User talk:Gwernol/Archive 8

Thanks
Thanks for deleting test2 I made a mistake and didn't mean to create it

Peach12 Talk [Contributions] [| Email me] 20:02, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion
I read the guidelines for speedy deletion before marking Vertissage. If it doesn't qualify, that's fine, but the guidelines implied that it did. They did not state that it had to be completely empty. Granted there are two sentences of text on that page, but as far as content is concerned it is empty. Should the Speedy Deletion guidelines be changed, or did I completely misread them, or...?

I'm fairly new to this and just trying to figure out how it all works. Wouldn't want to get it wrong next time. Thanks. Anne 2-July-2006

WP:Vandalism
Please read the edit BEFORE reverting.

And ... how do I get a copy of the admin bot thing on my page?

--User:Blue Tie21:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

---
 * The section is titled What vandalism is not and it leads with "Although sometimes referred to as such, the following things are not vandalism and are therefore treated differently:" (emphasis added). If you list Nonsense under this section, a lot of people are at least going to be confused. You are opening up a huge loophole that vandals will use to argue that they should not be blocked for vandalism. Please discuss this proposed change on the talk page before making it.


 * As for the "admin bot thing" I'm not sure what you are referring to. Could you explain? Thanks, Gwernol 21:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. I will bring it up on the Talk Page, but really it is self evident. Sometimes nonsense is only an accident or a person had problems expressing themselves. They should NOT be treated as vandals immediately! but more importantly, One user was already confused by the difference in policy. You can read the problem on User talk:Pat8722. The policy WP:Nonsense says that Nonsense is not Vandalism. The Policy WP:Vandalism says that it is. The should be consistent. And I think my edit fixed the problem reasonably.

As for the Admin Bot thing -- you have a table on your Page that shows those people who have requests for adminship and how the vote is going. I want one! --Blue Tie 21:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Gwernol replied:


 * Actually I don't think your solution quite works. I agree there's inconistency, but all you've done with your edit is move it from one place to another. The problem is that by adding it to WP:VAN as you did you have said both that nonsense is never vandalism and also that nonsense sometimes can be vandalism. This needs a more comprehensive solution, so discussing it on the Talk page is the way to go. To be fair the WP:VAN page makes this very clear right at the top.


 * I have not done any moving. I have only done clarifying.  I do not see ANY place on WP:VAN that says "All Nonsense is Vandalism".  And I certainly did not ADD that thought or meaning to the page.  Read it over very carefully and see.  I think you have made an assumption in that regard that is False.


 * Here is the problem: Some Nonsense is Vandalism.  Some Nonsense is NOT Vandalism.  Some Vandalism is Nonsense.  Some Vandalism is NOT Nonsense.  In otherwords, there is an overlap but there is no functional equivalency.  And the WP:Nonsense page is correct.  The WP:Van page is ALSO correct (it does not say that all Nonsense is Vandalism) but I was just making it more clear for the logically challenge.  However, although I consider both pages correct, I believe your view that all nonsense is vandalism, is not correct .  I also believe it is unsupportable.  And I note that in your supporting statements you make reference to notions that are not found on WP:VAN as I allude to in my first paragraph.  I also think your version of the policy violates WP:AGF.


 * But I do not like edit wars. I have put my views on the talk page and will seek comment.


 * On another note -- THANKS FOR THE BOT! I am putting it on my page!

Regards --Blue Tie 22:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies. I had no desire to misrepresent. In fact, I wanted to represent your views instead of just mine. I just got them wrong, although now, I have no idea what you are really talking about! --Blue Tie 22:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Starting to see what you mean! It does not say "Never" but it says "these things are "not" Vandalism.  Hence it is not right to say "Nonsense" is "not" vandalism because sometimes it is.  I think perhaps, something like "Nonsense in Error" is more the idea.  Something like a special category of Mistake.  I really did not mean to misrepresent you! --Blue Tie 22:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

And thanks for fixing my bot thing. I figured out the problem and was going to fix it myself. Then I saw you did it. I see you like hypercard too. Apple messed up by not doing that program right! Oh well. Thanks --Blue Tie 22:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Connections
So you must have known **The Legendary** Bill Atkinson! I started using Hypercard the first year it came out. It was out on like 4 or 6 disks and everyone thought that was nuts! LOL. --23:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Bill Atkinson was so great. I cannot believe that they just let him go. I shake my head. But you sure knew some cool guys. I envy you for that. I applied to Apple back before the Mac and they rejected me :-(  But I bought the first Mac.  It has signatures molded inside the case. --Blue Tie 23:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think I know who you must be! Anyway, congratulations on a wonderful career.

