User:Nmatavka/Archived discussions

=2009=

Welcome


Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions. It's great that you want to contribute to Wikipedia - the more constructive editors the better!

I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Getting the articles just right can be tricky - but there are lots of people to ask!

If you have any questions, just click on the Contact Me link after my signature at the end of this section. Alternatively, check out Questions, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question.

By the way, when you are writing on a discussion page (or someone's talk page), it is considered good manners to sign your comment... to do this, just add  at the end of your comment. That will put your user name and the date/time at the end (or you can click on the  icon when you are editing. Never sign on an article page - only on a discussion page.

I am now going to add my signature, using : --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me,  My Contribs ) 13:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Low rock article
A good starting point to find reliable sources of information can be found through Google News search for "Low Rock" - which includes:
 * Star Tribune story (subscription required)
 * Chicago Sun-Time story (susbcription required)
 * Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story (subscription required)
 * Rolling stone Magazine - no subscription required

And there will be others. Obviously, some of the stories will be about rocks rather than music!

If I get a chance next week (the kids prevent me doing much at the weekend!) I'll try to look at some sources for you.

Regards, --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 13:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

In regards to references
Hi! I saw you working on the article, I added a reflist for you so that when you want to add a reference all you need to do is place the URL between and it will automatically be added to the reflist at the bottom of ther page. :-). Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 13:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Information in Morphine and Low rock articles
Hey Nmatavka. I'm writing regarding the deletion of the post-Sandman's death section of the Morphine (band) article. I am against the deletion herein and subsequent move of this information into the Low rock article for a number of related reasons - while it's true that Morphine 'proper' ended with the death of Sandman, it is an incomplete telling of the band's story to end the article at this point and neglect the various posthumous works significant to the Morphine catalog and overall story. While the information does in fact relate to the genre of Low rock, it is inappropriate to relegate said information to a lesser-trafficked and secondarily significant article such as Low rock, since the term was coined by (and is ultimately in reference to less popular works within a genre of music that directly stems from) Morphine itself.

In conclusion and summary, while I very much appreciate your work in amassing the story of the Low rock genre, I oppose your relegation of the information surrounding the band's activity following Sandman's death. I think the information is much more appropriately placed in the Morphine (band) article - and after all, there's no reason it can't be in both places! I'm going to go ahead and reinstate the information you moved and post a similar message on the Morphine (band) discussion page. Perhaps it would be wisest to take up the conversation there. Best, Colinclarksmith (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Low rock
I have nominated Low rock, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Low rock. 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.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Bongo  matic  02:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
MuZemike 06:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

=2010=

Speedy deletion nomination of A.K.A.C.O.D.
A tag has been placed on A.K.A.C.O.D. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadManCF (talk) 00:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Greetings Nmatavka. At Wikipedia, we prefer that pages in such an initial phase of construction be left out of the mainspace. If you wish to work on this article, please keep it in your userspace until it contains meaningful information. Regards, RadManCF (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

A.K.A.C.O.D.
Greetings. This article needs independent reliable sources that demonstrate the notability of this band. Generally, unsigned bands are not notable, so sources are particularly important here. If none are provided, the article may be listed for deletion. Also, it was inappropriate for you to remove speedy deletion template, as you did here. Please refrain from doing that in the future. Regards, PDCook (talk) 14:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC).

Speedy deletion nomination of Low rock
A tag has been placed on Low rock, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Bongo  matic  09:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of A.K.A.C.O.D.
A tag has been placed on A.K.A.C.O.D. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Bongo  matic  14:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Pfund.png
Thanks for uploading File:Pfund.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 06:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 06:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Pfund.png
Thank you for uploading File:Pfund.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Your last couple of comments
Please do not make death threats like you did here and here again. If you disagree with the redirection, then discuss on the talk page or with the user who is doing the redirecting in a civil manner. You only make it more difficult for others to work with you when you have issues with something. Regards, –MuZemike 19:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC) --I made the threat in a joking manner. I am actively working on the page, so it's a bit difficult to include sources right away.
 * I understand that, but there are more tacit ways of doing that than placing "you will be killed" on the article and talk page. Some users do not jokes very well at all, and you need to be aware of that. –MuZemike 21:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ménage à 3
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Ménage à 3, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. --ANowlin: talk 21:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ménage à 3
A tag has been placed on Ménage à 3 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. --ANowlin: talk 21:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

