, North Dakota, since it is the smallest city in the United States. I cant do it for I have an IP # and IP's are blocked. I would appreciate it. 68.111.174.76 07:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BernieMac7734

  • cheers for blocking this foo'. keep up yr good work W guice 20:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:LeeSmith.jpg

Hey Wknight, I got a question regarding an image I recently uploaded Image:LeeSmith.jpg. I just wanted to know if my licensing was right, and if it all legit? I tried checking over other baseball card images and it seems that I can do this, but I'm not totally sure since I got this image from Baseball Almanac. Thanks for looking into it. Nishkid64 22:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...okay then. I do have a Lee Smith baseball card from 1997 (somewhere around there), but I don't have a scanner. I added the fair use rationale for the image, and hope everything goes well. Does anyone exactly decide upon the image's fate or something? Nishkid64 23:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. Question: that Carlos Delgado image? Was that a MLB.com image? Nishkid64 00:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Heh, you lucked out. About the time of my RfA, Meegs requested me to deleted 100+ images that I got from MLB.com. It was really annoying going to each article and removing the image and then deleting the image afterwards. By the way, it seems there are loads and loads of MLB.com images on baseball player pages. Want to discuss it on WP:WPBB and WP:WPBBP so people will know for future reference? Nishkid64 00:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Lol I tagged them as {{promotional}}. Anyway, see User_talk:Nishkid64/Archive_3#mlb.com_images. Nishkid64 00:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting

Hey how do i revert articles?

I noticed alot of vandalism in the recent changes area im trying my hardest to mark the articles that are nonsense to be deleted but for the regular articles how do i revert? Nareklm 22:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks man i needed that. Nareklm 23:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Just a tip for the last ten minutes i've been reverting spam and this guy is messing with alot of topics with his opinions. Nareklm 23:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheIceBox
she just messaged me to...
Thanks ill report more as i edit and revert spam (if there are any) :) Nareklm 23:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This person just blanked the tomato page and i reverted it looks suspicious... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=72.153.193.76 Nareklm 00:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Hopefully i can get most people banned who are trouble makers and the ones who make stupid and immature posts continuously, well the spammers yep. Nareklm 02:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah I've been cleaning out the recent changes and new pages so much today i reached 1059 edits, I've been adding stubs, WikiProjects, I reverted spam, im working to improve articles and eliminate non-sense material :-) Nareklm 02:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lee Smith

I'll give it a look see later tonight. Thanks for the message. // Tecmobowl 00:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stablepedia

Well, to be honest, it started as my own little project (which happened to have documentation in cased others wanted to get involved). I guess if it gets such massive involvement that it should be in the project space... Until then, let's play it by ear and see what direction we should take. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 02:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

There are no notability criteria (well, nothing added on to Wikipedia's criteria to having articles exist in the first place). As for reviewing, I created this as the virtually processless sister of WP:ARFA/WP:APPROVE. I know I review my articles when I add them in; hopefully I can review other people's articles. As long as the article is likely to stick around on Wikipedia, and is well-sourced and done well, go ahead and add it. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 03:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I say "reviewed" as in "I hope someone who's adding the article in took the time to make sure this article is accurate and acceptable." You can do the reviewing yourself, or, if you can't do that, you can post it in the Requests for Assistance and Second Opinions section. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 03:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tucson, Arizona

Odd Wiki-mechanics question here. I personally have no preference as to whether the article is called Tucson or Tucson, Arizona, but I'm a little nonplussed that it seems to have disappeared from my watchlist. The Talk:Tucson, Arizona does appear, and the watch/unwatch tab on the article says unwatch, indicating that it is still being watched. Yet despite the numerous edits made to the article tonight (some of them by me), it's not showing up on today's date. Do I need to do anything, or will it show up again after its first post-move edit? Please advise. Thanks. Karen | Talk | contribs 05:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, making an edit restored it to the watchlist. Thanks! Karen | Talk | contribs 05:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shushi

