User talk:Rjd0060/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Hello
Hi, I just like to say hi to people who don't have discussions on their talk page. I'm Seth71. Seth71 14:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
veto
I will check the veto page, but do you know when the veto ceremoney takes place.
- Last week it was about 2:30 their time...I dont know where you are but thats 5:30 EST.
Dang, I was hoping it would be at noon, and I only have the computer till 4:30 and I live in Ohio. Seth71 14:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- Well it could always be earlier. You never know. Do you check any of the Live Feed update pages? I use this one. It gets updated often.
It takes place between 1-3
User Page
You should create a user page so that people can learn a bit about you. Since you don't have a user page that is why when you put your name on a discussion page your name is in red, everyone else with a user page is in blue. You can check out my user page it's not much, but it's alright. Just click on my name, if it goes to the talk page go to the top where it says user page and click on it. Seth71 15:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Did you give me there's a sucker born every minute page. Seth71 15:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
No. Wasnt me. Rjd0060 16:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: Problem with a page
I created an AfD discussion for it, it seems to be entirely POV. You can comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/US Channels DirecTV Needs. Simply explain your reasoning, and we'll try to come to a consensus about what to do with the article. Hope that helps, Nihiltres(t.l) 22:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC) (cross-posted)
Big Brother 8
Good work Rjd0060 :) BB8 has been semi-protected - zachinthebox (User • Talk) 22:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- Excellent, is there anyway to get it protected until closer to the finale? - zachinthebox (User • Talk) —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 22:42:34, August 19, 2007 (UTC).
- Well, the first time I tried to request the semiprotect, I used WP:TW, and I put that I wanted it to last for 1 month. That didnt work, so I manually added the request to WP:RFP but didn't specify an amount of time. I guess we have to wait until this one expires, see if it still happens (probably will) and then ask for another semiprotect. (Cross Posted) - Rjd0060 22:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- Alright, sounds good. Great work! - zachinthebox (User • Talk) 22:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the first time I tried to request the semiprotect, I used WP:TW, and I put that I wanted it to last for 1 month. That didnt work, so I manually added the request to WP:RFP but didn't specify an amount of time. I guess we have to wait until this one expires, see if it still happens (probably will) and then ask for another semiprotect. (Cross Posted) - Rjd0060 22:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Chute Boxe edit
Sorry about that. I usually try to remember that. I'll keep that in mind.Unak78 17:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
America's Player
Oh, no problem. I don't know how many time's I've reverted it to TBA. It's very frustrating to keep seeing it as Completed, when the issue has been debated and TBA is the only way that is sure to be right. But now that it's Semi-protected at least we can explain why it's TBA. Happy editing, zachinthebox (User • Talk) 23:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
America's Player
- 1) I will not change the wording for "vote to evict" and "get evicted" even though it provides consistency because it is the way CBS worded it officially.
- 2) Even though we are 100% that "who should Eric vote to evict" will be the next AP task, you are right, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.
- 3) Every Big Brother website (i.e. hamsterwatch, jokers, reality insiders) admit Eric has completed at least 13 tasks and as of his revelation last night possibly even 15 though it is ambiguous where the last two came from. Please to not revert back to TBD as that would clearly be wrong.
-Comedy240 00:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Umm, excuse me but you are way out of line. I never reverted anything anyone did AFTER your comment on my wall (I've made three edits to the Big Brother page, only one after you wrote on my wall). I thought providing all sides of an argument that can be backed by sources was what Wikipedia was about but apparently I was wrong. I don't see how my most recent edit to the Big Brother 8 is wrong at all except that it is against YOUR point of view. Please explain to me while I can't add to what you have (mis-)written when I have a source and while I try to explain why some including Eric believe Eric completed certain tasks. I would greatly appreciate if you removed your incorrectly placed tag on my wall after you look and see I never reverted anything you or anyone else did after you asked me once not too. Comedy240 02:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I thought we weren't allowed to make wikipedia pages our babies where only wikipedians opinions matter, but I guess I was wrong. I'm not going to contribute to the BB8 page anymore as I don't feel like helping something that is incorrect and a complete mess. I'll keep to American politics where I can just write in data and prose and not have to deal with people who have been here less than a fortnight. I know I am not allowed to write other people's opinions besides yours, you might find these outside sources valueble, but then again probably not because you haven't in the past.
- Jokersupdates (the largest BBUSA fan web site) says Eric has completed 13/19 tasks [1]
- RealityInsiders (another fan web site) says Eric has completed 8/19 tasks [2]
- Eric claims to have completed 15/19 tasks. [3] -Comedy240 15:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch better luck next time [4], looks like you owe a bunch of people apologies on the talk page of BB8. Comedy240 06:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- TBA is the consensus because is an encyclopedia for factual information. CBS, the topmost source for this article, has dropped the ball with America's Player tasks by not clearly announcing the rules and/or results. All of these so-called "Big Brother websites" are all run by fans, i.e. not credible. All the editors want Wikipedia to be as reliable and accurate as possible and if it means leaving a few unknown tasks at "TBA" for a little while, so be it. Thanks. (Also posted to Comedy240's talk page) - zachinthebox (User • Talk) 15:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Comedy240, to gloat is not nice. Anyway, CBS just put that up because of all the misunderstandings. Now that is a reliable source. But the ones you posted before where not. It was never clear which ones he did complete, or not before CBS confirmed just now. So again, don't gloat, it's disruptive. Thanks.- Jeeny Talk 16:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Veto
I am unsure about the Veto I always thought that the Veto image stayed with the winner until the end of the week. I could be wrong ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 21:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sure a discussion couldn't hurt. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 21:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
ok
Points matched with yours
- 1) I see your point, I think what I added deserved to be mentioned to provide a true neutral viewpoint, but it did not have to be there, I could have added a subsection about the various counts the majority of fan web sites believe counted.
- 2) I accept your apology, and will not bring it up again, and I admit I was more offended than I should be but when someone puts one of those on your userpage and you are 100% sure you are innocent you will get ticked a little too.
- 3) My third edit where I sourced video from the official CBS feeds that showed Eric saying he completed 15 out of the first 19 tasks which any one that understands addition and subtraction would see he believed he completed those 4 TBD tasks. (PS, I'm not saying you can't do math, I'm saying that when we know he completed or failed the rest for a fact and he claims to have completed more than we had listed, than it has to be that Eric believes he completed the tasks we view as TBD). I understand there was a group consensus that they should be TBD, but I thought the minority opinion could be stated on the main article in a note as long as I found a good source (Eric himself actually).
- 4) I didn't realize there was stuff on the talk page (it was archived because of the constant bickering on said page), and I'm sorry for not looking through the archives, and I'm sorry for making you revert me the one time I changed his tasks to completed when the group consensus was TBD.
