User:Hoary/Archive16

the excellent results of infoboxes
Here's a particularly fine example... (I assume the space is for notes.) Pinkville (talk) 16:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

dates again
still, only assholes bitch about this sort of thing. I'm glad we went over it. Have you ever read ayn rand? Lovely tis she not?ILike2BeAnonymous- talk 10:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Nice try, IL!ke2BAn0nym0us. You're history. -- Hoary (talk) 13:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Harajuku
Deletions were completely explained as POV and were referenced with unacceptable sources. Try reading the edit summary. This article was vandalized back in February after various editors fixed the article last year. 220.253.28.41 (talk) 06:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Your edit summaries do not explain. -- Hoary (talk) 06:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You have been reported for your actions. 220.253.28.41 (talk) 06:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Gosh, that sounds exciting. Where? -- Hoary (talk) 06:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You have not "reported" Hoary to to any higher authority, also note that he is an administrator so try presenting your point rather than engaging in confrontational behaviour, especially since he holds all of the cards. James086 Talk &#124;  Email 06:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm open to rational persuasion. The persuasion should be presented on the article's talk page, where my opinions about the article (and I have some) should attract the same scrutiny as anybody else's. Meanwhile, removing stuff from the article, even stuff you (or perhaps I) don't like, counts as vandalism. -- Hoary (talk) 06:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Since petty argument is over. Is it acceptable to blank my talk page, so future user of IP does not be exposed to someone else issue? 220.253.28.41 (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi and welcome back! I sympathize with your desire to delete what's on the page. I'm not sure about the rules here. I think the best thing is to leave it and spend at least a couple of days making good edits and following the rules, and then to delete it. Then everyone will realize that you're basically a good guy (or girl) and aren't just trying to hide something. &para; Incidentally, even if you don't use the word "crappy", I will. The Harajuku article is crappy. In conformance to certain western obsessions, it purports to be about "youth culture", but actually this turns out to be a mixture of posing and shopping. (Where's the creativity?) Harajuku has much more (or anyway had until recently). Just as one example, the last time I looked, there was a museum there; you won't learn this from the article. &para; Feel free to be bold with the article; just be careful to announce what you're doing and to get an OK before a major deletion. And consider getting yourself a user ID: it's true that you ought not to need one, but in practice people view deletions (and additions) by mere IP numbers with additional suspicion. -- Hoary (talk) 11:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Inaba Masanari
Thanks for tagging the stuff on Inaba Masanari. I've been hoping someone else would notice, with regards to the issue of his using that source...I've tried bringing it up with User:Exiled Ambition, and while I can't fault his enthusiasm, I have to question the wisdom of his duplicating information that's perfectly available in English elsewhere. At any rate, I hope this issue gets discussed and that some consensus is reached. -Tadakuni (talk) 04:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I've just been drafting a message about this. Hang on a few seconds, and watch that watchlist! -- Hoary (talk) 04:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC) .............. PS Done! -- Hoary (talk) 04:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied there. Thanks! -Tadakuni (talk) 04:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Second Opinion
Hi Hoary. I've really appreciated your edits and level headed approach to issues in the past. If you have a free minute, could you look at this edit which seems to be a blatantly racist edit by user:Piercetheorganist on Hamstringing. Am I being too sensitive? House nigger seems to be pretty inappropriate for this article and is definitely POV. I left a comment on this guy's user page but it didn't resolve anything. It seems to be a pattern with this fellow every month or so to pepper an article with racial slurs, see his edit of Staceyann Chin or his vandalism of Tim Duncan. I appreciate it! Thanks. --208.58.197.14 (talk) 02:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind comments. I've asked this user a question; we'll see how he responds. -- Hoary (talk) 05:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * As always you are tactful and succinct; skills which I desperately lack. Thanks for your help! --208.58.197.14 (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've only just seen this moronic edit of his to Tim Duncan; if anyone's behaving erratically, it's certainly not you. -- Hoary (talk) 11:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

