User talk:BigHaz/Archive 3

DYK
Thanks for the article! -- Samir  धर्म 06:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bewdy! I think it's no secret that this was the one I was hoping would get listed (along with Guildo's). BigHaz 07:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Iceland eurovision
hi I have set up the category Category:Icelandic Eurovision songs for you to use on each of your articles. James Janderson 09:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Cheers. I'll use it on the remainder and (if I remember - this message being here should be reminder enough) go back and add it to the rest afterwards. BigHaz 10:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK
Yet another! Many thanks to you and your co-conspirator Bravada -- Samir  धर्म 09:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Paul Oscar
He he, this was quite desperate, I just couldn't find any Icelandic entry worth noting bar Silvia Nott, but you haven't done her yet. The 2000 guy was dressed as a baker, but I don't think this counts. So I recalled seeing the Paul Oscar video just a few days ago on YouTube and being totally surprised by this David Bowie impersonation (I forgot to mention that in the article). I believe it was in some comments that somebody mentioned him being a drag queen before, or perhaps I just started researching on him as I haven't heard of him before...

Anyway, we need to generate more of these! I have to browse through the archive of stubs you did to make sure that no great numbers were left behind :D In the meantime, there is also the other guy doing the Melodifestivalen entries - these are too good to pass on too! What I suggest is just doing a quick web search on each new entry and taking a closer look at the photos and the artists' section on Diggiloo T. - this is where I mostly get the fun stuff from :D Cheers, Bravada, talk - 21:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll get onto it this afternoon (my time). One other Icelandic entry which might pass muster is the 2004 entry, which is noteworthy for not mentioning the song title anywhere in the lyrics. Of course, Silvia is exceptionally notable in herself... BigHaz 22:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Eurovision DYKs
If anyone has objections to the level of Eurovision DYKs, please take note of the following:
 * I (and others) only nominate the articles. We have no control whatsoever over the whims of the updating admins who are free to pass over and/or reject outright any given nomination, whether Eurovision-related or not.
 * Eurovision entries are not the only things consistently nominated for the frontpage. If one is to object to "the daily Eurovision nomination", one should probably object to daily nominations from other areas of interest as well.
 * As Eurovision has been a neglected area of interest over the lifespan of Wikipedia, the creation of large numbers of articles will appear as a "blip" on the radar. Where song-articles are concerned, this is a classic case of a project with a massive front end (several hundred songs which did not previously have pages) and a relatively small back end (there being 35 or so entries per year). In the interests of speed, I have taken it upon myself to create the "front end" as rapidly as possible, which has resulted in frequent nominations as interesting songs appear.
 * My policy (and here I speak purely for myself) has been - since being instructed in the mysteries of DYK - to nominate at least one song per country. This is easier to achieve in the countries with more entries (France and Germany have had at least 4 nominations apiece, and several of each did not go through) and significantly harder in countries with fewer entries. This has resulted in (in some cases) weaker nominations being made or indeed no nomination at all being made on certain occasions. Again, there is no compulsion for any admin to take any suggestion to the front page. While I would obviously like each one of my nominations to appear on the front page (why else would I nominate them?) and I am pleased when one does, it is not the end of the world when one does not.
 * With regard to the frequency of the songs appearing on the front page, I must admit to some considerable surprise on that count. Again, this is due purely to the opinion of the updating admin. Further, those who object to frequent front-page appearances of Eurovision songs are more than welcome to nominate articles related to other areas of interest - nomination is hardly an exclusive club if they let yours truly make some. Additionally, I would refer anyone with this objection to the frequent appearances of other areas of interest on the front page as well.
 * The very nature of Eurovision entries makes them worthwhile nominations. A competing song is, by definition, a small and discrete area of information. In some cases, the song then goes on to achieve bigger and better things ("Volare", "Waterloo" and a select few others being prime examples). In a great many cases, there is something striking and unusual about the song - it is performed in an exotic language (Diwanit Bugale), deals with an unusual topic (Dschinghis Khan (song)), is performed in a comical or unexpected way (Wadde Hadde Dudde Da?), or is symptomatic of a broader trend in the Contest (Iemand Als Jij). Thus, the article can be created quickly, referenced successfully and nominated accordingly.
 * While the overwhelming majority of Eurovision entries have pages created (or edited) by me, I don't nominate everything I write. Being in Australia, being my current age and having only come to the Contest in the relatively recent past, I am not privy to some of the more striking facts which other editors add and nominate entries for (Wenn Du Da Bist being the prime example - I defy you not to be amused at that video). On occasion (such as "Iemand Als Jij"), I simply have a mental blank regarding the significance of a particular entry and I'm grateful for anyone who can add to it. On occasion, this has resulted in a song which is significant going totally unremarked. I'm not campaigning for that particular song to be nominated now, and despite the fact of its closest-ever finish, it will probably never make the front page. I am, however, grateful as I say to anyone who is capable of adding useful information about any given song - and I'll never pooh-pooh a nomination which results from that process.