Hey someone marked it as POV i think but i used another template i want to take sometime to revise it. Nareklm 05:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Shushi Massacre

Thanks for re-adding it i just noticed it doesn't affect the page only the talk page i just want to revise everything so it doesn't offend anyone or that POV thingy.Nareklm 05:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Hahaha, but there was another massacre called shusha some people might get confused with the words not to sure so theres more flaming for meh. Hopefully they won't take it personally they can write articles about armenians to so theres no heart feelings lol. (ASALA etc) Nareklm 05:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Captioning for deletable images

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Can you provide a link to an example of what you mean? I haven't added any delete tags to any of Chowbok's images, however I have added an RfU tag or two, and also tags specifying that the uploader provide a source. Neither of these templates said anything about adding a second tag {{speedy-image-c}} although I could be mistaken. TheQuandry 15:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, the caption says says "Also consider adding {{speedy-image-c|[[2006-12-03]]}} to the image captions." I guess I took that to mean it was optional? Anyway, I'll add them now. TheQuandry 16:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, you already did it. Nevermind. :-) Thanks for letting me know. TheQuandry 16:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
If you're talking about that album cover, I didn't realize User:Jaranda was an administrator. Sorry. TheQuandry 16:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] James Underwood

Thanks for preventing speedy deletion. I hope that importance is now asserted strongly (not weakly!). Still working on the article. Thanks again. part 17:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lee Smith (baseball) and more

Per your suggestion, I took some time to look at the Lee Smith article. I summarized my thoughts here. I've marked the page on my watch list so if you want to respond I would love feedback. Additionally, a number of the Baseball bios are in bad shape. I've started working on a handful of the "most important" people i can think of and would love to get some more help. These include (but are not limited to): Hank Aaron, Jackie Robinson, Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and Sandy Koufax. So much work needs to be done to those pages. I've taken some time to improve Cy Young, and i think it is a relatively decent article currently. However, it could really use some more meat. My current objective is the Shoeless Joe Jackson and i am working on that on a page in my own user space. If you have any other people that you think would help on some of these articles, that would be excellent. // Tecmobowl 21:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subrabharathimanian

Was speedy-tagged because the article talks about how great he is and how important he is to Tamil literature and yet his name only gets 177 Google hits in total, this article included, of which only 58 are truly distinct from one another. When "-wikipedia" is added to the search, this number drops to 67, of which 33 are truly distinct from one another. His Pinakalinmukaingal gets 17 Google hits when "-wikipedia" is added to the search, and that includes all hits, not just the reasonably distinct-looking ones. Even this was lifted straight from our Tirupur article, as you can see here. "PINANKALIN MUGANGAL" not in quotes got this: four hits, all of them for Wikipedia and three clone articles. The same is true of Samayalairaikkalayankal and Theener Idaivellai, as you can see here and here.

Oh, and according to http://www.katha.org/kathaawards.html, Katha Awards aren't given by the President of India, they're chosen as follows:

Katha requests an eminent writer, scholar or critic in each of the regional languages to choose what she/he feels are the three best stories published in that language, in the previous year. Our Nominating Editors sift through numerous journals and magazines that promote short fiction. Many of them consult their friends or other Friends of Katha in the literary world to help them make their nominations. The nominated stories are translated and from these are chosen the Prize Stories. Each author receives the KATHA AWARD FOR CREATIVE FICTION which includes a citation, Rs 2000, and publication (in translation) in that year's Katha Prize Stories volume. The editor of the regional language journal that first published the award winning story receives the KATHA JOURNAL AWARD. The translators are handpicked from the list of nearly 3000 names we have at Katha. Each of them gets the KATHA AWARD FOR TRANSLATION which includes a citation, Rs 2000, and the chance to translate a prize story.

Shankar Dayal Sharma (President of India in 1993) has an M.A. in English literature according to his severely undercited article but he sounds as if he had better things to do than to take time out to be a Katha Awards judge.