On Galt
I didn't re-add this information for effect but I understand you assumed this. I realized that it seemed lost at the top and added it at the bottom. I didn't think it was appropriate to delete it from the top since its a discussion page. You seem to be negative in so many of your edits and frustrated. Just chill out and dont always assume people are meanspirited for I assure you I am not. I am sure are a nice person. Artsojourner (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Art, we go back quite some way and our relations haven't always been cordial, but I've always thought that you're a decent guy and that you mean well. (I wish I could say the same of all other editors here, but I cannot.) Sorry to have made a big deal out of your duplication of your comment, but this duplication did look strange. Galt's article seems to be on its way to deletion; although I think that deletion is deserved, neither its deletion nor the idea that you've spent time on it gives me any pleasure. I wish you well in your other editing work in WP. -- Hoary (talk) 02:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hard headed and hard working go hand in hand with me and yes we do go way back Be well and namaste. Artsojourner (talk) 22:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC) sorry alway forget to log in first LOL 67.101.159.148 (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

didn't
you just come off a period of semiretirement? [I'm one to ask...]. ;~) Pinkville (talk) 02:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That was demisemi, but this is semi. I plan to bounce back (certainly by the time the cicadas are trilling), but in the meantime I have stuff to attend to elsewhere. -- Hoary (talk) 04:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Less elitist?
Maybe User:Neier/Sandbox/Date Masamune is a bit ahead of its time? Neier (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a good start, but it has some way to go. All that boring stuff toward the end; couldn't you make it shorter, for extra overall postmodernity? Time permitting (and for the next three weeks, it won't), I'll happily help you. I mean, after all, this cat Date is obviously a cultural icon and thus deserves nothing but the truthiest. -- Hoary (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks like I didn't even need to make up a new page -- Saika Magoichi pretty well serves as a model entry, without any extra oomph added by me. I've been moving stuff to Fg2's Japanese historical people in popular culture; but, I may leave this page alone, just as a monument of sorts.  Even the opening paragraph ties in to the games. Neier (talk) 13:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Stephanie Adams
Thank you. I don't see how the info is poorly sourced, libelous, or false... Dismas |(talk) 15:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, it's a review in what is perhaps a slightly dodgy publication. But compare that with the sourcing of, say, this chunk:


 * Adams was raised from birth by her aunts, who were former models. At the age of 16, her aunts encouraged her to start a career in modeling as well. Adams was signed first to Wilhelmina Models while completing her bachelor's degree at Fairleigh Dickinson University, and then to Elite Model Management by her ex-boyfriend John Casablancas. &para; Upon graduating college at the age of 20, Adams started applying her dual degree in business management and marketing towards her proceeds from modeling to become an avid financial investor in Fortune 500 companies.


 * Total sourcing of that: zero, squat. Also, the NYP recently published the great Matt Taibbi, so it must have something going for it. -- Hoary (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

thank you
For your slightly blunt but thoughtful and helpful and positive remarks on Giano's page, which I just noticed. Welcome to come across someone who actually values content. I have made further inroads on the Postmodernism article. The middle section still contains what looks like a long personal essay, but I have removed most of the complete gibberish and put a bit of a thread on it mostly by moving sentences around, simplifying and deleting redundant bits and pieces. Also added a few references. With every kind wish, and sorry for the (playfully meant) disruption to Wales' talk page earlier. Have a good week in the big city. 86.133.180.53 (talk) 18:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your amicable response. I'm sorry, I'll be too busy to do anything whatever for the next three days or so, or much for a couple of weeks after that. However, I hope that you continue to do good work at "Postmodernism". NB while I regard much of what was written there as piffle, and you seem to do so as well, you probably have a better chance of making your edits stick if you bend over backwards to be polite about the material that you excise. Fogster has good advice. Follow it for a while, and then I'll be more inclined to do an autopsy on the closeted skeletons and give whatever help I think is appropriate. (You could also take a look at cultural icon....) -- Hoary (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. You see I did create an account although this is strictly against the rules, isn't it?  I did take a look at Cultural icon.  There's very little to add to it that isn't OR (there are some academics who make a living from this stuff) but the best route would be AfD in my opinion.  Best Hinnibilis (talk) 18:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * There. Two splendid brand new articles. Villa Carlotta and Villa Cetinale.  Hinnibilis (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hah! I took the silly thing to AfD, and look what happened then. &para; I like your little article on Villa Cetinale; if time permitted (and alas it doesn't) I think I could contribute a very little to it. Some time later, I hope. I'll look at Carlotta a bit later. &para; If you'd like to discuss rules, could you please email me? Thanks. -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you again for your kind remarks and help. Fogster too has left a kind thought on my page.  I liked your comments on the cultural icon thing, and I am happy to help, but I wonder if it's worth it - does the article actually cause any real damage (other than laughter).  Speaking of which, while reading the AfD I noticed comments on another one which is rather more serious, Transmission of Greek philosophical ideas in the Middle Ages.  I left a note on its talk page with some critical comments - do let me know if they are too harsh, I don't want to upset the main author, who seems a nice chap.  Something, however, had to be said. Hinnibilis (talk) 18:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Adeyto
Adeyto Rex Angeli -. From what I understand she is also known as Laura Windrath,, visually it appears to be the same person, however I find nothing on Adeyto to say she goes by Laura Windrath. Just figured I would let you know, as for if they are notable, I do not know. --I Write Stuff (talk) 21:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. Well, Angeli seems to be a tarento -- and as such, not obviously less deserving of an article than are the squillion other tarento. IMDB is rather a sad joke, isn't it? -- Hoary (talk) 13:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Please help save Repo Man movie article
Hey Hoary,