- 5) I haven't done anything for the Big Brother pages besides inventing the current voting history table last season, while you revert all the negative comments about the disliked HGs like Amber, Daniele, and Dustin. Comedy240 —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 17:25, August 22, 2007 (UTC).
reply
- 1) Resolved
- 2) Resolved
- 3) Actually there is one small problem, CBS.com has task 3 listed as complete while my tivo'ed episode #5(?) has CBS buzzing and infatically saying Eric failed the task to nominate Jessica. Which is more official, CBS.com or an episode of Big Brother. I would personally think the episode because the producers help edit the episodes but leave the web site to the network, but I think this should be discussed.
- 4) Resolved
- 5) I was saying good job for dealing with and reverting the non-neutral hate speech. Sorry for the bad wording. Comedy240 17:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
You lost me
I don't what an edit summary is, you'll have to explain it to me. I've been making hundreds of Wikipedia edits and I've never done it once. So ya, you'll have to explain the problem. - Spyke1077 02:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for explaining that, Rjd. I'll try to remember to do that. - Spyke1077 04:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Re:Spoilers
Quick question, I can't seem to find the discussions you were referring to, can you point them out for me? Axem Titanium 19:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Ummmmm... no sarcasm intended? Anyway, you are aware of the current incarnation of the spoiler guideline? It suggests that spoiler tags are not necessary if a current fiction template (such as {{Future television episode}}) already appears at the top of the article. It also strongly opposes placing a tag at the very top of the article. Axem Titanium 01:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: Big Brother citation
Oh that's creditable. Not. I just saw the talk page and I was like yea that it very creditable and I just burst out laughing. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 03:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Note from Chrismaster1
By the way, I undid ur revision because the talk page for Big Brother is not only to talk about ways to make the article better, but to also talk about the show that's why its called a Talk Page! So quit posting threatening messages on my talk page!!!!!!!! Chrismaster1 14:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Confusion on FCC Big Brother discussion
Sorry if I confused you, I meant the CBS message boards for Big Brother was where the "FCC statement" was posted/faked. I wasn't saying that Wikipedia is a message board. Wikipedia IS an encyclopedia. So, ya, just to clarify. - Spyke1077 04:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Clarified
Okay, sorry. I knew a minute after I posted that you probably weren't talking to me. Oh well, lol - Spyke1077 17:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Argument with Wanzhen
I agree with everything you have said as well. That was not directed towards yourself. I was saying that that discussion needed to end, and I named you and a couple of other people personally because you had made a couple of good, smart comments. I mentioned Alucard as well. We were all just people that were contributing frequently. No disrespect, man. I feel stupid yelling at someone on the internet. I shouldn't have to argue over something to someone I don't know, so I shouldn't have fought with Wanzhen. But he was starting to go overboard. So was I. I will no longer be contributing to that section of the talk page. I hope no one else does. Don't take my comment personally, because it isn't. That was for everyone. Even though I mentioned you, I don't accuse you of any wrong doings. You have been here WAY longer than I have and you know way more about what you are doing that I am. So I apologize that you took offense. While I don't need to argue about something with someone I don't know, I feel that I should apologize to you because you have been nothing but nice to me. Where Wanzen just came out of the blue and wrote this stuff, I just got angry. I don't want anyone else getting worked up over that discussion so it's over for me, and I hope it's over for you and everyone else. I am going to be taking a break from the Big Brother talk page for a while, until someone starts up a new discussion. Thanks for reading all that, stay cool - Spyke1077 23:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Your message
Next time, please see what edit I actually made before slapping some template message on my talk page. I am not only not a new user, but the edit was legitimate. NSR77 TC 23:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- Discussion would yield little to nothing as the said article receives little traffic; virtually none to the talk page. Four edits since October of 2005. NSR77 TC 23:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
John Buttigieg
Hello RJD, THIS IS VASCO AMARAL FROM Portugal, user nº217.129.67.28.
IN JOHN BUTTIGIEG'S (MALTA FOOTBALLER) EDIT HISTORY, YOU SAID YOU REVERTED ONE EDIT (BY ME) IDENTIFIED AS VANDALISM...WHAT??!!!? I ONLY ERASED ALL HIS INT.MATCHES, EXPLAINING I FELT THE INFO AVAILABLE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH, AND ADDED HE WAS NOT A RELEVANT PLAYER (AND YOU KNOW IT IS TRUE!!!). I AM GETTING SERIOUSLY ANNOYED BEING CALLED A VANDAL, WHEN ALL I DO IS TRYING TO HELP!!! IF IT PLEASES YOU, NO WORRIES, I'LL LEAVE BUTTIGIEG'S PAGE ALONE...
GREETINGS FROM PORTUGAL VASCO AMARAL - --217.129.67.28 01:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
OH BY THE WAY, I WRITE HE HAS 95 CAPS, YOU WRITE BACK 97 CAPS...JUST ADD THE TOTAL GAMES IN THE WIN-DRAW-LOSS REFERENCE, AND YOU WILL SEE HOW MUCH IS THAT...
Message received
RJD, THIS IS VASCO AGAIN...
Message received, do not know if you already read mine, it is well explained and clear, I AM NOT A VANDAL, ONLY TRYING TO HELP!!!
VASCO AMARAL,--217.129.67.28 01:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Overstated
Saying "Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with the page Big Brother 8 (US) on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed." simply because you disagree with an edit is obnoxious. Wryspy 02:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Does it matter whether or not you come across as condescending like you're talking down to a newbie or a vandal? Yes. Yes, it does. When you can't find script to match, just use undo and type a simple edit summary. Wryspy 02:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Final observation: Looking over your talk page, it looks like I'm not the only one who feels you have addressed people like they were newbies or vandals. I hope you meant what you said about keeping my thoughts in mind, although the bold face on opinion (like I don't know my opinion is my opinion?) conveys a different impression. Wryspy 02:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: BB AP again
The way I was doing it was based on standard English (0-9 are written as "zero" through "nine" and 10+ written with digits), but I'm thinking that we should make it all digits, just so that the amounts are easily found - zachinthebox (User • Talk) 20:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Big Brother (US) to GA status?