The above is my policy as it currently stands. After having read it, you are welcome to add thoughts and comments. After all, we're all trying to make Wikipedia a better place. BigHaz 01:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * BigHaz, I am very sorry that my overly enthusiastic activity got your ESC DYK routine disrupted and put you in an uncomfortable situation. I still believe, however, that what is currently happening, including an admin actually ORDERING to lower the number of nominations (while other updating admins seem not to have problems with them) is deeply against the rules and spirit of DYK. After the absolutely dreadful loss of Wenn Du Da Bist, which makes me really start contemplating stopping wasting my time on editing Wikipedia, I suggest BEFORE you take on a country to try to determine which songs would really make the best DYKes and try to intersperse them in time so that they would fall in the "every second day" criteria instilled by the almighty Petaholmes. A solution might be to start creating the articles in a "notepad" in your userspace and copy them into Wikispace in a convenient moment. I believe you could then ask the people at WP:EURO (funny how the project usurped this shortcut rather than WP:ESC...) to suggest some good ones or help expand them, as then some interesting facts might surface. Regards, Bravada, talk - 02:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't get down about it Bravada. I can update the template as well, hopefully there will be a calm down in the religious jousting on my page that other editors in, so I can do some real editing. You have an interest in automobiles, so it may be good for you to keep a balanced editing regime, so you don't burn out on one task only. I think in early May before I became an admin I managed to sneak in about one Australian swimmer every two days so that should be fine. As long as there are no other guys with a legit article which misses out, then I am fine with one topic having a lot of features due to high productivity. ATM you two probably have created one of the highest project output levels, which most projects don't get even with 40 guys, so you should be proud of your work. Regards, Blnguyen | rant-line 02:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you both for your kind words (excuse me for using this talk page for my personal issues). I've got one question, Blnguyen - is there any way you could rescue Wenn Du Da Bist from oblivion? I mean, I can promise not to nominate an ESC article for a week if this gets to the front page. This is the cream of the crop, this is what DYKes exist for. I admit there have been "stretched" nominations before, like with Shake It which I have added moderately irrelevant content to for BigHaz's nomination not to fall through on the grounds of being rather uninteresting (though it does not seem to bother some admins, and the most boring things passed through in the recent weeks), but when I nominate something on top of BigHaz's nominations, it's usually SOMETHING.
 * I am most upset that, totally against the rules and spirit of DYK, one user can prevent a nomination from appearing on the main page and even provoke some retortions from an admin's side just by desctructive grumbling. Secondly, I am totally apalled by the very uneven treatment of DYKes by admins - on one day, and admin would pass a nomination which reads worse than an automatic translation from Japanese, is cleary an underdeveloped stubbylike creation, contains POV and its DYK is a lenghty sentence which is actually the opening of the article and just declares that the subject is what it is. On some other days, the admins (or, more specifically, one admin - I don't mean to point fingers, but I want to be fair to other updating admins) would surprisingly fail a nomination on this or other ground, most recently because he does not fancy the topic (even though it - the topic - was skipped in past two refreshes). Bravada, talk - 02:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't blame you at all, Bravada. I think it's just one of those things which happens around here. Someone gets a bee in their bonnet about a specific issue (heck, here in Australia if you stand up and say you're an ESC fan you get laughed at, so why am I unsurprised that there are people like that online?) and overreacts by complaining about it. An admin gets involved and makes some unfortunate comments and everyone gets their egos bruised. People being people, this is going to happen every now and then and I'm surprised it didn't happen before now. As it currently stands, I deliberately skate over articles-to-be-nominated when I've already written one such that day (see the Iceland page, for example - also see the dates of some of the German and Greek articles), so it won't really be a massive imposition to adapt to a directive - if it's made as one, currently all I think we've been asked to do is to "consider" doing this - from on high. Like I've said in a couple of places already, I only write the articles - I don't stick them on the front page and in some cases I don't even write the nomination. If DYK policy is to be changed, it should be changed in relation to everything - Indian history, ESC entries, Russian generals, religious buildings. It'd be a shame if you were to stop editing around here, you're a valuable member of the team. But if that's the decision you come to, then that's the way it is. BigHaz 02:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I appreciate your efforts definitely.