I have prodded the Chayathirai article because it's almost 100% lifted from somewhere that no one has been able to track down and the stated reason, "24 distinct Google hits, excluding this article and its numerous clones." Also, Chayathirai "best novel" tamil nadu gets me 8 hits from Wikipedia, its clones and some blurbage from three sites that are selling the book. One site even tells you that that's just what the publisher says (that it won the "Best Novel Award" from the Tamil Nadu Government). I am beginning to doubt that the Government of Tamil Nadu actually bothers with such things, because of the results of "best novel award" tamil nadu government 2/3 Chayathirai (the Wikipedia article and a website that sells the book) and 1/3 clear reference to the Best Novel Award said to be given by the Académie Française.

Those are just the lies I've caught so far sitting on my ass.

I don't want to have Category:Wikify from July 2006 open on December 1, GMT because of this joker. Please don't let this article remain until the end of time.

Is there a way to get that tag back on because of what I just told you?

[edit] Sorry to bug you

I hate to bother you, but since you seem to be one of the more interested people on baseball biographies, would you mind checking in on Casey Stengel. There is a very active user who has been making a number of edits. I personally don't agree, but feel that a third party should probably look into it. I believe there are structure issues, content issues, refreence issues and more. Additionally, a number of quotations have been inserted. I have no problem with quotations to an extent, but i believe a) they should be used when they are encyclopedic b) really add value to the article. The {{wikiquote}} tag should make it easy for someone interested in compiling a compendium of quotes. // Tecmobowl 01:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation request

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television), and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I was going by a quick look through the names and diffs at the "Summary of Discussion" section. If you think others should be added, feel free. --Elonka 04:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
So feel free to add him, as I'm sure it was not Josiah Rowe's intention to deliberately exclude someone who was a legitimate participant. Josiah is human, after all. --Elonka 05:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I am! I didn't mean to exclude any major participants — my original list of 15 members was an attempt to list only those who had made substantial comments in the recent discussions. Chuq hadn't edited WT:TV-NC since November 15, which is why I missed him. I've now added him to the list and notified him. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Will, I think that we should all stop editing Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) — continuing the edit war over how to describe Radiant's involvement will decrease the request's chances of acceptance. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I esp. don't think Radiant's name should be removed when he put it there. The chaos there can't possibly be how that's supposed to work, is it?! —Wknight94 (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
That's more or less my perspective as well. I agree that Radiant's name should be left there, but I'm concerned that reverting Elonka's changes will further diminish the chances of the RfM being accepted. If we can get all participants to agree to mediation and get the case accepted, we can work out our differences in the mediation process. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good. But if Radiant's name is removed again, I think the page should be protected. It's been removed twice - once after he added it. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I think that if the participants have to resort to page protection on the RfM, there's a good chance that the mediation isn't going to work. I've asked Elonka to stop editing the page, and I've asked several MedCom members to take a look at the RfM to see if it can be salvaged. Let's hope for the best. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
It's such a God awful mess now that it should probably just be re-started - with only one person editing the damn thing. Absurd. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Are we allowed to do that? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
No clue. But apparently there are too many people involved to let anyone do anything. I say you should get in there, get it the way you want and tell everyone (including me) to stay the hell out. At least until a mediator shows up. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm just concerned that if I go in there and start reverting changes, it'll just escalate the matter further. I bollixed this up, didn't I? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know how picky they're going to be. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide to filing a Request for Mediation and Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Common Reasons for Rejection suggest that they're fairly picky. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: reversion of Geni

Good question... looks like a legit edit. I have multiple windows open, so I may have reverted the wrong page. Nwwaew(My talk page) 15:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Look, you are going to report me, so it doesn't matter anyway.