I posted this on the main page but I doubt that many people check it during BB8 but do you think that Big Brother (US) can get GA status? I think a peer review would be good but I am confused by the whole thing and don't understand it. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back so quickly. I responded to your message on the talk page. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
RE: PoV page
I voted to keep it because if that is deleted people are just going to try to post it back to the main article and then it would ruin the slightest chance of Big Brother (US) becoming GA. I don't know what to do because if it is deleted people are going to be putting all the trivia and stuff in the main article again. I am surprised that anon users haven't already *knock on wood*. In the event it is deleted I should find a way to put mention of the silver and golden vetos. Right now in the main article the basics are only covered. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 17:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I managed to add that the veto was originally silver and nominees couldn't use it on themselves and that the Golden PoV replaced the Silver PoV and is now the standard Veto. I also added that nominees could use it on themselves. This is incase the PoV page is deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alucard 16 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't hate you for wanting to delete it. It's cool. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 20:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Nissan Cube
Hello, I am 58.28.148.104. You recently reverted one of my edits on the Nissan Cube's talk page. I am unaware of the fact that Wikipedia allows letters of such a kind on it's discussion pages. Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn't contribute to the discussion in any constructive form. Not to mention that the person who wrote the letter did not leave his name. I know this can be found on the history page but his letter was of no value to the discussion. Please explain your revert and why you chose to warn me, as I do not consider it to be vandalism. I am new to the community so if I am wrong please be a little more understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.28.148.104 (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding POV page
Sorry if I did something wrong, I though Adria's last name was Montgomery? Or Klein, or maybe both. At least that's what it says in the Big Brother 5 article. I thought Okins was the fake name she used before the twin twist was revaled. Sorry. - 99.243.247.227 22:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I definetely see your point. That makes so much sense. I only did that to match the season's article, but you are right. Thanks for the clarification. - 99.243.247.227 22:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
What did I do?
Hi there. You sent me a message that I had vandalized the Monica Gellar article, but I am very confused as to how I am supposed to have done that. All I did was change it to present tense, which is exactly what you are supposed to do with articles on fictional characters. It's really not helpful when someone makes a big, scary accusation of vandalism without explaining the reasons for the charge. Treybien 04:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Question
I'm new here at Wikipedia and I can't find any moderators. I added and fixed some things to the Big Brother page and someone named user:Alucard 16 keeps removing the things I add, even though they are correct. Like I added that the live feeds are provided by Real Networks and that they are blocked when houseguests discuss their Diary Rooms sessions and he took it out. I really don't appreciate it. Is there anyway to stop people from removing information that is accurate? I know I'm a newbie on Wikipedia, but I am an expert on Big Brother U.S. -- watched every single season and subscribed to the live feeds -- and I know what I'm talking about. Maybe I just don't understand how Wikipedia works? --Teehee11 02:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply
I don't really think it's a good idea to add the strategies section for each season, because there would be a lot of repeats. I'd have to add backdooring, for example, to seasons five, six, seven and eight. Is there any chance of an article stub or whatever you call it? An article with its own page that links back to the main page? It wouldn't clutter the main page but it will still allow us to span the strategies of Big Brother, in general. I don't know who I need to get permission from, but to me it sounds reasonable. There are more strategies I was going to add. And in future seasons, I'm sure new strategies will arise! --Teehee11 18:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
RE: BB Archives
Ok I will keep an eye on them. I just added them to my watchlist so I will know when they are edited. User:ScottAHudson gets on my nerves sometimes have you seen all the test subpages he has? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 15:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am not going to worry about the test pages, it looks like people are getting on to him and telling him they are not acceptable. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 15:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well looking through his talk if we see User:BigBrotherFan that could be him. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 15:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- I love the page WP:Sock because of the picture. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 15:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well looking through his talk if we see User:BigBrotherFan that could be him. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 15:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Question
Why did you give 203.173.205.178 a warning when I made the revert? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- It just bugs me when that happens...I make a revert and don't get to warn the guy....gives you an emprty feeling. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Big Brother 8, Danielle breaks rules
I found the rules page where it states the rule of elegability. does that work? and i didnt know how to cite it, so i figured i'd just give it to you if you could add it, thanks! http://www.cbs.com/primetime/bigbrother_application/rules.shtml Xylogirl07 03:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Voting History Note
Rjd, I like the compromise on the notes :) it really clears everything up LOL. Just thought I'd let you know that I like it - zachinthebox (User • Talk) 23:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm fixing it
Ya, i know, i'm trying to fix it, the reverts won't work! Frustrating... - Spyke1077 02:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I fixed it, sorry, I was trying to revert my edits. In previous seasons, the third last person didn't get an "Evicted" box, it was still "Nominated" because technically they were still in the house during that week. But now I'm leaving it alone! - Spyke1077 02:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I know, I was just saying it would probably just get reveretd so I wouldn't bother. I don't like the warnings, and I never said it was specifically anyone's intention. - Spyke1077 02:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Brian Belo
Currently the merge discussion is still open, but I am about to close it, as it has been two weeks today. It hasn't been up for AfD as I wanted to merge rather than delete. John Hayestalk 06:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Good work on that article you put up for AfD. There seems to be some idea that winners of reality contestants automatically get an article. WP:BLP1E is quite clear on that, which is why I merged Brian Belo and it is good to see that someone else is doing the same thing elsewhere. John Hayestalk 07:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
REdIRECT
I was trying to make a redirect page with dun dun dun dun du na na na na na naaaaaaaaaaa na na na na na no ne ne na new na na na new to jurassic park that's all. user: icerainbow Icerainbow 03:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I was bold, and redirected it. Hope it stays that way. jeezel petes! Hope you don't mind, I didn't check the delete page. Oops. Okay, Just keep reverting whenever it's changed and take the articles for deletion down. - Jeeny Talk 20:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
BB8 AP
Do you want me to do it? Redirect it to the Big Brother 8 (US) page? - Jeeny Talk 02:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- I redirected it. Call me Jeeny the meanie. :p - Jeeny Talk 03:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Test
Test
RE: BB to WP:GA status
I have been wandering the same thing actually. Maybe it will be noticed next month. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Mr. Gung Ho
Just a follow-up from one of my comments. I guesss he, TS (Mr. Gung Ho) is not an admin. I believe he registers in my memory because there have been many (some?) dicussions about his behavior, or maybe just activity on WP. IDK. Maybe it was on AN/I. I can't remember, but do remember the name. lol that's all. - Jeeny Talk 22:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
User:Rocktooloud
Hi. I was lurking around the new pages the other day and I noticed that "Lennon Leppert" article created and recreated numerous times under, I believe, another username. This leads me to believe this user is a sock. No need to respond on my talk page. I used to be an active editor, but I gave it up. I do pop in and tag nonsense articles on occasion. Have a good weekend. 74.62.174.104 01:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: William cormier
Because it is unnecessary to delete the redirect. Having such redirects ease the navigation (well, when they are not double redirects of course, I fixed that one for you) by making it easier to search for the name. Moreover, redirects are cheap in terms of server storage, in the MediaWiki software (there used to be a page about that but I can't find it). -- lucasbfr talk 22:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup"etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 18:14 23 September 2007 (GMT).
