User talk:Craw-daddy/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your assertion that a good faith edit of extraneous material from the article Miniature wargaming was vandalism is a violation of the policy Assume good faith. Please read this policy and enjoy contributing constructively to wikipedia. Larry Dunn 17:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Larry, your continued editing of the miniatures wargaming page to remove content is a violation of the policy Tendentious editing. -Russ

Tarot cards are playing cards.
The coins suit is part of Latin suited playing card deck. The Tarot does not really have its own special suit symbols. Tarot is not always occult. Tarot is also a card game. Sometime the standard playing cards are occult when used in card reading. A traditional Tarot will have Italian suits and a more modern one will have French suits. Your edits are promoting an Ango-American bias.Smiloid 07:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing with you that tarot cards are playing cards. I'm simply questioning what more would you add to this page (and the others) that would result in the removal of the "card game stub"? It's clearly pointed out in the early part of the description that tarot cards are used to play card games. Is there some special meaning for the Ace of Cups (or any other tarot card, aside from The Fool, perhaps) in tarot card games? As I've said, what's the justification you're using for the "stub" tag when I don't think there is anything else to add that will result in the removal of that tag? Craw-daddy 09:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC) The Ace of Cups is not exclusive to tarot cards and it's not exclusive to the "occult" You were correct in removing a card game stub from specific divinatory decks such as you did with the Vikings Tarot, but Ace of Cups has a wider signifigance than any relation to the occult. It was not my idea to have individual articles on each tarot card, but as long as they are there why not include its relation to other playing cards such as barajaSmiloid 06:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Fightball.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Fightball.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you Game?
A "" template has been added to the article Are you Game?, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Whispering 11:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Good work.
Hey, just wanted to let you know that I think you're doing some great work with board/table game articles. I see your improvements everywhere I go. So, good work. It's unfortunate that you feel disillusioned about Wikipedia after the whole List of miniature wargames thing, but I'm glad you continue to contribute. -Chunky Rice 21:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Chunky! As you can probably see, I've mainly been doing lots of formatting of various articles, and occasionally doing more substantial things. Lately I find myself adding lots more tags and trying to stamp out some of the weasel words. As a fan of games and gaming (of many different types) I certainly have an inclination to add all kinds of "cool" this-and-that type of stuff, but am resisting that temptation. Anyway, I'll probably keep up my work, but am also trying to spend more of my free time on things like painting miniatures (so I can game with them!). Craw-daddy 22:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd like to echo my thanks. I'm still working on the Treehouse article, but seeing you fix up its formatting a little makes me feel like the work I'm doing is worth it and being noticed.  So, yeah, thanks!

Six of Wands copy and paste
Hi,

The Fairebianca removed the copy and paste notice. I put it back. The copy right notice at the bottom of the learn tarot page seems pretty clear. I've been away from RCPatrol a while. In the past I've deleted the copied material at this point. Are we less aggressive in this than we were? Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  03:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I had tried removing the material before when she (I'm assuming "she") inserted it on some of the other tarot card pages, but then she put it back. I have warned her on her talk page that she's pasting copyrighted material, but it hasn't helped.  I have even reported the copyright problems, but nothing much seems to have happened.  I don't know what else to do exactly, and I'm sure that the insertions are going to continue.  These tarot card pages seem rife for either OR or for copyright problems when someone inserts information about the "divination usage".  --Craw-daddy|Talk 07:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Entering the Fray. I could have saved myself quite a lot of time if I had read your edit summaries sooner. :) Thank you for making it so much easier to strip the copyvios from the tarot articles. I see that you've been working on this for a while. I hope that at least the editor in question will have a better understanding of policy now. --Moonriddengirl 13:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope so. As you can see, I warned her once already on her talk page, but then she reinserted all the copyrighted material again.  At least more than one editor has now warned her.  I've now gone back to removing the copyrighted stuff instead of just inserting the  tag.  Thanks.  --Craw-daddy|Talk 13:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I did that in all the articles I found, but there are so many it's quite probable I've missed a few. I saw on her talk page that you and Dlohcierekim have both warned her. I hope she'll realize the seriousness of the issue with more editorial input. I've put one of the pages on my watchlist, and if I notice that she reinserts the material I'll be following your path further by reporting it at the Copyright problems noticeboard. --Moonriddengirl 13:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Technomancer Press
An article that you have been involved in editing, Technomancer Press, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Technomancer Press. Thank you.--Gavin Collins 08:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

GURPS books
You are right about the problem with transferring unsourced statements to List of GURPS books. I have modified it very slightly:even not knowing Japanese, have a feeling that this page lists GURPS-based novels: look at the English name of the internal links like this one. However, I have left a message to User:Plumcherry, the main contributor to GURPS Runal, which apparently is a Japanese and could give us more info. Happy editing, Goochelaar 13:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Following your example, I have redirected GURPS_War_Against_the_Chtorr to List of GURPS books and put there the image of the cover of Chtorr. I was thinking about rescuing other cover images, and then I noticed that you had already listed them to be linked. Good work! Thanks, Goochelaar 13:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

If you can, please give an answer to this!!!
I'm trying to notify the administrators, and get them to do something about the lack of images in Iggy Arbuckle's article. I can't figure out where exactly to go for this, so, since you're one of the people who have worked for the article, I've included you in the list of people I've been asking for help on the matter. If you know the answer, or can provide me with clues on where to go, please leave your comments on my talkpage. Thank you. Wilhelmina Will 23:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Comments req
I made a request for page protection here, and filed a AIV report as well. This has gone on long enough.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 00:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Roadkill bingo
I don't understand why you think that Animal Rights is an inappropriate for this article. Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavtron (talk • contribs) 13:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Add it back if you like. I just thought it was odd to have it as a category when there is absolutely no mention of animal rights anywhere in the article, nor were there any links in the article to any sort of animal rights topics.  --Craw-daddy | T | 14:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)