Administrators are bored kids that have nothing else to do in life except be extreme ass-holes that have absolutly nothing to do with the real world. They play all day "editing" and "warning" like like people that do not have a social life. Admins live hard and borning lives and do not have nearly enough "relations" with females. You were wrong to warn...at least now you can warn for the right reasons. 131.94.216.188 18:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 209.234.136.67 (talk • contribs)

Why did you not block this guy? — Superbfc 18:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Locking

Please do not lock it. I would prefer an outsider to do it. Locking it would look bad in the face of mediation. -^demon[omg plz] 20:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate editing...

Hello Wknight94, I was recently scrolling down recent changes and caught sight of this user page. Apparently NandT and some friends of his are using their edits merely for socializing which violates WP:NOT. Could you take a look at it please? Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 02:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Open proxy checking

Hi. I wanted to help out at WP:OP. Is it sufficient to run nmap to prove that an IP is an open proxy? If you get output like I showed at User talk:61.90.228.106, is that proof positive? — Wknight94 (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

In general, is there any documentation on how folks can help with this project? — Wknight94 (talk) 04:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh. I forgot to get back to you on this one. 61.90.228.106 isn't an open proxy as far I can tell. Port 80 is actually running Microsoft IIS (nmap -A told me this) and when you try to set it as your own proxy server (Firefox's SwitchProxy is nice for this), I get "HTTP request refused or failed (400)". And no, there's no general documentation on this, though there definitely should. I'm not actually part of the WikiProject, so you should ask them to write one up. --  Netsnipe   ►  05:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Sherwin Revestir

Hello, sorry about my bother. Considering about the deletion of the article on Sherwin Revestir, what is the minimum Google search hit points in order for me to retain it. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Agent paper (talk • contribs) .

[edit] The DataCore page

Thanks for moving and not deleting the article. After I get more content on it, how would I go about getting it reinstated? Stos553 15:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References and television episode articles

To my knowledge, no, it would not be proper to add {{unref}} to the many thousands of television episode articles around Wikipedia, since by their very nature, the episode effectively is a reference. I think this has been discussed at the talk page of WP:V, you might want to check there and toss in a question if it's a concern, or maybe at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television. --Elonka 19:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:User:Jghfutikdpe3

This user is a sockpuppet of blocked user User:The hobgoblin, identical user page and interest in Mulatto, SqueakBox 22:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:FuzzyRedGuy

I see you blocked this account, indef; you might consider another account, User talk:FuzzyBlueGuy92, as well, since they seem to be a tag team. John Broughton | Talk 17:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Fact.doc.check

You sent me a message saying that you were going to delete Winn O'Donnell but you didn't specify which information you were not in agreeance with or how come there couldn't be information posted to wikipedia by a user. Not all information, and or events link to the public webpage, study, or research database. I am not understanding. A wikipedia user | Talk 18:22, 2 December 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Log.doc.check (talk • contribs).

[edit] Babe Ruth and WP:WPBBP

I thought you could look at the discussion on the Ruth talk page and offer some food for thought. Also, are you not on the list at WP:WPBBP? I didn't see you there and thought you might want to toss your name up. Seeing as you are an admin, i know you've got a lot of duties, but felt it was worth pointing out to you. // Tecmobowl 05:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patsy Cline

Totally linkspam. I reverted it. Cornell Rockey 06:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Troll and WP Vanity Malefactor

I decided I don't have the time or the desire to be drawn into a nasty melodrama, but this editor needs to be banned in my view. Brunonia 00:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unprotecting RfM page

^demon (talk • contribs) requested that the Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) be unprotected, but whatever admin he asked hasn't gotten around to it. Since even Elonka has asked for the page to be unprotected, I don't think it would be controversial if you did it just to get things moving along. – Anþony  talk  03:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How many admins?