High bloody culture? Wow, that's a new one. I'll take the barnstar, though. No point turning one of these babies down. BigHaz 08:03, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK noms
Let me throw in my 2 cents. Please continue with your nominations. It's at the updating administrators' discretion to decide what goes onto the mp. The whole point of DYK is to encourage the development of new, high quality sourced articles, and that is what you are doing, regardless of the subject. Please keep up the good work, and please continue to contribute to DYK. Thanks -- Samir  धर्म 12:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Withdraw of AfD

 * Just add this to the top: Keep.  Nom withdrew.BigHaz


 * And this to the bottom:
 * Its going to end up the same as a keep, or speedy keep. SynergeticMaggot 02:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sweet. Now to try to be first on the scene to use such a template :P BigHaz 02:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, you can check the logs every so often and try to spot them first. And if you are interested, theres a WikiProject I help maintain called WikiProject AfD closing. SynergeticMaggot 02:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Might have a look at that. Thanks for the tip. BigHaz 02:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Yemen
Merhaba and Welcome to WikiProject Yemen. We are happy that you joined us. If you have any questions, need help on something, or suggestions, then please don't hesitate to tell us. To identify yourself as a member of this project, you can add this template to your user page: Cheers, Jidan 20:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Volume fifteen
Hi, you might want to include all of the albums listed at Volume magazine in the afd, since I can't really see what would make one of them more notable than the other. The one I edited was not a speedy candidate but I can't say I'd disagree with an afd. - Bobet 09:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I was thinking just the same thing, actually. What's the way of combining them all? Just stick an AfD note on each page which is piped to the Volume Fifteen one? BigHaz 09:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Ya, just the way you're doing it :) I linked the articles in the afd page so you don't have to worry about that part. - Bobet 10:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That was going to be the easy part - a straight copy-paste from the article on the magazine :P Thanks, though. BigHaz 10:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, it took me many seconds to remove the dates after the links. - Bobet 10:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: The Pegasaurus
Thanks for that. I knew there was a quick way of zapping it, but it's clearly too early in the morning here. BigHaz 00:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's far too early here in the UK, too! Unless you're here as well, that is. Night!  (aeropagitica)    (talk)   00:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Brian Kennedy
Appreciated! Thanks for spotting it -- Samir  धर्म 10:00, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Eurovision
Nice articles but there is also a 1999 year category which is important. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Now that I know this (I didn't before, despite asking to be told if it existed), I'll add it to the next entry in the relevant year I write. When I get around to changing the links in the Contest pages to internal ones, I'll add the year categories to everything which doesn't have them yet. BigHaz 10:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes they are very important as they connect all of the entries in the contest by year e.g Eurovision songs of 1999 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ernst Stavro Blofeld (talk • contribs)
 * Never said anything different. To be perfectly frank, I think that by the end of the mass-creation the year's songs will be more than well linked together (in the articles on the songs in question, in the Contest article as well as by category), but I'm certainly not complaining about the existence of the category. BigHaz 10:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it would also be useful if you could create categories for national songs that don't yet exist e.g Austrian eurovision songs for example, I think this exist but e.g Lithuanian eurovision songs so there is even coverage Good luck I'm sure you'll do a great job. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Adds this to the to-do list mentally. First priority is going to remain the generation of content, but after that's taken care of I'll play with categories. BigHaz 10:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi yes content is of prime importance but as you are going through I believe each entry needs three or mmore categories. Category:Eurovision songs Category:Eurovision songs of .... and Category:Hungarian Eurovision songs for example. I think the list at a later date in Category:Eurovision songs needs standardization like this Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, it's two categories. X-ish Eurovision songs (so "Irish Eurovision songs", "Lithuanian Eurovision songs" and so on) and Eurovision songs of XXXX (so "Eurovision songs of 1999", "Eurovision songs of 1974" and so on). Blnguyen explained to me once that if an article is added to a subcat such as those, it's automatically added to the big cat as well - since a Ukrainian entry or one from 1957 is automatically a Eurovision song as well. It's the same principle as results in the hypothetical "Somalian ski-jumpers" being added to the broader category of "Ski-jumpers" and presumably to a category as broad as "Winter sports athletes" or something. BigHaz 10:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Shir Habatlanim and The Voice (song)
Yeah, I used the box from Wenn Du Da Bist and forgot to switch the language entry. As for the voice, I put in that semifnal thing because according to Eurovision Song Contest 1996, there was a prelim round to cull 5 songs before the final. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 21:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC).