This guy, Dædαlus, is in there trying to remove parts that you, I and many others contributed to the Repo Man article. Please add to the bottom of this thread on the Repo Man talk page that you think the "Notable Motifs" section should not be blanked (erased), but left as is since the Pulp Fiction article also has a "Notable Motifs" section that isn't being considered for removal at all (even by Dædαlus himself).

While I agree that the "Notable Motifs" section could use some work, it certainly won't help the article to delete the whole thing and erase all our work which consists of many multiple contributers over a course of years. I'm willing to work on it and better incorporate it into the article, he just wants to delete it all!

With consensus, we can stop this guy from deleting all our work soon!

Thanks in advance. Cowicide (talk) 02:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

officially back
Officially back. Many thanks for all your kind help. Hinnibilis (talk) 06:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks but . ..
No thanks. I appreciate the sentiment. Happy editing Hoary. IvoShandor (talk) 08:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Hoary!
Just wanted to say thanks for your comment regarding my lil contribution to the Monroe page. ;0) Feecher (talk) 10:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)Feecher

RFA Thanks
Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, Risker (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, Hoary!
Hi Hoary, thanks again for all help you gave me 6-10 months ago when editing and correcting my contribution. However now I am a little concerned since I believe someone (only IP-address) changed, I would even perhaps say "vandalised" my page on Lidstromer, by taken away the link to Jonas Lidstromer, changing several sentences etc, without any comments. I have undone this edit of the 15th May 2008. I hope you could keep an eye on that and maybe, if it happens again, some kind of protection exists? Another thing happened on February 13 (?) when someone (IP-address only again) actually very pervertedly vandalised the article on Louise Lidstromer, by inserting words which mean very bad and discusting things in Swedish. Someone fortunately undid this vandalism many months ago. Thanks for your concideration, perhaps advices to me, regarding this. I'd like to know what I should do. Currently I am working on an article on photography, that I will paste in my own "sandbox" to work on soon. Thanks so far! NikeNike George 05:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi. Louise Lidströmer‎ is still on my watchlist, although many other pages are also on my watchlist. I'm afraid I can't guarantee to look at every edit that's made to it. Unfortunately vandalism is endemic in Wikipedia: I can think of various ways of countering it but all of them would be deeply unpopular. -- Hoary (talk) 06:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Possible for FAC?
Hi Hoary,

It's been quite a while you probably last heard from me. ;) I'm thinking of trying to salvage a near-condemned article and will need a favour from you. Odex's actions against file-sharing was previously shot down by FAC and GAC due to various reasons and I don't know whether all the criticisms thrusted at it were legitimate, and if it's worth to salvage the article and be able to pass it through FAC again. The only change that did happen since the FAC/GAC is that article stability is no longer a concern and can be edited with a retrospective perspective. I will need some further assistance per Tony1 to have a second or third opinion on the copyediting state of the article if it's going to stand any chance for FAC. (my grammar can be atrocious at times!). Apologies for the long rambling and g'day! - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Diablo. It's good to hear from you again.


 * I started to read the article, but I'm afraid that I gave up. I then skimread some more of it. Certain aspects of it seem very well done indeed. While Tony or someone like him may be able to improve the English here and there, the English seems excellent.


 * These don't seem to be the problem, which to me is that the whole thing doesn't seem encyclopedic. By that I don't mean that the subject shouldn't be covered; rather, I mean that the article looks to me like a chapter of a book -- an exceptionally scrupulously referenced book -- about BitTorrent litigation.


