User talk:EurekaLott/Archive10

Category:The Criterion Collection
Hi; I'm OK to delete Category:The Criterion Collection, I just am wondering where the previous CFD discussion was so I can link to it when I delete it. Thanks. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The previous discussion was about Category:Criterion Collection back in 2006: Categories for deletion/Log/2006 January 16. - Eureka Lott 00:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey EurekaLott; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Your move of Shrine Church of St. Stanislaus (Cleveland, Ohio) to Shrine Church of St. Stanislaus
Why would you move this? The part (Cleveland, Ohio) was there to clarify a common name used for Catholic churches with Polish parishes. There are several "St. Stanislaus" churches in Ohio. As a shrine church is not a common recognized type of church designation, keeping the (Cleveland, Ohio) fits the title convention, Name of Thing (at Place), and users will get better suggestions using the wikipedia search box. Article titles suggests adding "distinguishing information, often in the form of a description in parentheses after the name"; the location is the easily understood distinguishing information about the article than the word shrine in the official name. Removing (Cleveland, Ohio) added ambiguity and made it incomplete. The move should be reverted. Please visit Talk:Shrine Church of St. Stanislaus and comment. BoBoMisiu (talk) 21:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Why did you delete this....
http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1bsy17/pringles_ring/c99uuvi?context=2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fwb885 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for moving Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes,
could you now also restore the redirect history of it? I know this sounds stupid, but I don't like wasting revisions.-- Laun  chba  ller  23:24, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Already done. If you encounter this situation in the future, you can use the histmerge template to easily request the same thing. - Eureka Lott 23:27, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much indeed. Just one last thing; the deletion log said that there were revisions before 21 February 2007, yet the history doesn't show them. I'm not trying to take the mickey or anything, but could you please restore those as well?-- Laun  chba  ller  23:29, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Those revisions were a version of the article that was speedy deleted in 2007. The text is almost entirely original research and speculation, and not worth keeping. If you really want to see it, I could userfy it or email it to you. - Eureka Lott 23:41, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not a case of 'seeing it', it's a case of the article itself exists, what's the point in hiding revisions?-- Laun  chba  ller  23:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This isn't a matter of trying to conceal things. The article was deleted for a good reason, and restoring content that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia helps no one. - Eureka Lott 00:28, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Pussy n Owl
That was a useful link. Thank you for showing me that. I added the chunk of text in after reading similar poem articles (I.e. The Raven, Oku no Hosomichi, and lastly To His Coy Mistress). These three articles all list out, if not all, some of the original text. Perhaps that could also be done for the Owl and the Pussycat: adding the first few lines. Besides, the copyright for The Owl and the Pussycat has already expired in the US. Anyway, thanks and cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 08:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't object to adding the first stanza or so to the article. As far as I'm aware, there's no firm rule about what constitutes excessive length, but I figure that if it needs to be collapsed, it's too long. - Eureka Lott 13:24, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Brush High School article
Eureka... in light of recent events surrounding the kidnapped women being found on the West Side, several articles (particularly the Brush HS article), are getting info added on that is more current event oriented rather than encyclopedic in nature. Any thoughts on how to curb unnecessary edits?Ryecatcher773 (talk) 16:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

File:By Any Means Necessary.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:By Any Means Necessary.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for removing that vandalism on Alice's Adventures in Wonderland
You wouldn't believe it, but I got to that article just in time that for a few seconds there I thought that actually was the author. I almost put a thing about contradiction in that article. I should know better than that really, considering I own a comprehensive edition of his works and that it was a such an obvious contradiction... Repku (talk) 19:43, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Seeking a Review of my Permanent Block
Hi EurekaLott, I'm posting here to ask you have a look at my block which I say is counter-policy and unfair. I'm posting via IP while signing my username. I know this "block evasion" is against the rules but I believe I really have no other choice. I came to you pretty much randomly from the list of administrators (I decided to try one with username beginning "E" and checked for recent activity).

I edited Wikipedia for years, then some incidents drew my attention to online privacy and harassment. My previous account was vulnerable to that so I switched to a new. My very first edit as "Colton Cosmic" explained this conscienciously and straightforwardly. Nevertheless I was permanently blocked within weeks for "sockpuppetry." That block occurred without warning, diffs, or discussion. I won't risk tooting the "admin abuse" horn too often, but there is *no* *way* a no-warn/no diffs/no discussion block is anything but abusive. After that, an entire crowd of drama maniacs from WP:AN/ANI descended on me, each with his own criticism and theory, all filled with suspicion. Could I have handled all that better? Yeah, but I really was overwhelmed by it and upset that my honesty was being questioned. I don't want to type the whole affair here at your talkpage, but you can look at my latest summary, here:.

Will you have a look? I will answer any questions you have. If you unblock merely my talkpage (to me) it will be easier for me to reply, but I can also answer here. I guess I will say: please don't believe what anyone says about me without allowing me to respond. No offense certainly if you decline, but I hope you at least give a reason. Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.226.66.202 (talk) 13:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) REDIRECT Target page name

RE: Cleveland article (argument on talk page regarding the 'Mistake by the Lake')
Please weigh in at your earliest convenience. Thank you.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 05:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Batteries
I just saw your comment People invent artillery, not gun batteries. You might be interested in Ricochet Battery, so called by its inventor Marshal Vauban, was first used at the siege of Ath in 1697. Perhaps someone should write an article. Maybe I'll put it on my list.  Spinning Spark  12:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)