1906
Please don't threaten to block good faith contributors. Read edit summaries and discuss the problem. Thank you. —scarecroe 20:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please stop bullying me. That text was not originally in the template that I removed. —scarecroe 22:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - Rjd0060 23:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Are you Vandalizing my {{hangon}} Tag? --Ludvikus 21:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Not vandalizing, but removing from AfD'd articles. Hangon tags are only for CSD pages - Rjd0060 23:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- What the f*** are a CSD pages? --Ludvikus 05:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Why don't you reconsider your proposed deletion now?
- Also, you should not add a delete notice on an early stub on the work of an experienced Wikipedian editor. --Ludvikus 13:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
You should have checked the facts before leaving these messages. - Rjd0060 15:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Survivor/Big Brother winner notability
If the Dick Donato article gets restored, whichever of you relist it for AfD would probably be more effective if you tackle the issue rather than the individual article. I recommend listing all non-notable Big Brother and Survivor winners as a single AfD. You should save yourselves a lot of trouble in the long run by dealing with them all at once instead of one at a time. You'd also establish a more clearcut precedent than a single article's deletion could achieve. That precedent can be used to make subsequent related AfDs go much more smoothly. Travislangley 00:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- The admin relisted it. One of you ought to charge in and proceed with checking how to list all of the non-notable winners as one group AfD to make sure this really gets dealt with. An admin would then close the relisted Dick Donato AfD because of it being part of a group under more appropriate discussion elsewhere. Travislangley 03:09, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Create a new one including Dick Donato and all others -- soon, before the Donato thing grows much. It's better to address the issue as a whole instead of having one deleted here but another survive there. It would be screwy to get everything except Donato's deleted. Nominate the group, and then ask the admin to close the Donato discussion because it's now part of a larger group on nominations. Like I said before, addressing the issue works better than attacking one article alone, and establishes precedent. Travislangley 03:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- There's a ton of precedent and closing an individual AfD or CfD to open a group nomination is how I usually see it done, but I'd have to wade through a zillion old AfD and especially CfD nominations to find examples. If you'd asked the person who started the new AfD to close it so you could reopen as a group nom, that might have done it for you. Better yet, if you were already planning to do the new AfD yourself, you should have preemptively posted a notice at the deletion review stating that you needed to be the one to create the relisted nomination. Opening it yourself would have been stronger because you could have started with reasons for deletion instead of a balanced, "So, people, what do you think? Which way should it go?" kind of thing like the other guy has done. At this point, it doesn't really matter anyway. The AfDs are already in motion. Shoester 18:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- I know this might sound biased because we voted differently, but seriously, that's not what this is about because I'm okay whichever way that AfD goes: Commenting so many times on the same AfD can come across like you're trying to shove your opinion down other people's throats instead of letting everybody else speak. If someone makes a vague comment like that one person's non-explanation, regular AfD editors and certainly the closing admin will see that. Posting so many comments can actually cause people to underestimate the number of people who also posted comments along the same lines because some readers will blend them together as if a single person said them all. Also, posting more than one comment with the same point (about Wryspy's weird crystal ball thing) can make people underestimate the variety of comments that have been made. Shoester 19:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Re: Keep - As explained up there. BigCoop 09:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Comment: Sorry, but that is not really helpful. This is not a ballot and there are no "votes", so your "input" (or lack of) would have had the same effect if you hadn't even added it to the page. - Rjd0060 18:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, comments like "keep per so-and-so's argument" or "delete per above" are common in AfD and CfD discussions. They're not votes. Rather, they assert that someone agrees with points that have already been made, thereby showing support. That matters to admins. Admins usually (though certainly not always) close based on consensus rather than by evaluating the specific points themselves. When you say, "This isn't a vote," you're right, of course, but by saying so, you've actually pointed out the amount of agreement for a position contrary to your own. New people weighing in on the AfD or CfD don't have to make brand new points any more than you do (although repeating yourself really does water down your own arguments). Arguing with each individual who disagrees with you just makes you seem argumentative, which actually weakens the arguments you have made. When you've made good, strong points (and from what I've seen, you frequently have), I really recommend against making them look like they're so weak that you must continually defend them. Travislangley 06:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Replied to this whole situation on the articles AFD page - Rjd0060 18:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Antec
Listen, I understand you're trying to get things done quickly, however, if you had taken the four seconds it would've required to Google 'Antec,' you would've easily found they are an actual, notable company. Don't go around marking articles for deletion just because you don't know what they are. Charles 03:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- "Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved or reduced to a stub; if so, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete." It would've been far more effective for you to consider actually contributing to a 100% relevant article rather than to mark it for deletion. In addition, you expect me to have to defend my article's "notability" before I've even spent five minutes on it? If there is an actual debatable reason for my article's relevance I would be glad to defend it's position; however, in this case you obviously marked it in error and ignorance, and in that case I refuse to have to explain my position rather than just adding to the article and moving on. Charles 17:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Replied on the users talk page - Rjd0060 18:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Beside the fact that you completely ignored my quote of the actual deletion policy, which states that it is inappropriate to consider an article for deletion if it can be improved, I don't think there is a better way to describe you than a bureaucratic tool. If you had any knowledge at all, or any will to do research, you would know that Antec is a very well known company. The "See also" section of my page lists many case companies that are far less well known than Antec that all have their own articles. The fact that I don't have the resources to expand upon an article does not mean it should be deleted, it simply means it should be added to. What's the point of everyone being able to edit Wikipedia, if I have to write the entire article first? Charles 19:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Personally I don't appreciate your vendetta against my article. Get off your high horse and do something useful. Charles 19:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Beside the fact that you completely ignored my quote of the actual deletion policy, which states that it is inappropriate to consider an article for deletion if it can be improved, I don't think there is a better way to describe you than a bureaucratic tool. If you had any knowledge at all, or any will to do research, you would know that Antec is a very well known company. The "See also" section of my page lists many case companies that are far less well known than Antec that all have their own articles. The fact that I don't have the resources to expand upon an article does not mean it should be deleted, it simply means it should be added to. What's the point of everyone being able to edit Wikipedia, if I have to write the entire article first? Charles 19:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Made a final reply on the users talk page. As far as I am concerned, this discussion is over. Leave it up to the AFD - Rjd0060 19:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
You might want to visit this article again. When you voted for deletion, you may have been misled by the nominator, who deleted the article's source before nominating it for deletion. The article now has four sources. You may recall it was nominated on the grounds of being unreferenced. Best Regards. Anlace 03:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Done! - Rjd0060 18:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Eddie McGee
Personally, I think we should delete articles on all reality TV performers who don't have any other notability, but I've lost that battle too many times in the past. I would vote delete for all, but what's the point? But I do think that Will Kirby deserves a keep. Corvus cornix 23:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Dick Donato revert
- You beat me to making that revert on the Donato talk page by only an instant. Wryspy 18:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Egyegy's PA