Hey, Will. I was about to drop a note at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves, in response to Elonka's comment that "An admin's assistance is requested." I was going to note that at least five admins have already agreed that there is a consensus about WP:TV-NC, but I suddenly realized that I could only think of four: me, you, Radiant! and Steve Block. Who am I forgetting? (I'd like to be sure that all five have actually expressed the belief that a consensus has been formed, rather than merely supporting the guideline.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Chuq (talk • contribs) makes five, though his involvement was a while ago. IIRC, his position was to keep the guideline as is but create redirects to facilitate linking. – Anþony  talk  08:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Right! I forgot Chuq was an admin. Thanks, Anthony. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eddie Klint

You asked why the {{prod}} tag was replaced - the tag was removed by the author, yet no evidence of notability wa provided. - Tiswas(t/c) 10:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. - Tiswas(t/c) 11:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The latest shenanigans

Yeah, it's frustrating and exhausting. I just hope that since the RfM page is now unprotected, we can get on with this and bring it to a sensible conclusion. Thatcher131 is certainly right that this issue hasn't been worth the energy expended on it. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the defence on Elonka's talk page. I appreciate it. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block of User:165.138.161.1

Thanks. --Dweller 18:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page move notices

I'm putting them on now...I hope you don't mind me replacing yours so they're all consistent. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll let you finish up. I'll just double check them all. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out with the notifications. I checked them and they seemed OK. I also put one at the episode list and when I got to the main show page, there was already a complaint about the notification not being there. Let me know if you think of anywhere else to notify. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Per your comment on my note on Mediation cabal

Per your calling my actions vindictive, I have core policy, WP:NOR, on my side with the request I made. If you'd prefer some other admin handle that particular aspect, feel free to bring it up at WP:AN or WP:ANI. Elonka can do the same. If either occurs, I'll gladly leave the issue alone as long as someone is addressing it. At some point, if she doesn't rectify this, I plan to bring it up at one of those places anyway since I know that me personally editing her pages would cause World War III. But her use of original research is a crystal clear violation of core Wikipedia policy. It's not my fault that this ongoing discussion has shone a bright light on her activity and alerted me to this and other policy and etiquette issues. As an admin, it would be a gross dereliction for me to let those go unattended. I've let pass various personal attacks and allegations of stalking, sockpuppetry, and whatever else I've forgotten - none of which have been accompanied by evidence or examples of violated policies - and I'd appreciate if you not pile on even further with public mischaracterizations of vindictiveness. You should also be fair and give an example of comments directed at you since I don't recall that ever happening. Thanks. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I refuse to get down in the mud on this; I've seen what happens to people who do. The issue I'm raising has nothing to do with core policy or "crystal clear" right or wrong, and I'm not taking any form of stance on Elonka's family tree etc. I am, however, taking a strong stance on your behavior. Especially as an admin, you should be bending over backwards to not get involved in any Elonka-related side issue, given the harshness and general incivility that characterizes the dispute with her on WP:NC-TV. Whether you choose to recognize it or not, it comes off as vindictive and petty. I have nothing further to say to you on this matter. -- PKtm 19:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
I see where you're going with that, but there are certain things on Wikipedia that we should never ignore, regardless of the situation. Core policies are one of those things. It's that important. -- Ned Scott 21:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Welcome

Thank you very much for the warm welcome! I am pleased to be part of the Wikipedia community and looking forward to contribute as much as I can to this website. However, I have a question. I am very interested in the U.S. Congress and I have seen many pages of current U.S. Senators who have "served with: _____ ". It looks really bad and was wondering, how I can create a template, like the on that has "Political Offices" UnitedStatesIndia 02:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Negima!?

Recently, I've seen an unsourced paragraph in the ending of the overview, as is protected.

The following part of the entry:

However despite the new look from the old series and manga this series has been getting a lot more flak from critics and fans alike than when the 1st series aired. Many complaints stem from the fact that most of the characters have been redesigned to look different than from the old anime series and the manga. Most of which center around Nodoka and her new hairdo that essentially looks almost totally different than from the manga and 1st anime. there has also been complaints about her so called "Cosplay Card" that gives her a pair of reading glasses. Also for the reason that Asuna no longer has her signature heterochromia (2 different colored eyes). Many people also are complaining about it because it has nothing to do with the original Manga story line what-so-ever. Many Professional critics have complained that despite that it's a retelling of the story, the story-line itself seems to be totally incoherent and just plain not well thought out. There have even been calls for it's cancellation altogether. And there are rumors that Akamatsu may just pull his license out of the series, effectively canceling the show.

