User talk:Daedalus969/Archive 6

Re: Help
Re your message: Since the dispute is just between the two of you, I would suggest trying Third opinion. It's simplier than an RfC and can be faster. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: I left a warning about the personal attacks on his talk page. Since you filed an RfC, I would recommend that you both stay away from each other until the issue is settled.  Continued discussion on talk pages is not being productive. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: Cowicide has offered to refocus on the article, so I recommend that you do that. This back and forth of who didn't or did do whatever is no longer productive.  I have noted his incivility towards you and I hope he stops.  Just let it go and try to work with him on improving the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello
Dear Daedalus969: To answer your question, I am an attorney and certified public accountant. I've been editing Wikipedia since late 2005, mostly in law-related areas -- and mostly, specifically, in tax law articles. For me, law school was a long time ago.

Are you interested in law, or do you have an interest in a particular area of law? Famspear (talk) 19:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Message from Orrshnap
I don't think it was a threat. I didn't feel threatened by it. He was unhappy about his article being deleted. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply to comment on my talk page
Hi Daedalus969, I completely understand what you're saying. . .sometimes I'm a little unorthodox, sure, but I will explain as best I can. The anon (probably banned, I know) commenting at my talk page was harassing other editors. The problem is they can shift IPs and everybody ends up playing a game of whack-a-mole, that goes on and on and well. . .on. I let them comment at my talk page to defuse that scenario. I really couldn't care less about insults directed at me, but some people do care (and rightfully so; I always remove stuff that might offend others in this situation). This approach has seemed to work on more than one occasion, so as long as things don't get out of hand on my page, and it keeps it from spreading, I tend to let it go. Hope this helps to explain why I leave it there. . . Thanks, R. Baley (talk) 19:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Regarding the page Clinton Jones (footballer), which you tagged for speedy deletion on the basis of an article about a real person, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject, I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because it says he plays for St Kilda Football Club, a professional AFL team, which is an assertion of notability. If you still want the page to be deleted, please re-tag it under a CSD criterion that applies, consider redirecting the article, or use the proposed deletion or the articles for deletion processes. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 09:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about football, so thanks in that respect, I was just patrolling and tagging CSD where I thought it applied.
 * Second, why the fake 'you have new messages' box? Isn't April Fools over?—  Dæ dαlusT@lk / Improve 16:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you notice it says "you do not have new messages"? Stifle (talk) 18:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hdayejr sockpuppet's back again
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.26.177 (talk) 00:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks for your attention. To answer your question, I'm a contributor to a lot of the pages that hdayejr and his sockpuppets have vandalized, and I got tired of standing by and watching him try to destroy Wikipedia. I have a user name, but I chose to do this "project" as an anon precisely so I don't have to deal with the kind of harassment he's shown Steve. This "user" has done this to many Web sites and many people over the years, and IRL he's had legal action taken against him because of it. I think Wikipedia should consider doing the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.26.177 (talk) 12:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with your latest comment. His local newspaper has a restraining order against him because of his abuse of their Web site. Hard to imagine, isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.26.177 (talk) 19:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Precautions for the future
Re your messages: You caught me in the middle of writing my reply. Anyways, page protection would be the best option, but user pages can only be indefinitely semi-protected per the protection policy. If you wish, I can set the protection for you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: I see. Well, I'm a bit leery about protecting your page now because protection is not done pre-emptively.  You haven't had any vandalism at all to your user page, so protection may be unnecessary. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: You have this uncanny knack today of leaving a message right when I'm in the middle of writing you one. I changed my mind and semi-protected your user page.  Full protection isn't going to work as that would lock you out, too.  Not to mention that is really out of policy. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: It's a very slick idea, but full protection of user pages is way outside of the protection policy. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: Yup. Says so when you edit it, too. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vons
Regarding this AfD, you forgot to place the AfD templates on the actual pages. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 19:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, why did you bundle Dominick's into that mess? That article is very well sourced. (The discussion looks like it's headed for a snowball keep anyway.) Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 21:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming that you meant well by listing them at AfD; the articles aren't sourced (except for Dominick's), and their names don't make it very easy to source. Nonetheless, I feel that I have to WP:TROUT you for thinking that a 102-year-old supermarket chain with eight zillion locations in SoCal isn't possibly notable. (You also seemed to be suggesting a merge, which is not what AfD is for.) Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px]] Please do not make frivolous AfD nominations. The notability of those articles were abundant and clear. Bstone (talk) 22:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw what you said on bstone's talk page. Notability isn't always established by age, but I would think that it's true here. Just an honest mistake on your part I guess. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * As for anything else that makes it notable -- well, it's owned by Safeway, and it seems to be the dominant grocer in its region. There're also a bunch of reliable sources about the chain, as I pointed out in the afd. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to me. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact that their ownership by safeway doesn't mean inherent notability, and how you felt that the sources didn't cut it. Personally, I would think that if there're articles about the store's history, it must surely be notable if so many people bothered to write about it. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia.
 * I thought that didn't apply to talk pages. Will (Talk - contribs) 05:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Truestatus
Just modify your LCARS indicator to use the output provided by Truestatus as a switch. Documentation provided at the template. Let me know if you need further explanation. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 16:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC) Presently Truestatus would report you as :
 * I went ahead and made some changes for you - and . Now if no parameter is passed by "User:Daedalus969/Status" it will use truestatus, or you can still pass the "busy" and "wikibreak" parameters. You might want to change the Truestatus parameters (see template documenation), but presently they will show "online" when statusbot says so or you've edited in the last 30 minutes, "recently online" when you've edited in the last 2 hours and "offline" when you haven't edited for two hours. Hope this helps! xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 17:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. Happy editing, xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 17:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

&larr; I don't actually run the bot, but I believe this will accomplish the desired effect. best, xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 17:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Rather this will. Blank when truestatus says online, otherwise, busy. yes? xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 17:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you elaborate? xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 22:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Problem
 * Looks like I forgot to change the "out" switch to "offline". It should work now. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 22:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

While it seems to be working, the best thing to do would be keep these two pages on your watchlist: User:StatusBot/Status/Daedalus969 & User:StatusBot/Status/Daedalus969/LastEdit, that is what the template bases your status upon. Also remember there can be some delays in updating, based on caching. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 13:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Further problems?
 * Sure thing, your User:Daedalus969/Status will still continue to accept a parameter (/StatusText|busy etc). you can even use "/StatusText|offline" (out was replaced with offline). just remember to clear the parameter for it to begin working automagically again. hope that helps. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 18:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That thing made my eyes pop out of my head. Sorry I only know a tiny bit of code =) Maybe ask the person who wrote it. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 22:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Commited Identity
Re your message: Sure, but there's not a whole lot that I can help you with as you need to do pretty much everything on your own. I didn't use the standard template, but the template documentation should have everything you need to do. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your messages: I semi-protected it. When somebody is checking your committed identity, they're supposed to check the history first to see if its been changed recently.  Semi-protect should be good enough.


 * As for your question about using IRC, I don't use IRC nor do I have any plans to do so. Sorry.  It's just not something I want to setup nor get involved with.  -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)