I did not, and have not included a personal attack on my userpage nor my talk page against User:Egyegy. What I had on my user page and talk page were backed up with links to the issue of my blocks and were true statements that anyone could check out. I don't appreciate that you equate me with Egyegy who is evading a community ban and has many sockpuppets and only edits in a very hostile tone. And he has slandered me on his talk page and user page. He is a sockpuppet of the banned User:Verdict, check on that! I am so pissed off by these vandals and those who are intentionally hostile because they "don't like it", and those who create an atmosphere of hostility and lies so others quit. I will never come back again. Trust that! Also, I am by no means prejudice against different ethnicities. I embrace all, yet I am prejudiced against assholes. As assholes come in all colors, creeds and nationalities. Good luck. Jeeny 00:26, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- PS: Please stop threatening people with blocks it makes the situation that much worse. Thanks. Jeeny 00:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- As far as your first comment, I am looking into it so I'd rather not reply until I have my information double checked. As far as blocks, I am doing what Wikipedia provides, and that is block warnings. I see nothing wrong with that. The people who get the warnings are the ones who "make the situations worse". Jeeny, hopefully you know that I have nothing against you and appreciate all of your help since I've been here and its a shame that this had to happen but I did see comments from you that could be considered personal attacks. - Rjd0060 00:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
And Jeeny, I really dont appreciate the useless vulgarity on this user talk page and in the edit summary for your last comment. - Rjd0060 00:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What complete garbage, I never had anything to do with that Verdict nonsense, which is made clear [5]. And I trust 100% that you will be back, either as this or some other user name. Egyegy 00:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- I can't believe the nerve of Jeeny making these accusations about me when she had this all along [6] Egyegy 02:26, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- She restored her attacks on me again on her talk page!!!! Why wasn't that removed and the small disclaimer I left on my user page was???? Egyegy 02:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply from my talk
You can notify her if you want. I don't think it is mandatory. It's a polite thing to do, but if you think it would only provoke her, then don't. Use your judgment. Dean Wormer 02:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Rjd
I'm sorry. My anger was not personally against you at all. It is frustration. Not against you. I said "this place" not you. I'm sorry you chose to report me, when you knew it only made me more upset the last time. Stay sane. Goodbye. I like you, and have nothing against you. Peace. Jeeny 02:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- I would hope not. I am not doing anything different in your case as I would do with anybody that I didn't know, and thats try to prevent continuous and repeated vandalism / vulgarness or any edits that are disruptive. Something I learned from you. Oh the IRONY. - Rjd0060 02:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have not been involved at all in repeated vandalism. I may not have a good attitude at times, because I edit controversial subjects. But I am old and cranky. I have not been disruptive, at least I don't think so. At least against those who are really disruptive where my blood starts to boil. Like I said, I do not work here. I have done more good than bad. I may have a poor mouth (fingers?) at times. But, I've shown more kindness to others than I have hostility. Too bad that is not known. Again, I do not wish anything bad for you. Sorry I have put you in a bad place. :( Jeeny 03:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Everybody knows you have done a lot more good than anything. I understand what you mean about working with the controversial subjects. That automatically makes things more challenging than normal. Maybe you can have a laugh though about the comment from ANI "She should go on a week long Caribbean cruise with ScottAHudson". You know who Scott is. We've had fun with him. Coincidentally, I reported him tonight also (and he got blocked for 7 days). Take lots of pictures on that vacation. - Rjd0060 03:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, Scott was a pain, but nothing like the ones on the racist articles. Nothing. Another lesson, you have to WP:SUBST notices on user pages, like User:El_C corrected the one you left on my talk. I do appreciate the notice, but not the report, to be honest. Also you have to distingish between WP:Vandalism and WP:Civil. I have not vandalized anything. :) Jeeny 03:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, I was surprised to see it on AIV, a board reserved for vandalism. El_C 03:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- So noted. I do understand that more now. I never really knew about the Administrators Noticeboard before. - Rjd0060 16:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, I was surprised to see it on AIV, a board reserved for vandalism. El_C 03:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, Scott was a pain, but nothing like the ones on the racist articles. Nothing. Another lesson, you have to WP:SUBST notices on user pages, like User:El_C corrected the one you left on my talk. I do appreciate the notice, but not the report, to be honest. Also you have to distingish between WP:Vandalism and WP:Civil. I have not vandalized anything. :) Jeeny 03:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Everybody knows you have done a lot more good than anything. I understand what you mean about working with the controversial subjects. That automatically makes things more challenging than normal. Maybe you can have a laugh though about the comment from ANI "She should go on a week long Caribbean cruise with ScottAHudson". You know who Scott is. We've had fun with him. Coincidentally, I reported him tonight also (and he got blocked for 7 days). Take lots of pictures on that vacation. - Rjd0060 03:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have not been involved at all in repeated vandalism. I may not have a good attitude at times, because I edit controversial subjects. But I am old and cranky. I have not been disruptive, at least I don't think so. At least against those who are really disruptive where my blood starts to boil. Like I said, I do not work here. I have done more good than bad. I may have a poor mouth (fingers?) at times. But, I've shown more kindness to others than I have hostility. Too bad that is not known. Again, I do not wish anything bad for you. Sorry I have put you in a bad place. :( Jeeny 03:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Non-substitution oddness
Sorry about that. Thank you for correcting it. I read through the article (WP:SUBST) but have one question; you said it "created havoc". What did it actually do? - Rjd0060 03:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, np. Basically, everytime I edited that section to add another section, it moved it to template. I've never seen an unsubstituted template have that effect. Once it was substituted, everything was normal again. How odd is that? Regards, El_C 03:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Wierd. Well, before I read that article (WP:SUBST) I added subst to everything (including cleanup tags). When I was told not to do that, I stopped adding them to everything. Now I read the article and understand where to subst and where not to. Thanks again. - Rjd0060 03:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the holiday
Like all holidays, there is much more information to put. I feel the page needs to be there in order that we can help let it grow and show the subject needs more experts to write on it, something I cannot do. --Enzuru 22:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- You're right, there wasn't one. Okay, thanks for your help in this matter, I'll undo things. --Enzuru 22:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi there
Just in case I am not on your watchlist, as I know how big one can become. I wanted to say I harbor no ill will towards you. I would, though, like to suggest that you enable the email feature in your preferences. This is because once you start to give out warnings, fight vandalism, reporting other users on ANI and enforcing Wiki policies, it is a courtesy to have it enabled, you may be surpise at the support you may get. Don't worry about hate mail. I've had mine enabled since I began editing and never once have recieved hate mail. (That may change now, that I said it online. lol). If you want to keep your privacy, you can use gmail or yahoo or another provider so you don't have to use your ISP's email. Again, just a suggestion. When I was blocked, I wanted to email you rather than post on my talk page for obvious reasons. Not to attack you, but to explain a few things. Take care. Cheers! :) Jeeny 00:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
My WP:UAA Report
Strangely enough, I did not get a warning from Twinkle. I did, however, notice the duplicate report. On my attempt to revert that (I agree all it does is take up space), I ran into an edit conflict that it had been removed by an AIV Helper Bot. -- Tckma 02:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC) No warning? Wierd. - Rjd0060 02:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Image Question
YOU SAID:
Just so you know, I have removed 4 {{helpme}} templates that you added to image pages. Helpme templates are for use on user talk pages only. If you have any questions, feel free to leave them on my talk page. Thank you. - Rjd0060 16:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
MY REPLY: OK, thanks for removing them. And thanks for the notice. (Without it, I would have become even more frustrated,
- and perhaps even suspected vandalism. Sorry for my Newbie paranoia.