The following section was unsourced, and has no proven facts. I ask upon you to delete it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.13.132 (talk) 02:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

A lot of unsourced POV was added into the Negima!? page, and that is why the edit war was going on. I was trying to remove the POV contents while at the same time trying my best to communicate with the user who was adding his own comments into all of the three pages he is trying to edit. The current protected version of Negima!? contains a lot of sentences like this angered a lot of fans, many see these characters as useless. Which are all POV statements made by the user Animedude, without sources, even after I have repeatedly asked for them. If possible, can you please edit the page to reflect a more NPOV version of that page? Thank you. MythSearchertalk 05:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television).
For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
This message delivered: 04:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC).


[edit] blocked user

Hi there, probably not my business but I'm wondering (at the risk of getting myself put on some suspicious persons list...) why was the user User:Techmobowls blocked? I'll condede that he can be difficult/downright stupid when people disagree with him, but is that blockworthy behavior? Maybe it is, I don't know WP policy well enough, but if it's just an issue of vandalism/trolling I don't really think he qualifies as either. Thanks for hte clarification! Avraham 09:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi. First of all, thanks for your reply. I actually was loking at User:Techmobowls and just his edits, which didn't seem seem like vandalism, however I did not realise that he was impersonating another user, that puts a whole different spin on things. As for my NPA violation, I suppose you're right, though I didn't mean it as a personal attack. More like: "I understand how he could have rubbed some poeple the wrong way but does that really merit blocking?" Anyway, thanks for your reply. Avraham 21:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Found it because I too am a sockpuppet. Kidding! I just found it by pure chance on the Hank Aaron talk page. I found [exchange] Too weird to not look into, so I checked out Techmobowls's user contribs. which seemed weird but didn't explain the block. Avraham 01:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deletion of International Relief and Development

Hello- noticed you deleted a page i created for an organization: International relief and development. Just wanted to know why. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Annpincus (talk • contribs) 21:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Resusal

My current 'plan' for mediation after reading the statements is to propose a compromise all can agree with, my request for someone to be blocked is not at all linked with the case. Merry Chrismahanakwanzaka WikieZach| talk 03:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Arbitration

I have submitted a Request for Arbitration for the TV-episode naming conventions dispute at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Naming_Conventions_for_TV-episodes_articles. As one of the involved parties, could you please come and take a look and submit your statement? Thanks, --`/aksha 12:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baseball

Hello, yes I see what you mean. The pywikipedia framework, which my robot uses, apparently does not remove duplicate categories, and duplicate categories will therefore result from the category clutter that was on those articles before. My robot and I have closed hundreds of CFD debates, but this is perhaps the first one where the categories have been piled on the articles so. The problem which my robot is clearing, which was identified in the CFD debate, was category clutter. In my opinion duplicate categories are an improvement over category clutter.

Any other automatic robot will probably do the same as mine. The only alternative is moving all these categories by hand. Are you up for that? Another solution might be to find someone with WP:AWB willing to run through the categories when I've finished to remove duplicates from the articles? Or if you really want my robot to quit the field, I can submit the rest of the merge for implementation by another bot, but the same is likely to occur. --RobertG ♬ talk 17:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I think this is what you're looking for

This has Cburnett explaining the reasoning behind the pre-emptive disambiguation and why subsequent page moves are acceptable. Jay32183 19:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, I believe this diff is also extremely important and should be included somewhere in the ArbCom evidence, mostly because it made me crack up laughing looking through the archives just now. Spock. You quoted Spock. Awesome. I need sleep. – Anþony  talk  22:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stoner rock

What are your thoughts on the 18 speed tranny spamming? Think it's worth nominating the URL for the pan-wiki spam blacklist? Deizio talk 23:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Template Related

