User talk:ArcAngel/Archive0012

Jim Bell
Thank you for helping. I had already provided him with those links, but we shall see if your posting them will help any. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Since you were just accused of sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry, I have started a WP:ANI discussion about the editor. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Redundant category
Hello When you made this edit, you added Category:Alternative rock albums, even though it is already in Category:R.E.M. albums, which is itself a subcategory of the former. If you need to respond to me, please do so on my talk. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Your AfD-comment...
Really? I knew the video-game/software-rule and that already didn't make sense to me... now I learn that any jerk can announce a book and it cannot be speedied? Are there any other exceptions that give carte blanche to hoaxes sitting around for 2 weeks? *sigh* The more I learn about this, the more I see the need for some revisions.... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 21:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yea, unfortunately it says right there under the A7 criteria ...not to articles about their books..., so that's why they weren't speedied. I think G11 might apply for yet-to-be-published books, but that is a judgement call.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 21:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for the support vote and kind message. It went bad, but c'est la vie. Best wishes, Alan16 (talk) 07:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC).

Your Nominations for Deletion
{| class="navbox collapsible " style="text-align: left; border: 1px solid silver; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #CFC;" | Soft-Archived
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; " |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; " |

I realize you try to make wikipedia more encyclopedic by nominating user pages/sub pages for deletion, such as Totaldramaman, Hadger- forcing him to get rid of his Total Drama Random, and myself. What I don't understand is why do you care? For, especially Hadger, how do these pages affect you? Hadger is a really great contributor to wikipedia so I don't understand why you are forcing him to delete his creative series which probably took some time to create. -- Dragonof Fire (龙火) 00:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Simply put, Wikipedia is not a social networking site. I am of the opinion (and I am sure others will disagree with this) that Wikipedia is, first and foremost, an encyclopedia, and not a "gaming" site.  Hidden page challenges, quizzes, and the like simply have no place here.  That's why those policies were put into place.  And I really didn't "force" anyone to delete anything.  I nominated the pages so that a consensus among other editors could be reached as to whether or not to keep them.  I also gave those editors the option of placing speedy delete tags on the pages, something which was voluntary.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 00:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That means I have an option, right? I think Totaldramaman let you delete it because he thought he had to. Maybe you should ask him if he wants you to restore it. -- Ha dg  er  00:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * First of all, I didn't delete it as I don't have that ability. Secondly, in the interest of fairness, I would recommend that you delete the section on your userpage as it really does not comply with the policy I outlined above, and since it's a section of your userpage there's nothing I can do to nominate it for deletion.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 01:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I realize that wikipedia is not a site for blogging or putting unencyclopedic information, however Hadger's Total Drama Random isn't like a game or a hidden page, really. This quote is from the link I provided:
 * "Consider: If a user is contributing well to articles, why do you care how good or bad their userspace pages look? As long as that user makes good contributions to the article space, and their interactions with other users are polite, why do you care what else they do on Wikipedia, or why they're here?"
 * The reason I used the word "force" is because it's either he deletes it, or you will probably nominate it for deletion. It would be inevitable that it would get deleted. -- Dragonof Fire (龙火) 01:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I realize that the essay may not reflect all the views of users because of it's top template. If Hadger agrees with you, then he can remove it. Alas, it feels like I am fighting a losing battle. -- Dragonof Fire (龙火) 01:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
By the way, someone else replied, not me. -- Ha dg  er  00:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. He already messaged you (read the above section on your user talk page). -- Ha dg  er  00:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * }

Can we please talk about deleting my elimination tables?
Those are the things that I really enjoy doing on wikipedia, and please dont quote me on this, but i dont think it is fair that you come to my user page and just say "you must delete ur ETs because they dont fit in." All I'm saying that, it is my user page, and it's not like i'm doing anything wrong. --RealityShowsRCool —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.231.219.50 (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I never said you must delete them, I stated that they don't fit into the userpage policy and asked you to remove them. Whether you do or not is up to you.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 02:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Obsession (band)
I do not understand why this page has been deleted. I am not an avid user of Wiki but every bit of the content in what was posted was true. I see in previous discussions of deletion, some users reference that the wording was similar to the page on http://theobsession.net/mike.html Maybe that is because I own and operate theobsession.net and I wrote every word of it. I had reposted the page and made many changes to it to make it different from the page previously deleted, it makes no sense why this page is deleted. Why is it that you can't just let me know what parts of the page need to be CHANGED instead of deleting it?? There are no issues with copyrights and every word is factual. Thank you. I would like a copy of the page emailed to me. Route1guitars (talk) 00:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * First, you need to follow this link and follow the instructions in the red (bottom) box on that page. Then read the latest deletion discussion in which was stated that there are no or very few reliable sources found, and thus there is not enough to assert the notability of the band.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 00:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Archival of Wikigreek Basketball
May I request you un-archive this section on Wikigreek basketball? I'm sure it's a sure thing, but I was composing a statement while you archived. Usually, consensus is acknowledged in the thread as having been determined when it comes to a formal ban. I see no consensus to close yet. Auntie E. (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I archived because I felt this editor has caused enough grief and drama, but another editor disagreed with my archivng, so it's undone. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 21:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Archiving
Why hidden? This makes it hard to see how people responded to things I said... the only time I think that archiving talk by hiding the discussion is necessary is when the argument is contentious, going nowhere and generating unnecessary wikidrama. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 21:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I see no point in continuing talking in a "resolved" thread, but as I see you have undid my archival...but you COULD have just unarchived the particular section you were involved with instead of undoing my entire edit. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 21:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If I may, I would suggest archiving one thread per edit in the future, just in case there's a difference of opinion. It's a pain to manually have to undo someone else's edit. Some of those closes seemed good to me, which is why I didn't revert and asked you to instead. Auntie E. (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I did leave the option open for reversion if someone objected though so I wouldn't have had a problem with it. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 22:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No problems with the archiving bit, as I say, but why not instead use archive top and archive bottom? There is no need to hide non-contentious threads. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 02:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought collapsing would be a better option, well because I'm lazy and I didn't want to have to scroll down forever. :)  Seriously though, I thought it might look better if the page were a bit shorter.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 02:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand, but people (like me) like to read the archived thread. My browser doesn't give me a chance to search for my username when the text is hidden, which is a problem :( - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 02:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't use collapse top archiving at noticeboards without good reason ("too lazy to scroll down" doesn't cut the mustard). It makes archives much harder to read. Thanks, –xenotalk 14:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Xeno, perhaps you missed the smiley when I said that? In other words, I was kidding about that, I wasn't being serious about that statement.  ArcAngel (talk) (review) 18:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Lambda Alliance Article
It seems that the real article: http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2008/05/03/news/mtregional/znews09.txt has fallen to linkrot. But no, I figured I could trim that article down to a couple of sentences to describe the founding of Lambda.

In any case, I'm not sure if there are any RS mentioned outside of the missoulian (Missoula, MT's newspaper). I figure for the Lambda Alliance to be notable enough to be mentioned here, it will have to do something nationwide or for the debate on Same Sex marriage to heat up, and I'm not even sure the debate on Same Sex marriage and LGBTIQ rights in Montana is noteable enough in its own right right now, as there's maybe only 200 people caring about it in the last two legislative sessions, and maybe three politicians in the whole state were for it enough to include it in campaign literature.

But I figured I'd write up an article and have it in my sandbox at least with the founding info and maybe some other crap, unless there's some obscure wikipedia policy against that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OneofLittleHarmony (talk • contribs) 01:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No, there's no policy against it, I just thought I would advise you that in its current state it is not likely to last long if you transclude it to the mainspace. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 01:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Account creator tool request
I have requested an account on the ACC account creation interface, and as requested I am posting a confirmation message on my talk page. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 04:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request so welcome to the team. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on IRC where a bot informs us when new account requests come in as well as the mailing list.


 * Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day (a day being from 0:00 UTC to 23:59 UTC), although you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked "Account Creator Needed". However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM.


 * Please keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome! ---- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 07:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I noticed that you put on your userpage that you have account creator rights; just to be clear, I have granted you access to the ACC tool, but you do not have account creator rights yet, which can be requested at WP:PERM once you have demonstrated that you need the additional permission (hitting the six accounts per day throttle). Hope that this clears up any misunderstanding. Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 09:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

ok got it
Ok it wont happen again. Sorry. Brazilnode (talk) 04:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Southwest Asia now changed to Western Asia
Some pseudo-editors are having objection to using Western Asia article name, which was changed from previous Southwest Asia mainly in airlines destinations lists, they are saying it should be listed as Southwest asia despite the article having been renamed as western asia, why this double standrad, these very editores are also asking China be listed with full name becaue PRC article carries country's full name, so then why not western asia.116.71.53.73 (talk) 19:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is jaspel reply showing a dual standard for articles and threatening too.

"Once AGAIN: Consensus was reached in the Southwest Asia article. NOT in the aviation project (that governs the airline/airport articles). More than one established editor has reverted your edit. And you have been asked, more than once - and nicely too - to follow procedure. Do you really want to head down the path you're headed, and effectively act as an IP Vandal? Jasepl (talk) 19:25, 17 January 2010 (UTC)"
 * I cannot do anything about this so I have reported it here. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 19:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

IRC Cloak request
This message is to confirm that I am in control of my IRC account (ArcAngel_wp). ArcAngel (talk) (review) 01:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)