3RR warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Ménage à 3. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Jeremy  (v^_^v Carl Johnson) 21:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry About That!
My bad! Turns out that wasn't vandalism, on Ménage à 3, but was actually part of the article! Thanks, and sorry about this confusion! Endofskull (talk) 21:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Ménage à 3. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. TEK (talk • e-mail) 21:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Ménage à 3
I have nominated Ménage à 3, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Ménage à 3&. 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.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Barack Obama has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. —  Jeff G. ツ  03:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Hillary Rodham Clinton. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 21:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Sandbox, you may be blocked from editing.  Hazard-SJ Talk 07:35, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Sandbox
Yes, but, as always, things have a limit. Things, such as what you recently did in the sandbox, in not acceptable. (Yes, the sandbox also has a limit, and eyes are watching!)  Hazard-SJ Talk 07:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Please read over the sandbox header, if you haven't as yet done so.  Hazard-SJ Talk 07:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Vigenère cipher has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. TwistOfCain  (talk) 20:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding original research as you did to Tron: Legacy. If you do wish to experiment we have a sandbox you are more than welcome to use. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me | Merry Christmas to all! 08:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Vigenère cipher
A short protip in the future with regards to the edit you made here, instead of blanking, it is preferable to place  at the top of the article to let others know that you are currently doing a major edit so that others won't make intermediate edits. Hope that helps, –MuZemike 20:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Tron: Legacy, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 13:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, your recent edits to the Tron: Legacy plot summary added a significant amount of unneeded detail and have been reverted. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You are welcome to use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 03:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The guidelines WP:FILMPLOT recommend between 400 and 700 words. Many editors are willing to be flexible on this but please not the previous discussion on the Talk page and the edit history of the article from the past week. Please respect the work that other editors have done in good faith to bring the article closer to the suggested length. I would particularly draw your attention to Inception (film) which although quite a bit more complicated than Tron:Legacy manages to have very succint plot summary. -- Horkana (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Please see also WP:SIMPLE. The very basic rules clearly emphasize the importance of providing a clear edit summary.
 * The plot section already contained comments warning about the recommended word count. Please note the advice given above by Donagio about usign the sandbox. -- Horkana (talk) 04:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Tron: Legacy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Tiptoety talk 05:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC) During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

=2011=

January 2011
Please do not alter other people's quotes on their own user page as you did with this edit. I have repaired the "damage", so to speak. Thank you. DVdm (talk) 15:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Nmatavka/N0rp
User:Nmatavka/N0rp, a page you substantially contributed to, 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:Nmatavka/N0rp and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Nmatavka/N0rp during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 03:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a darn shame =( I didn't even know they had such policies limiting user space. User:Nmatavka/Prawn is epic btw. DB (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Can somebody please unblock me?
I really don't get why I got blocked---I'm not this FuckOMatic character.
 * Read WP:AUTOBLOCK -- it should help you understand that this had nothing to do with you at all. --jpgordon:==( o ) 22:46, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Masturbation, you may be blocked from editing. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 05:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Masturbation
The terms you added to the lede of Masturbation may have been used historically, but they are certainly not neutral and are quite inflammatory. If you would like to contribute discussion of these terms to the article, find or start an appropriate subsection where they can be explicated in their historical and cultural context, with assertions verified with references to reliable sources. Proceed carefully and -- especially if you contend the terms belong in the lede -- prepare to engage in consensus-building discussion on the talk page. —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 06:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)