User talk:Erakura/Archives/2008/December

Signature
Hey! Greetings fellow lefthander! Just wanted to let you know that in your messages here, your signature did not render correctly. Or is that what your signature is supposed to look like? NightFalcon90909 (talk) 20:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That's weird. when I put ~ I have it set to use those templates but it doesn't. I want it to look like ¤Belinrahs talk/contribs¤. Any idea? ¤Belinrahs  talk/contribs¤
 * ✅ Sig changed to [ Belinrahs | 'sup? | what'd I do? ] 19:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You need 'raw signature' ticked :) &mdash; neuro(talk) 11:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your careful consideration at my successful RfA. Please let me know on my talk page if you have any suggestions for me. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 04:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Coaching
Ok, so I am actually stumped. I figure therefore I should ask you - where do you feel your knowledge is lacking? &mdash; neuro(talk) 11:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:
Sorted before I saw it! :D &mdash; neuro(talk) 23:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: December 2008
I do not think that what I edited was unconstructive since I corrected incorrect data. First of all, re: Traffic, was not "Last film to date to have a television movie or mini-series based on it to be nominated for Best Picture." It was the last film to date BASED UPON a television movie or mini-series to be nominated for Best Picture, since it was based upon the 1989 BBC mini-series Traffik starring Bill Paterson and Julia Ormand. Also, The Godfather, Part III is not a trilogy, it is a film, as is The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. All I did was link to the pages concerning the respective trilogies, since that is the information that people would be interested in (and since that is the correct information). I also indicated how many Oscars the entire trilogies were nominated for and won, which is also relevant information on this page. Furthermore, I am going to revert the page back to what I edited, since it took me some time to do the correct research.129.115.251.120 (talk) 00:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Look, first of all, I do not think that what I edited constitutes vandalism. How in the world is it vandalism if it's the correct information? I'm not vandalising the page, I'm just contributing correct information. You're not a Wikipedia administrator, so who are you to be playing Wikipedia police? I don't want to get into an edit war, so I won't do anymore editing, but I think that you're way out of line to report me for vandalism when I'm clearly not vandalising the page. I've been a major contributor to the Academy Awards pages for several years and even added the information concerning Traffic about a year ago, which was changed to this butchered (and clearly incorrect) phrasing by God knows who. I also wrote the entire page List of actors who have appeared in multiple Best Picture Academy Award winners, so I know what I'm doing. I just haven't signed in under my Wikipedia login name, which is user:TheLastAmigo.129.115.251.120 (talk) 01:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have anything to say in regards to the last message, leave in on my talk page.TheLastAmigo (talk) 01:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, if I add an edit summary and use citations, will that make you happy? I'm asking because I think that the information I added was correct, relevant, and constructive information. At the very least, let me edit the information concerning Traffic because the information that is used in the article is false. There was a sequel mini-series to Traffic on the USA network about two years after the film came out, but that is irrelevant information. What is relevant is that Traffic is the first film based on a TV movie or mini-series since Marty to be nominated for Best Picture.TheLastAmigo (talk) 01:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: About your edits
Sorry if I made you upset by saying you were playing "Wikipedia police." I was out of line in that respect, and I'm sorry. I was just upset that you accused me of vandalising the page when it was clearly not my intent. I understand your position on vandalism and I wasn't aware that you were actually part of the Wikipedia vandalism team. I guess that to me, vandalism would constitute adding lewd, suggestive, vulgar, abusive, or intentionally false information just for laughs. It's not as if I put up fake or misleading information, or put up the 2008 Best Picture nominees even though they haven't come out yet. I was just submitting correct information in good faith and you deemed it worthy to revert what I edited without doing any proper research to see if you even knew what you were talking about. I am an expert on the Academy Awards and have made some major contributions to the page over the years. I submitted to you an explanation of my changes and provided to you the proper information, proving that I was not a vandal, and you still reported me for vandalism. I want to comply with the policies of Wikipedia and I do not feel that my edits were against any sort of policies or protocol. I find it incredibly ironic that you are fighting vandalism on Wikipedia and don't care that the page I edited contained false information which I corrected, or that I was fixing other people's edits to information that I originally provided in the first place.TheLastAmigo (talk) 02:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Woops
I have replied to your thread on AN. Also, please take the time out to notify an editor when you make a thread about them on AN or ANI, its considered somewhat offensive if you don't.  « l | Ψrometheăn ™ | l »   (talk) 03:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Dahiwad
Hi there. When closing AfDs, please remember that speedy keep is only used when the subject is clearly notable. A consensus of keep does not equal speedy keep, and implies some bad faith on the part of the nominator. In this case, there was only one speedy !vote. Also, when closing, please remember that the close header should be above the article's name, not below it. Thanks, Peter Symonds ( talk ) 16:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note -- I thought speedy keep would be right due to the fact that the place was notable -- a notable place in India. I still have much to learn about closing those AFD's -- I'll definitely keep what you said in mind. [ Belinrahs | 'sup? | what'd I do? ] 18:55, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Great. :) Good luck and feel free to ask if you aren't quite sure. Best, Peter Symonds ( talk ) 19:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Adoption
Whilst I admit it didn't go to hand, I do hope you at least gained something out of it. I think going any more advanced than I have with you would be a bad idea, as I think you have advanced past the stage of needing someone like me attempting to help (and failing :D). As I feel the adoption is more of just you answering questions that you already know the answer to, as opposed to having to learn the answers (a good thing), I'm going to formally do the old I give up thing, heh. I do very much hope to see you around from time to time, as I have been since we talked last. If you do wish to continue, please contact me and I will oblige, but otherwise, best of luck in future. :) &mdash; neuro(talk) 16:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)