 * As I look around my shelves, I see a lot of books. Of course many are poorly referenced. But many others are scrupulously referenced, published by university presses, and all in all are about as good on their subjects as you could reasonably expect books to be. However, the great majority of these aren't (and don't attempt to be) encyclopedic. This article seems similar.


 * What are the important issues and events here? I think these are what we need, not an exhaustive blow-by-blow.


 * On the other hand all of this may simply be too far from my own areas of interest. Others may have a more favorable view (and I don't notice my objection arising among the pernickety GA comments). -- Hoary (talk) 07:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. It's something for me to consider about. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 16:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:PROF revision suggestion
I am trying to "test the waters" to see if there is enough interest in revising WP:PROF to better reflect the arguments that are actually used in practice in academic-related AfDs. I've put a note about it at Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics) with a somewhat more detailed explanation. There is also a link there to a possible draft of a revised version of WP:PROF, which is located in my sandbox, User:Nsk92/Sandbox3. Since you have participated in academic-related AfDs in the past, I'd like to hear your input about this idea, both in general and in terms of specifics. If you have some comments, please post them at Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics). You are also welcome to edit User:Nsk92/Sandbox3 in the meantime. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

words indeed
User_talk:Tony1/How_to_satisfy_Criterion_1a TONY   (talk)  08:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

FA criteria: punctuation problem
Hoary – Tim Marskell and I have been discussing the problem of the punctuation in the single-sentence lists in the criteria (recently reformatted but not renumbered). The punctuation has been through a few little tweaks in the past half-hour, and we'd like a third opinion. I was uncomfortable with two colons in a sentence, and feel that a dash is fitting as a kind of an "equals" symbol in Cr. 2. Tim cautiously mentioned the possibility of using commas, but we're both unsure about that. Here it is currently, and in two previous forms, here and here. I can't think of a solution. Tim suggested another opinion, so I wonder whether you could oblige. TONY  (talk)
 * Excuse this intrusion from the peanut gallery, but why not colons and semi-colons?
 * It is: ¶ (a) well-written; its prose is engaging... Pinkville (talk) 15:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I was about to say: "I'm a bit knackered right now from some Deep Websearching, so it will have a wait a few hours". But a pulchritudinous pilcrow perks me up. A bit. -- Hoary (talk) 15:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You should see what happens when there are two of them! Pinkville (talk) 15:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Joanne Gair
I have replied on the talk page. Gair is an icon. She is the world's leading body painter. The problem is that she is relatively unsourced and prior to two or three years ago you could have probably even contested her WP page due to inadequate WP:RS. She is starting to get her work published and so some information can be sourced. However, although an article with this content could be WP:FA material with WP:RS, this article will have to wait until she is reviewed more extensively in critical analysis. I would love any help that you might be able to give in terms of finding legitimate sources.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Killed by/Killing Keïta
Help! I've managed to make a good-sized mess out of attempting to clarify several articles/redirects/disambiguation pages revolving around the following:


 * 1) Seydou Keïta (photographer)
 * 2) Seydou Keïta II (footballer)
 * 3) Salif Keïta (footballer)

Now, if I were an admin... I believe everything is now okay regarding article 1 (the photographer), but article 2 needs to be moved back to Seydou Keïta (footballer) (which, as you see, is currently a redirect to article 2). Article 3 is also, I believe, okay, but a redirect to it (Seydou Keïta I (footballer)) needs to be deleted, or something... or maybe that one doesn't matter. Sorry to drop this on you, but can you make it better? Please tell me if there's anything I can do to help (some reluctance on your part for my aid is entirely justified). Eventually, I hope to get back to refining the links to these articles (they were pretty messed up to begin with). Thanks! Pinkville (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Done.