AfD
My mistake ;) I could have sworn that the convention was the other way around. I've fixed the entries in quesiton. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It always trips me up as well, because everything else goes from the top down. Clearly there's a good reason for it somewhere out there. BigHaz 05:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Speedy delete
Is non-notable neologism actually a valid speedy deletion reason? Erechtheus 05:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Come to think of it, it probably isn't, but I don't think the page really fits into the reason you were using to start with either. Perhaps this is a WP:IAR case, since I think we can all agree it's not meant to be here. BigHaz 05:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Mastering the speedy process is difficult because the stated categories are narrow, but there appear to be many things that need to be deleted this way that do get deleted this way even though they're hypertechnically outside the categories. Erechtheus 05:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * True that. I've had the odd csd template revoked for various reasons, so I thought that this one would've been as well for being the wrong kind of csd. Not that the change on my part is necessarily going to be massively helpful, though. :P BigHaz 05:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

2 Sep 06
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --PeterJohn2 02:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This warning was added by a user who (according to his contributions) began his stay on Wikipedia by nominating Earth for deletion. When I left a message on his talk page about it, this was his response. I'm keeping it here for humour value. BigHaz 02:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

A tidbit of pedantry
Technically, to be metrically correct, wouldn't it be "...the very model of a modern bad-faith nominee"? Seriously though. That made my night. The comment, that is. Not the pedantry. Crystallina 04:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Probably true, although I felt that the nomination itself was the important thing, rather than the one doing it. If only I could've found something that rhymed or at least scanned during the months I'd been hoping something like that would happen! BigHaz 04:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Speedy tagging
I was checking through the candidates for speedy deletion and I noticed that you tagged Hackmaster index for speedy deletion, with the reason "no assertion of notability - what I guess would be 'db-game' if such a shorthand existed." There is no speedy deletion criterion applying generally to games (although an article may fall under one of the other general criterion). Where there is no criterion, use PROD if deletion is probably controversial, or AFD if deletion is likely to be contested. --bainer (talk) 08:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just noticed the amendments on my watchlist. That'll teach me to wake up before I stick templates everywhere. BigHaz 08:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Whoops, I meant to say in my previous message that you should use PROD when the deletion is likely to be uncontroversial, not controversial. --bainer (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't even see that when I read the first comment. A fine pair of editors we make :P BigHaz 09:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Malaysia Students
Please visit the article for deletion page for Malaysia Students entry. I has proved that Malaysia Students blog is gaining popularity. Do you mind to teach me how to get an entry which has been nominated for deletion back to a normal entry? Cupid9 16:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)