I've been a long time lurker here so I somewhat resent the implication that I'm some sort of troll. I was very careful to follow appropriate protocol and follow the procedure to the letter (which is very difficult, if I may state). If the community believes the article should stay, so be it. Thank you for your input. Vagabond997 13:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism?
You recently messaged me accusing me of vandalism. I'm not sure if you read the article you linked me to, but right in the second paragraph it says "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia." I don't believe well-placed sarcastic comments to be an attempt to reduce the quality of the encyclopedia.

If there were factual errors in my changes, they were mistakes and not an intentional sabotage of the encyclopedia. If you think I was offering opinions, well...I believe the same vandalism article you linked me to said "adding an opinion once is not vandalism" in the sixth sentence.

With that as a premise, I don't think I've done anything wrong, and I would appreciate it if you could avoid contacting me with frivolous accusations in the future.

67.174.18.52 16:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)67.174.18.52

Speedy deletes
In response to your message on my talk page, a policy can only do so much to outline the proper procedure for a multitude of situations. I've written Wikipolicy before and know that there is a big gap between writing a policy and making judgement calls on edits as they are added. That being said, I don't agree with your recent judgement calls on some of the articles I've tagged for speedy deletion, such as Royalty free Urban Music and Konoor. Nowadays I edit using Vandalproof, so if I don't find a speedy delete tag that's perfectly relevant to a page/feel I need to highlight the non-notability of a page, I will use dbreason to assert or clarify a point. Perhaps I should just stick to using set db tags, but still I think the supervising admin should not fail to delete a page that's non-notable just because the tag does not match a CSD. Fabricationary 03:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion
I have recently added a page to Wikipedia called Datamonitor, and after numerous attempts to add the page it seems that your user name is appearing as someone who has deleted this page. Is this correct? and if so why are you deleting my page? I am new to wikipedia and would appreciate any advice you could give on how to add a page for the company i work for Datamonitor. Thanks Jenny —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Datamonitor (talk • contribs).

I dont understand this
Yesterday i had edited the "Blog" article. I saw today that it was missing. You have written "removed link to money making scheme" as you deleted this. I don’t understand this. I am trying to contribute to wikipedia. The fact that blogs are used to make money is true and widely accepted. I have NOT SPAMMED. I have provided a link to a genuine article. Please see the article. If you had seen it you would have understood. It is not a money making scheme. It is a popular article. I would have "reverted" the page. But that is childish and makes little sense. You will revert it again. Please could you explain. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 221.134.248.78 (talk • contribs).

Thank you for your quick response. I have posted my suggestion as you suggested on the "blog" dicsussion page. I have not got any response as yet. When can I expect something?

I don't think Cyde's block was very fair, as I checked the disruption clause and it actaully states that users will usually be warned before being blocked, so why wasn't I, given that I am an established user. Myrtone

Westside
You recently deleted my article on Westside, because it was not "verifiable". You said that I needed to have Westside reviewed by newspapers, or something along those lines. My problem with this is that it is not a, um, well known publication, and as such would not likely be reviewed by any newspapers or such. Is there anything I can do (or in other words, what kind of external sources do I need?) to get my article back on Wikipedia? How can I get somebody that you define as reliable to verify that Westside, umm, exists? It just doesn't seem fair that I can't write an article about Westside just because the New York Times doesn't write about it. I thought the purpose of Wikipedia was to make information available to anyone who wants it. Several of Westside's readers have approached Wyatt (the co-creator) about a website to learn more about it, and, as of yet, he has no website to point them to. When he asked me to create a site about it (he's not great with these things) I of course immediately thought "What better than Wikipedia?" Unfortunately, I wasn't aware of the difficulty of putting a simple article up on Wikipedia. I won't deny that this has made me very angry. Is there ANY way for me to get my article back up? There's pretty much no chance that anything like a newspaper will cite Westside. Is there some kind of other source that I can get to review Westside? Also, why was my article initially cited as an attack article? It seemed obvious to me that my description of Tucker and Jason were not in any way insulting, as their apparent lack of intelligence is a character trait. Thanks in advance for your response.