 * Hmm . . . that's not a bad idea. How about becoming an administrator? It's no big deal but you do get to delete stuff. (What's disappointing is that you can't just delete stuff because, however well sourced and neutral, etc etc it might be, it's about crap, or boring, or whatever. Well you can, but then people will call you a rouge admin, which is charming, but also get most upset.) -- Hoary (talk) 14:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I kind of like the idea of saying in my RfA that I'd like to be an admin so I can correct my own errant page moves... (This is the second time I've made this request of you, I think). Well, I'm seriously thinking about jumping in to the fray (probably more rouge et noir, than rouge). I've been doing a bit of preparation with this in mind... Pinkville (talk) 15:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Also you get to look at deleted stuff, which is even more boring :) Gwen Gale (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * All I want is to gaze upon the ordure, and inhale its piquant fumes... Pinkville (talk) 15:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Right. Like this. Shall I nominate you? (But can I go to bed first?) -- Hoary (talk) 15:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Eek! My vanity nightmares made flesh! Gwen Gale (talk) 16:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * "Unauthorized" has a charming odour of its own. But yes, I'm willing to go where you and GG have gone before, only.... Pleasant dreams. Pinkville (talk) 16:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * What happened with that? Gwen Gale (talk) 16:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It's actually the second of two nominations I've had (both by the same editor). The first was badly timed - in the midst of Xmas holidays (probably better chance of success, though!), and the second has been stalled by a combination of my computer going brulé and some very time-consuming family matters (which have now stabilised). Pinkville (talk) 17:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Trivially, the linked nomination was rewritten by the nominator on 19 April 2008, but without changing the origianl end-date of the RfA. Pinkville (talk) 17:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[Too many damn colons] I think you're supposed to answer the questions. (How about copynpasting Gwen's answers -- she released them under GFDL, right?) -- Hoary (talk) 00:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Bastard! I'd already thought of that! :~) Pinkville (talk) 01:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Take hers, take mine (GFDL too!), pass them to Mark for an intelligent synthesis, get them back and of course change every "i" to "ï" and every "ï" to "i" and stick the result in and release it to the impressed "community" -- but later, halfway through the solemn proceedings, do an extensive revision to this, citing new discoveries at the Library of Congress. -- Hoary (talk) 01:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh crap, I've never seen that modcon before. What sport awaits! However, I fear the Library of Congress will not be amused... Pinkville (talk) 01:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Meanwhile, could you please move Salif Keïta (footballer) to Salif Keita (footballer). The sources cited in the article give "Keita", without diacritic, and his nephew, Seydou Keita (footballer), apparently does not use the diacritic. Thanks, doll. Pinkville (talk) 01:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Argh! You're too fast! I only just looked at my watchlist... Thanks! Pinkville (talk) 01:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

just stumbled upon and
not that you were my friend but why don't you take a look through the....telescope Tsurugaoka (talk) 08:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Er, yes. And? Hoary (talk) 12:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * i couldn't find any CD cover...'cos you said, Tsurugaoka (talk) 15:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Shima Ryu
I know that you're busy with our Hiroh, but if you have a moment could you please check the orthography, etc. of this little article (and soon, her lesser half)? Thanks. Pinkville (talk) 01:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Done, done and done. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I knew there had to be a macron (goddamn lazy-ass Bennett!), but of course my understanding of Japanese is almost entirely intuitive, not learned. Thanks for the improvements! Pinkville (talk) 12:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Culture wars
Yes, you'd think we'd have a keen young bunch of semioticians er semi-idiots no semiologists to fill up this sort of thing, but we plainly don't, yet. Where to turn? Johnbod (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Stay tuned! -- Hoary 23:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC) &para; Blammo. -- Hoary 00:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * We're just too ludic to do more, having eaten too many reified beans. Pinkville (talk) 16:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yokoyama Matsusaburō
More macrons needed, I suspect. Pinkville (talk) 16:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you perhaps scan an illustration showing Kanko Zusetsu, Jokakau-no-bu and email it to me? I can only guess about two of those characters with confidence. -- Hoary (talk) 03:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I should be able to get an image for you. Pinkville (talk) 11:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

email draft
Any thoughts on the draft(s) I emailed? (I'm not sure my emails are being received). Thanks. Pinkville (talk) 02:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry, I haven't checked my email for the last couple of days. Shall do so soon. Irrelevantly (I suppose), how's this? -- Hoary (talk) 02:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Whoah! That's a foul idea. I added my not-bot-loaded vote. Thanks all round! Pinkville (talk) 02:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

yay
\o/ Gwen Gale (talk) 09:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Bizarre curio of the month. -- Hoary (talk) 11:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Eek. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...
for looking after my userpage. Much appreciated. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * All in a day's work. (I see that shortly thereafter Gwen performed a similar service for me, and also awarded the perps with vacations.) -- Hoary (talk) 14:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

David Tipling
Hi Hoary

I realise that some of the sections are totally novice in the article on David Tipling, I've only written a few articles and I could do with a little help. David Tipling is the genuine article and has lots of mentions in secondary sources...he's a well know wildlife photographer in Birding circles...maybe I was a little OTT coz I like his work ...I'm happy to have a go at supplying the citations, any chance you could give me a little breathing space and remove the speedy deletion TAG while I do .....? 91.109.135.148 (talk) 17:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think that the article has ever had a speedy deletion tag on it; certainly I have never placed one there. Yes, please add citations, e.g. for the claims that Tipling's work is influenced by the people named. -- Hoary (talk) 01:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry...
Who are you?