I'm trying to make meaningful contributions, but it has become very discouraging!)
PROTOCOL?
I tried to leave a question on YOUR talk page
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rjd0060),
but it said you would reply to messages on MY talk page.
Does this mean I should ask questions on my own talk page?
(Or is it OK to ask here, on your page; if so, do I then look on mine for replies?)
QUESTION:
I still don't understand what is the proper way to put appropriate images, logos, and photos into Wiki articles when I have the owner's permission. When I attempt to do so, they get removed, regardless of what info I provide. Please advise.
Thanks, in advance, Tripodics 17:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
More to read
Thought you might be interested in this: The rules are principles. And this. Cheers! Jeeny 20:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Re:FYI
Thanks, but I'm not an admin. ;) -- Gravitan(Talk | Contribs) 23:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. I'm assuming that page had something to do with me then? -- Gravitan(Talk | Contribs) 23:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, well thanks very much. I hope this ends soon, 'cause I'm tired of having to deal with him... -- Gravitan(Talk | Contribs) —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 11:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry!
Whoops, sorry, made a mistake reverting. Thanks for catching me bud. Failure.exe 02:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Ronald A. Carson
Hello: I saw that you had a hand in deleting Ronald A. Carson. I was hoping that you could assist me with re-creating the page so that it will remain permanent. Ronald A. Carson is a very noteworthy political operative and wonderkid. The articles that were cited on the page from the aurora advocate were written solely about him and his accomplishments. He is a role model to hundreds of thousands of african-american youth throughout the world. These youths looked to his page as a beacon of hope that they too might one day become as succesful as him. He has been commended by president's, acotrs and athletes alike for his rapid ascension into fame and stardom. I would greatly appreciate your assistance with allowing for his page to stand. Thanks Alinob77 16:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again for getting back to me. Your advice is appreciated. I have been able to contact the editor of The Aurora Advocate and have retrieved a couple of newspaper articles featuring Carson. I have also been informed that they are in the process of putting these articles online, which would give them a url that can be used on a Ronald A. Carson page. Once that is done, this would satisfy the third party source that is lacking. Also, Carson has been the point person/strategist in cities across the country for President Clinton, Vice-President Gore, Senators Lieberman, Edwards, Kerry and now Clinton. He is a political strategist in the mold of a James Carville, or a Paul Begala. This is what makes him notable, becasue he is so young, a wonderkid if you will. Also, it should not go without notice that he is African-American and let's be frank, this is an accomplishment that not many African-American's can boast of. This is why this "story needs to be told" it serves as inspiration for the throngs of African-Ameican youth who feel that if Carson can do these things, why not them. So, I will find the url's to the sources and then I hope that, after this, you will assist me in making Ronald A. Carson a permanent page on wikipedia--thanks again.
Alinob77 22:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
RJD0060/Improbcat: The two of you are out of line and your motives are again called into question, please revert to my above post about respect and integrity, of which, not one of you is exhibiting at this current time. "COI is a indication for scrutiny and editing, not rejection. The tone of the current article is unfortunate, but that can be changed. I'm prepared to remove some of the fluff." DGG (talk) 20:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Busted! Congrats! How does it feel to now have zero credibility? Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Alinob77
Here's a reality show-related AfD that might interest you: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sophie_Simmons.
Wryspy 03:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Sock report
Looks good to me. But again, I've never started a report before, but have commented on some. <shrug>. Again, it looks good to me. You done good, IMO. :) Jeeny 00:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes I did look. But, just a skim through, so what I did see looks to be as you've reported it. Jeeny 00:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry.
Sorry about the late response. It was obvious that those accounts were Alinbob's sockpuppets, and they were blocked by another admin (whose name escapes me at the moment). I then blocked Alinbob himself for two weeks for sockpuppetry. There wasn't any confirmation as you say, but the probability of those accounts being different people is zero. · AndonicO Talk 13:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. · AndonicO Talk 14:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
No problem on the comment deletion, what you posted essentially duplicated what I had up. She's got some bizarre obsession with this article. Improbcat 18:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
QUESTION
you recently deleted a contribution i made to the article Kerkhoven,Minnesota calling it vandalism. I said that young people living there are moving away because its a dead end town. how can you call it vandalism when i am a young person who has left Kerkhoven, Minnesota for percicely that reason. Please explain this to me. User:Zoidberg12592
Replied here. - Rjd0060 20:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
OMG
your now giving me a last warning? and not those other people i never even made a personal attack wow please re read the article about my sockpuppet and refrain your self from skimming its important info and those non admins shouldnt be able to spam the sockpupet thing on me and they dont get into trouble where is the democracy in here you claim that this is a free encyclopedia yet you restrict on free speech? TELL GRAVITAN TO STOP POSTING THE SOCKPUPPET THING ON ME IAM ONLY ALLOWING REAL ADMINS TO DO IT CUZ ITS ANNOYING AND ANOTHER ADMIN SAID THAT HE IS NOT AN ADMIN--Umm killer 20:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Omg then why are you giving me a last warning what did i do?/--Umm killer 20:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Why you cross out my wargames thign omg i want her or him to comment back--Umm killer 20:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
the quote "you are and uneducated buffon" was allowed by the game masters at 's world of warcraft when somone said it to me even though they have an extremely strict verbal thing. It is not a personal attack it is simply an opinion maby jet lover is a genius but she/he has never responded to my evidence and repeated again answer back about my wargames plzz Cheers!--Umm killer 20:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Why cant we award our selfs barnasters? my friend does it all all allllll the time —Preceding unsigned comment added by Umm killer (talk • contribs) 20:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
F major AfD
Thanks...I wasn't sure how to tag all the others...I've never done a multiple article AfD. Smashville 21:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deletion review Carson
Thanks for your reply. Do you know if the previous article resurrections were all Undeletes or article recreations or combination thereof? I have a real problem how pointless exercises like this waste so much time better spent elsewhere in the project. Do you know if the article was SALTed this time? It's warranted in this case. It's a shame at one level, since Carson's notability might conceivably be adequately documented some way in the future. But this long running history of heavy-handed chicanery with the article means any such future claims of its notability deserve to be viewed very skeptically. Professor marginalia 21:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for posting the SALT inquiry. Fingers crossed this will stop the sideshow.Professor marginalia 21:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hopefully salting it will stop it, but I'm doubtful. The reason for the whole deletion review fiasco was that the article had been salted, and she couldn't just recreate it. Improbcat 14:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User talk:Rjd0060/Archive index
