User talk:GeneralCheese/Archive 2

CSD#A1 on Veerappa Nayaka
Hi. WP:CSD#A1 isn't the right tag for a very short film article like Veerappa Nayaka -- the context is clear, it's about a Kannada language film. I have therefore declined your speedy. In such cases, if you are not able to find references for the article, it is best to PROD or take to AfD. Happy editing. - Spaceman  Spiff  19:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * But isn't an article thats short CSD #1.    Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." This applies only to very short articles. Context is different from content, treated in A3, below. Key: This applies to very SHORT articles.-- General  Cheese   20:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No, CSD#A1 applies only to cases where the subject is not identifiable. In this case, at the time of tagging, there was sufficient context to identify that it was a) a film, b) in Kannada language, c) starring Dr.Vishnuvardhan, d) directed by S. Narayan, 3) made in India.
 * The content within the article is more than sufficient to identify context in this case. Whether the subject is notable is a different question, but that's not addressed by this tag.- Spaceman  Spiff  20:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * So if the article is too short, what code am i supposed to put. Or am i supposed to leave it alone?-- General  Cheese  20:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Leave it alone, or if it's not notable, take the PROD or AfD route. I'd suggest reading the CSD policy pages too. There's nothing at all in our policy that prevents stubs from being created.- Spaceman  Spiff  20:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do! ✅-- General  Cheese  20:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

(butting in) this is very good advice, and I would advocate only using speedy if something looks like nonsense. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Autoreviewer right
Hello, I removed the autoreviewer right from your account, because per you have only created one page (not including redirects). While your contributions to Wikipedia are valuable, you haven't created the suggested requirement of 75 pages. Please see WP:AUTOREV for more information. Killiondude (talk) 22:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Question
Your vote in Ironholds' RFA reads like a support but it is in the neutral section. I was just curious if it's intended as a neutral vote. Thanks, Lara  ☁ 00:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, my mistake.-- General  Cheese  00:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

oh cool. thatnks for listening and considering. not.

Mikspike23 (talk) 06:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Mislabeling vandalism
Why did you call this edit vandalism when it was the creator  of the article that blanked it? I see you had been recently informed that this kind of thing was not vandalism. You need to slow down, and look at the history before slapping the vandal label on another editor. False accusations of vandalism are considered a personal attack and also a violation of our good faith policy. How would you like it if someone else called you a vandal when you weren't vandalising, especially if you were brand new and had no friends here? There's a person behind each edit and it's important to get reviewing done right. Auntie E. 07:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * My mistake, i am not a robot/machine so i tend to make a mistakes! Im sure you do too!-- General  Cheese  23:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Am I wrong or are you mistaken? Here You warned the fellow for vandalising. So please be careful in future to make sure you are getting it right. If you do make too many mistakes, human or no, you can lose your Huggle privileges. Also, the title of the section you left on my talk page was quite rude. If someone pointed out a mistake to me I wouldn't yell "Your (sic) Wrong!" at them if I thought they were mistaken. Auntie E. 00:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * After talking privately with GeneralCheese, I showed them they were mistaken in thinking they didn't do anything wrong. I think they were confused more than anything, but titling a section thread with "Your Wrong" isn't particularly helpful, GeneralCheese. Please take care to seek advice in the future if you are confused about something, rather than assuming the other party doesn't know what they are talking about. I don't want this instance to become a big deal, however. Killiondude (talk) 00:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Killion, while you have him on the horn, you may want to mention this edit summary borders on personal attack. General Cheese, please do NOT refer to others' postings as false, especially in an edit summary! Auntie E. 00:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what initially drew my attention. I think they understand now, but I don't wanna do all the talking for them! :-) Killiondude (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Adoption
Cheers,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 01:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

gnome work
Okay, here's an interesting list. Why not play detective here and see if some of these can be improved. Now before going and nominating for deletion, why not ask a relevant wikiproject if anyone knows anything more about it? For instance, if you find and article on some little village in Tennessee, leave a message at the appropriate wikiproject. I found a plant one which got improved, such as Artemisia cina, which looked like this a few days ago. I hate the idea that new folks write these articles which often get deleted before improving and then they leave the project. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I would mostly consider it!-- General  Cheese  22:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Good, the challenge would be to try and look with an open mind and before reaching for the speedy/prod/Afd buttons. I might make this an open challenge on the village pump too....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm Back
To tell you the truth, the "block" had little effect on me. This week made me think about my actions and I will continue to do things my way and that I will come back with a vengance. I could cre less what you or anybody else thinks. Damiens .rf 20:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.106.57.215 (talk)
 * Well, ill just request for you to be blocked indef. :) !-- General  Cheese  00:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Message
Maybe you'd like to take a look at the article on Warblington. Can you explain to me why the Bibliography is repeated EIGHTEEN times??? Until you can provide an adequate answer to that, I shall revert your revert. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 20:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You blanked the article without a summary thats WP:Vandalism. I shall revert your revert of my revert.-- Written by  General  Cheese  20:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * WHERE did I blank the article? Fine have it your way, I'll go against all logic and leave eighteen exact Bibliographies in place, as well as an article that is all over the place. I never leave summaries, doesn't take Einstein to notice the difference between articles. General Cheese, sure living up to name. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 21:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, blanking content without a summary is WP:VANDALISM. Read the article of it and it says so. So i suggest you add a summary after edits. If you would have had a summary i would have left it alone.-- Written by  General  Cheese  22:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Stop being such a jobsworth. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * PS: What is not vandalism. Digest. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 17:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)