why would you block me? I am sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megangibsonfan (talk • contribs) 07:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm a user of this encyclopedia who contributes worthwhile material to it, and I'd block you (or anyone else) in accordance with the policies that cover what to do with vandals, a term that encompasses people who continue to make whimsical comments in inappropriate places after they've been warned to stop. -- Hoary (talk) 07:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Why do you use such big words? Talk like a normal person. What are you a principal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megangibsonfan (talk • contribs) 07:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently normal people are required to talk like they're half-illiterate. --Closedmouth (talk) 08:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with this. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kazuo Nishii
I have nominated Kazuo Nishii, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Kazuo Nishii. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? StewieGriffin!  • Talk 15:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

"Barkelyism"
I"m guessing this refers to Charles Barkley. (e.g.). Pinkville (talk) 02:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * What an article! Another reminder that there's something fundamentally different between (a) a large percentage of the world's population, and (b) me. I skimread this thing -- no, that's not true, I idly jump from randomly picked sentence to randomly picked sentence, and can't work out how anyone could be anywhere near so interested in what other people do with balls.


 * So I suppose the IP meant a "Barkleyism". No doubt there's room for that in some book about wordplay, but hardly in an article on AAVE. -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * But if we have the Cos, surely we should have Barkely... Rivetting stuff, I thought. (You could put a rivet right into my forehead, in fact). [By the way, I posted my acceptance and the answers to the Qs, but Epbr123 is rather busy at the moment with her/his own RfA...] Pinkville (talk) 03:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

"shared" accounts
I laughed when you jumped in, no, I wouldn't have done it (for starters I know it's not shared), but you knew what flashed through my mind! :) Gwen Gale (talk) 04:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

ja:Adolfo
Noticed this earlier today! Somewhat coincidental to your mention of de:Felice... If you feel like having a gander, how does the Japanese translation look? Pinkville (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry but I have littler fish to fry. -- Hoary (talk) 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * That's such a small fish, one needs a microscope to see it. Pinkville (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Now checking. (Cue for sound effects of cogs engaging, chains moving, squeaks, groaning noises.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps some foley from this. Pinkville (talk) 01:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Checked (knowledgably, i.e. not by me but by a professional writer of Japanese). Verdict: Excellent. Another FA in the making? -- Hoary (talk) 01:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm glad it's such a good rendering. Remarkable! Pinkville (talk) 01:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Terry Sanford
I've put a lot of work into this article lately and hope to nominate it for FAC in a couple of days. If you could look it over and give it a good copyedit, etc, I'd really appreciate it. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 00:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * After some of the stuff I've been reading in the last few days, it's a pleasure to examine an article that isn't a load of -- er, well, let's not get into that. Yes. Indeed, I've already started, but please give me more than "a couple of days", because even after I think I've finished I tend to want to start all over again, disagreeing with my own stylistic decisions about as strongly as I disagree with anyone else's. -- Hoary (talk) 00:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, gladly a few more days, you're good that's why I keep asking you. Thanks. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 01:35, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * See how I've repaid your kind comments. Yes, my contribution to the talk page will have you cursing -- but better now than later, during any FAC. -- Hoary (talk) 02:23, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, it's on page 204. You're right, it's a better ref. I should not have been so lazy. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 02:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Spoken like a gentle(wo)man. Excellent: I now know I won't have to send a ningen after you. -- Hoary (talk) 05:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I definitely a dude, uh, let me double-check though ;-) — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 10:29, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Stephanie Adams Article
I think my first post in that section did come off as melodramatic, so I did tone it down a bit. That said, there were three or so sock puppets posting to various admin boards alleging vandalism among other things, so I do still see it as bullying. It is unfortunate that only one point of view can ever be expressed without incurring the wrath of the socks, so I'm going to sit back a bit and wait for the fighting to blow over. Wandering canadian (talk) 19:48, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Socks alleging vandalism? Give them enough rope. . . . I'm more amused by the socks' inability to restrain themselves from reminding the world reading the talk page that that this person is beautiful and intelligent.