User talk:Rjd0060/Archive index, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Rjd0060/Archive index and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Rjd0060/Archive index during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Rjd0060 22:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
The Original Barnstar | ||
For helping out against the trolls and reverting vandalism. Out of the last 5 or so vandals i've been fighting, you've helped on at least 3 cases :). Enjoy the barnstar! AntiVMan 22:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC) |
Question
Why did immediately delete the page that was just created?--Freddy G15 23:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Replied on the users talk page - Rjd0060 23:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with the db-bio tag because starring on Broadway does seem to be a notability, but it is a copyvio. Corvus cornix 23:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
He has an entry at ibdb - http://ibdb.com/person.asp?id=75347 Corvus cornix 23:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I completely understand. If it hadn't been a copvio, I would have taken the db-bio tag off and rewritten the article myself, but it's best to get it deleted and start with a clean slate. Corvus cornix 23:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Corvus cornix 23:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
JOBING.COM ARTICLE
YOU SAID: Comment: Please refer to WP:WAX in reference to your comment. - Rjd0060 23:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
MY REPLY: I have used published media stories, in addition to company information provided by thier company website, to write what I feel is an objective article- including one front-page story from the New York Times; Rather than simply deleting this article, can you make suggestions as to how it should be changed? User:Phanavan
- YOU SAID: It should be noted that there have been substantial (positive) edits to this article since I opened this AfD. - Rjd0060 23:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- As the nom, I am surprised and impressed of the number of changes and references added to this article. I believe that it may be suitable to keep now. - Rjd0060 23:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- MY REPLY: Thank you for your patience and understanding as I enter the world of Wiki. What's the next step here? How do I get it off the "articles for deletion" list? Thank you again for your help and my apologies. --Phanavan 00:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello
How are you? Do you have an assignment for me? --Mahadali 15:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
SM64
Sorry, it's just that I'm tired of seeing Zelda on the top today, while before E3 2005, everybody (magazines also) said it was the greatest game of all time.--Mr.Mario 192 22:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
O.K. Thanks.--Mr.Mario 192 22:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your nomination, which, after 10 days, I closed with the result of delete both articles and merge' them. I am in the process of completing the deletions now. Bearian 16:18, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
New article
Dear Sir I want to start a new article on Dr umar Alisha (1885-1945). he is the 6th peethadhipathi or head he is the great granfather of Dr Umar Alisha (1965). He is the 9th peethadhipathi. Both these persons have same name how i start this article. kindly suggest.
regards Pingali 14:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
US Flag
Should be merged to that or Flag Desecration Amendment; I think the original writer, whoever he was, didn't search WP throughly enough before he started the article, because there is one main article already on US flag desecration and a section at the general article on flag desecration. Regards Buckshot06 14:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I blocked this user for an hour, because he made three edits, all to vandalize Moose, all in rapid succession, during the time you gave the user a warning. Was this proper? I tried to report it to WP:AIV, but it did not appear on the screen. Whether I messed up, or did it right, please tell me. This is my first block ever as an admin. Bearian 00:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, I am impressed by you. When are you submitting to the rigors of RfA? Bearian 00:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I had about 4 or 5,000, but I declined it outright once, and put it off again another time. The general consensus is 3,000 edit minimum. Bearian 01:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Levi Strauss
Did it occur to you to revert back to the correct version rather than to just revert back to the one with only mentions of his prostitution and the wrong born as name? Look carefully at the revisions before you revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deansherr (talk • contribs) 01:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Replied on users talk page - Rjd0060 02:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
hello!
I just wish to delete an account I have, this is the fiasco! and please please don't pretend you want to help me and just mess with my head! I just want this to end!!! a brief synopsis, I created an article-went to a vote to keep or delete- I stupidly added a few comments while un logged in and some while logged in , I'm dyslexic-so sue me. but I got on some guys radar (for all I know a friend of yours) he then accused me of being other users and did a checkuser on me, came up negative, still the guy wouldnt let go of it, he put crap on my user page that was rude! and took it off and then he locked my account, so sick of it, I have sent an email to wikipedia foundation to help. but I just want the dumb account deleted right away! its so embarassing to me and also reveals my personal info-please help ! Canuckchick007 02:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I read that, I take it you are an administrator and can help? just let me know, I don't want to go through the rig-a ma- roll of dealing with head office-they probly take forever to get back to you!, also can a user block your account because you say you will put out a wiki alert and say you made a legal threat? This was just made up to freeze up my account, I m so ticked off as the checkuser proved my innocence!Canuckchick007 02:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- anybody you would recommend?Canuckchick007 02:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- this is all so annoying! I wish he would just go away! can you do me a favor and delete the comment I put on the administration board?Canuckchick007 02:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- anybody you would recommend?Canuckchick007 02:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Recommended user to email a Bureaucrat. - Rjd0060 16:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Just to say hi, and that I'm thinking of you. Hope all's well. :) Jeeny (talk) 03:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm the author of the above mentioned article. After all the pictures were deleted by the admins who do not think ranks and insignias are not essential to the articles regarding armies and not deserves to be use under the fairuse criteria, I really disappointed and requested to speedy delete that. So if you think that article contains some context which is also have some encyclopedic value, then I'll keep the article as it is. Thanks --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 17:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I have sourced the championship titles. Whether the titles are sufficient to meet notability is now the question. If you feel so inclined, please revisit the AfD and comment. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
You put one tag on it, I put a different one on, and we could even add db-repost. :) Corvus cornix 22:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I like that, let's add db-duh. :) Corvus cornix 22:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Some people just don't know when to quit. Corvus cornix 01:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
WTV
And yet you have WTF!
(above? WTF?) - Unsigned comment left by User:Manduck2k3 at 19:08, October 11, 2007 (EST).
RfA
Don't forget to study up on this. You may already know this though. Good luck, I'll support you. :) Jeeny (talk) 23:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Navigating this thing is way confusing
Navigating this thing is way confusing... I tried to post something and was in the wrong spot... can't it be easier to post?