Sure! If you look at the page of Sen. Blanche Lincoln and go all the way down to her Political Offices space, it says "Served With Mark Pryor". I think that really looks bad. Therefore, I was thinking, if there is a possible way to make a "template" like the POLITICAL OFFICES one, but this was is titled "Served With" and there, the names of people can be written who actually served with him/her. Hope you understand! UnitedStatesIndia 02:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Hey Wknight94, someone keeps on putting information on Armenian related articles such as "Urartu" and putting non-sense like he's trying to say that there not Armenian and all these other random things someone has complained on my page i reverted about 3-4 articles from that guy and theres two people actually one with a user name and one with a i.p address doing very similar things.

Dacy69 and 70.235.224.33 Thanks man! Nareklm 07:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hildanknight

Thanks for the heads up, that sounds like his modus operandi. And per further evidence I gave on the AN thread, my suspicion has only increased. Kimchi.sg 13:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyrighted image

Can you delete this too its a old one i uploaded and forgot. Nareklm 00:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Smallimagamona.jpg

[edit] Greek pedigree of Empress Sisi

5 votes against 4 were at least in favour of getting rid of the seperate articles. Could they at least be merged? This sets an awful precedent for Wikipedia. The creator of the articles also went around asking seemingly unconnected people to vote. Charles 18:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed it does. Thank you. Charles 20:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions for TV-episodes

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions for TV-episodes. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions for TV-episodes/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions for TV-episodes/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,—— Eagle 101 (Need help?) 18:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why was "Dual Moons" deleted?

Hi, just wondering why the final outcome of the deletion debate for "Castlevania: Dual Moons" was a deletion? The argument against it was that it was a "non-notable prank", however, several hundered websites across the globe have info on it, and a simple web search can verify this. So what's the problem? I see tons of internet hoax pages on Wikipedia, and this was probably bigger than several of those.

Thanks for your response. You can email me if you wish. enterprisegame@aol.com

-Dave. Nonresonance 21:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

...for moving that page to my userspace. --GUTTERTAHAH

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BVE Trainsim

Thanks for administering AfD, it seems like a mostly thankless and sometimes tedious task. Can I request that you review the closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BVE Trainsim? It is true that a majority of contributors expressed the opinion that the article should be kept. However, it does not appear that there was a consensus to keep the article. Thanks again, -- Chondrite 22:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, arguments opposing deletion consisted of unverified claims that the subject "is popular in a niche," whereas the arguments for deletion were based on policies and guidelines. But I am not suggesting that the there was a consensus for delete, only that there was no consensus. This would also seem to be consistent (by the evil numbers at least) with the result at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The angrez, where 4-2 was considered no consensus. Thanks for your consideration. -- Chondrite 22:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion. It's no big deal, really. I just thought that the summary should be accurate. I understand that you are busy, thanks for your time. -- Chondrite 06:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meatpuppets of dual moons?

I didn't ask anyone to come to wikipedia to back up the deletion argument. Although I'm glad people did. And I don't see anyone making new accounts just to vote on it. I looks like people simply didn't log in and it just registered their IP's instead. I myself can account for 3 of those "keeps" since I was point-for-point rebutting the arguments made for deletion. So if this entry was deleted because of that, then I think that is a bad call. The facts still stand that this was a big enough AFD joke for the creator of Castlevania to publicly deny it, and for several major gaming sites to report on it as if it were fact. Deleting it just to delete is not really a benefit to Wikipedia. I guess people will just have to rely on the hundreds of other news sites that still report on this for their enlightenment on the subject. It's a shame they can't just come to wikipedia to get the whole story at once.

Also, someone suggested merging it with another hoax page. Why wasn't that option considered?Nonresonance 23:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] My Thanks

Thank you for the quick permanent block of the vandalism only account User:Weberavin. Pete Orme 16:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No problem.

I was considering making a joke about how I didn't inhale, but decided it would be inappropriate. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/k/n/User_talk%7EWknight94_ce18.html"