 * Pity that the last AfD ended in "keep". Another would end in "keep" too, thanks to the strange but pervasive notion that a person acquires notability by being shown topless in this strange magazine. -- Hoary (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

LD Cortez
You have a valid point, but LDCortez removed the previous warnings on her talk page from today (including two final warnings) about removing the AFD templates from that article. She then proceeded to do it again and then vandalized my talk page and user page. If you still think I should unblock her, then I will. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 02:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * She was free to remove those warnings, but of course she wasn't free to ignore what they said.


 * You're right then. Let her stay blocked. If she's not happy with the block, she is of course free to contest it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This article is becoming amusing. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 04:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

PDFTT or whatever

 * Sory about that. Thanks for blocking him.  Shapiros10  contact me My work  14:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Spreadtrum Communications
I've sent it further on its winding way. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

On second thought... Gwen Gale (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Seven more times and it will be up to number nine. Ah, irrelevantly I'm sure, what do you think of this chap? -- Hoary (talk) 16:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Cary Herrman
Hi Hoary, I read your very fair and objective comment to an administrator. I am working to preserve an article written on an individual that was blocked/ deleted by the administrator you contacted, Jauerback. It appears as if this is from a personal conflict with the original creator and not based upon objective fact in regards to the notability of the article.

I personally noticed a "war" going on between the admin and the creator, thus copied and preserved the work (see below). The email address that the creator used most likely was an email address to contact Mr. Herrman himself. I see no conflict, only an article that was created for others to share.

According to wikipedia guidelines, this is a notable article.

I am requesting your assistance in unblocking the page, allowing the notable article to be posted and am asking for your assistance in placing a protection on the page against vandalism.

unsigned comment left by User:BHOrchid

[copy-pasted text of deleted article removed] Gwen Gale (talk) 20:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Articles for deletion/Cary Herrman shows that Jauerback nominated it for deletion, prompting a discussion in which none of half a dozen or more people disagreed with deletion, which in turn led to its deletion by Rjd0060. If you simply disagree with deletion, there's nothing that you can do. If you think the process by which it was deleted was seriously faulty (e.g. that its deletion was partly based on a misrepresentation of the facts, or that Wikipedia policies were misinterpreted), then you can bring up the procedural problem(s) in Deletion review. I strongly suggest that you read the explanation on that page very carefully before you appeal for a review of the deletion process. -- Hoary 00:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Cleveland Steamer
Actually, I agree with you 100%. However, i don't see the point in disucssing that as the consensus is to not agree with me, so there is no chance of getting anywhere discussing it. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 09:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No consensus from me! Look at the sources for this "notable sexual activity": "Sit and Spin's Dictionary of Poo Sex"; transcript of the Deminski & Doyle Show aired on January 9, 2002; The Complete Asshole's Guide to Handling Chicks; and a Sex Dictionary. And who publishes this dictionary, you may ask -- Princeton University Press? Wiley? Erlbaum? Uh, no: "Body Vibes Adult Toys", on mybodyvibes.com. Maybe this activity is notable; if so, let's see the evidence of notability. We have, after all, been waiting for it since 09:29, 24 March 2005. -- Hoary (talk) 14:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Lol. I should visit your talk page more often, Hoary. The comic relief is worth the price of admission. :-) The Complete Asshole's Guide to Handling Chicks, indeed. Give us a break, guys. J Readings (talk) 17:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh, well said! Well maybe eventually when the Population is Uploaded directly into Wikipedia, they'll smarten up enough to let us Delete the article. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 16:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Southerndata
So have a shufti at this and this, oh and this too. :/ Gwen Gale (talk) 22:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * My favorite edit among those I've seen is this one: Are you a communist? Because, by not allowing other theories, you must be. Who are you to promote the TIGHAR theory? The TIGHAR hypothesis is a theory. It has un-supporting evidence. In one of the edits to which you point me, I learn that you are a nazi as well as a communist. Now, merely being called a nazi is humdrum, but being called both at the same time is somewhat out of the ordinary. Unfortunately, I didn't quite manage to work out the reasoning for the diagnosis of nazism (let alone of both together). Let me guess: by not allowing other hypotheses, and clinging to a theory that is a hypothesis with "un-supporting evidence"?


 * Should I have heard of "TIGHAR"? (As all this seems to be about yet another dead US celeb, I just pray that this is unrelated to Nick what's-his-name and 12*12-3.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Haha! Speaking of which, our old friend is at it again. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)