Also I tried putting the template thing in buy the thing was deleted before I had a chance.. really you all should give more time to the noobs to figure out how to do stuff... and DUH... make it so you can't edit OTHER peoples stuff.. but thats just obvious! Manduck2k3 23:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank You
Now thats what I needed in the first place, if I had that I would have known how to do stuff, you should really make that the page everyone goes to when they sign up! Thanks Manduck2k3 Manduck2k3 23:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- PS: "And, even though it is your user page, it still belongs (and can be edited by) the community" Please define the community" if that means anyone then you have some warnings to remove from me as you state the above quoted.. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manduck2k3 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- UPDATED: If owned by the community means: every member, then vandalisms is imposable as you cannot vandalize your own stuff? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manduck2k3 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I read WP:OWN, and it says you shouldn't try to prevent people from editing your articals, and what not, but it does not say who the owners of what are., The problem is that you have too much stuff opened to the interpretation of someting... not to mention it shouldn't be possable to edit "home pages" or "user pages" if there not yours.... and why do i have for and not just two? sounds like all the "power" can be missused if 3 people do a warning at teh same time that gets you 3 warnings.. and the ones regarding my own artical shouldn't count because I kept tring to used the form to show I wasn't done but I couldn't get it to work! What a rip! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manduck2k3 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm only reading what you have written... I don't believe I have misinterpreted the meaning of anything you wrote, if you meant to say something else then please feel free to correct what you said.. but if you mean what you said then there are some issues here. Manduck2k3 00:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- "Unintentional nonsense
- While intentionally adding nonsense to pages is a form of vandalism, sometimes honest editors may not have expressed themselves correctly (there may be an error in the syntax, particularly for Wikipedians who use English as a second language). Also, sometimes connection errors or edit conflict unintentionally produce the appearance of nonsense or malicious edits. In either case, assume good faith." Manduck2k3 00:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Head Shampoo
Hi! I'm surprised that there wasn't an article on this stuff before now. I remember it well. I've added a couple of cleanup notices in lieu of the speedy since I'd like to take a whack at cleaning this up later. No need to respond. Thnaks much and have fun! Best, --PMDrive1061 01:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks much. :) New pages patrolling is hard, dirty work. Anyone who does it with any regularity deserves the barnstar like the one on your user page. - PMDrive1061 01:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- LOL! Oh buddy, do I ever feel your pain. It was worse when I was an administrator under a previous username. Not no mo'. I asked to be deadminned. --PMDrive1061 01:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- That goes without saying, of course. I love adding content, but playing whack-a-mole with spammers, garage band musicians and high school students is too much fun! It's an endless task. Ah, but the fun of maintaining integrity! --PMDrive1061 01:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Re:Thanks
That was probably one of the most poorly-reasoned unblock requests I have seen. He cites "free speech", which does not apply to the WMF, and he issues a legal threat after posting the unblock request. :-P Nishkid64 (talk) 01:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: Manduck
Oy-freaking-vey. I saw his talk history. You have my sympathy. :) --PMDrive1061 02:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Staate00
At User talk:Staate00 you've said that the user won't get any more vandilism warnings.
Can I point you to Edit History of St. Brendan's Colleg where the user appears to be inserting the names of himself and his buddies into the page.--ZayZayEM 02:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for reporting sock BusterA
Thanks for reporting these socks early on. I suspect these socks were created to utilize in retaliation for another sockpuppet case I instituted recently. BusterD 13:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
what is blog type?
sure, so you are a great expert on what is a blog type website? then you donot consider the story " A STUDY IN SCARLET" written by one of the most famous novelists of all time a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Decembernoon (talk • contribs) 15:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
the helpme move request
FYI: I did not place that request there, even if it shows as me on the history. If you take a look at the article's history, you will see that I moved the helpme tag and the request off the article onto the talk page. I am sorry if that has mislead you. :-) Stwalkerster talk 20:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
RE:CSD
- OK, sounds good. Honestly, I'm not sure why it matters, because it's getting deleted anyway. jj137 (Talk) 02:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- It matters because some admin's will only speedy an article for the reason listed on the tag. If it does not match, they wont delete it. Also, when deleted, unless the admin specifies a more specific reason they deleted it, that tag will show up in the articles deletion log, and we should make sure it shows the correct reason it was deleted. - Rjd0060 02:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- To make it easier on the admins when deleting, ah, yes, that would make sense. I feel I have been making a lot of stupid mistakes when it comes to NP Watching lately, and as an experienced editor, I should know better! :) Thanks for the help jj137 (Talk) 02:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- It happens. Everybody makes a few mistakes. You have a point, it will be deleted anyways but here's an example. See this deletion log. Notice it says "content was: '{{db-attack}}Chase Oliver is born....". That admin didn't specify a specific reason for deleting it, so the system automatically inserts the first 100 (or so) characters from the page. Since that article had a proper template (attack) we now know the specific reason it was deleted. Otherwise, it would have just said "nonsense" or something. Make sense? - Rjd0060 02:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Perfect sense. I think I should start working harder at remembering all of the CSD types, as it will come in handy. jj137 (Talk) 02:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- It definitely helps. I don't know if you use any scripts but I use WP:TWINKLE and it really helps with vandal reverts. Maybe something you should look into if you havent already. - Rjd0060 02:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have AWB and NPW. AWB is great, and I think NPW is pretty good, but it can mess up a lot, so I only occasionally use it. Now that I know it has all (or most) of the types, I think I'll give it another try. jj137 (Talk) 02:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- It definitely helps. I don't know if you use any scripts but I use WP:TWINKLE and it really helps with vandal reverts. Maybe something you should look into if you havent already. - Rjd0060 02:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Perfect sense. I think I should start working harder at remembering all of the CSD types, as it will come in handy. jj137 (Talk) 02:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- It happens. Everybody makes a few mistakes. You have a point, it will be deleted anyways but here's an example. See this deletion log. Notice it says "content was: '{{db-attack}}Chase Oliver is born....". That admin didn't specify a specific reason for deleting it, so the system automatically inserts the first 100 (or so) characters from the page. Since that article had a proper template (attack) we now know the specific reason it was deleted. Otherwise, it would have just said "nonsense" or something. Make sense? - Rjd0060 02:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- To make it easier on the admins when deleting, ah, yes, that would make sense. I feel I have been making a lot of stupid mistakes when it comes to NP Watching lately, and as an experienced editor, I should know better! :) Thanks for the help jj137 (Talk) 02:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- It matters because some admin's will only speedy an article for the reason listed on the tag. If it does not match, they wont delete it. Also, when deleted, unless the admin specifies a more specific reason they deleted it, that tag will show up in the articles deletion log, and we should make sure it shows the correct reason it was deleted. - Rjd0060 02:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Carl Ritter ~ Help Me
Thanks for the help RJD. In the future, is there a tag like {{helpme}} for articles.
Could you please speedy this? No one has contributed to the AfD, and it obviously needs to be speedied... Thanks, Codelyoko193 Talk Contributions 19:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I thought you were an admin. Thanks, Codelyoko193 Talk Contributions 22:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)