EDIT: Damn, I just lost everything I typed. Basically, 1: Not trying to promote Westside 2: Westside is not my comic. "When he asked me to create a site about it (he's not great with these things) I of course immediately thought "What better than Wikipedia?"" 3: Wikipedia is too much of a hassle, so I'll make a MySpace or something. Westside will never be good enough, I guess... KewlierThanThou 08:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry
I appologise for that. I didn't mean to leave a nonsenical opening paragraph, I just was trying to make a miror edit becuase the article states the 'bull' is the shortened form, but I fellt the 'bull' was the original expression and the s-word was added later. Myrtone

Pauannis - reply
I have replied to your comment on my page to keep everything together. -- G e n e b 1 9 5 5  Talk / CVU 10:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

CNicol
Dear Gwernol, You appear to have deleted every single link I posted. This is, of course, your prerogative. However, it was done just as quickly and sweepingly as I was criticized for posting them up, surely without considering every article, and I believe this is unjust. Some of the articles certainly deserved links, and if my novice understanding of what was appropriate or how to go about doing it was not in line with Wikipedia standards, I am now learning, and the constructive thing to do would be to point out which articles would be considered helpful contributions. The articles listed under their authors' bios, for example, do not seem to me to be reasonably out of place, but those are gone too. I am not going to restore anything. I would like you to restore the ones that you believe, in your more extensive experience, are constructive contributions to the website. Thank you, CNicol

MinistryHome
I noticed that you speedied this under CSD:A7. You may not have noticed, but it is actually an article about a website which doesn't currently qualify for CSD:A7. It has since been recreated by a user. Stifle (talk) 22:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Jaydinia
blah —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaydinia (talk • contribs).

Thanks
Thank you for reverting vandalism to my userpage. DVD+ R/W 01:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And a thanks from here too Gwernol. Thanks very much.Blnguyen | rant-line 00:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Speedy delete
Hi, sorry for the incorrect speedy delete notices (like the one with the loooong title), but I got a bit tired of prodding or AfD'ing all ridiculous articles. Friday evening is catching up with me, I think ;-) I'll try to stay with the rules for each type of deletion, but the flood of deletable articles is quite impressive. Fram 14:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Admin intervention against vandalism 86.7.132.163
Hi,

I've warned the user again now. However, I understand you believe that the main page editing is a content dispute, but does the repeated change of peoples' comments not count as vandalism? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification
Thanks for the clarificaion on the CSD on VNU Global Media. Wildthing61476 19:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Fetal Rights Article
I altered what could have been percieved to be non-neutral language in the fetal rights article. I haven't seen you back on the articles talk page however I have listed a few words on the articles talk page as well as explanation on why I changed them or why they are neutral in general or contextually. So I was thinking you read them and remove the pov label. Thanks. Pax Jfraatz 19:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)jfraatz

Message from 198.175.175.110
You had a new message from posted on your userpage. Petros471 21:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh and while I'm dropping by, just wanted to say it looks like you're doing a pretty good job as an admin :) Hope you're enjoying the life! Petros471 21:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Jaydinia
Why was this page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Predestination&oldid=62415443 reverted?Jaydinia

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the recent vandalism on my userpage and talkpage :). Fabricationary 19:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Pussing
I object to your stating this is nonsense. it is a recognised, and growing, sexual actuivity which I have helped codify. Just because you do not happen to enjoy it yourself, you should not condemn others for doing so by calling it nonsense. Please remove your proposed deletion. Thank you Kevin Kevinbeds 20:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyright status from user:FelixCheng
Re: copyrights of uploads by

Firstly, on those that are based on copyrighted images, I hope you agree the derivitive work is a clear violation of the holder's copyright.

On those that were modified GFDL images, the GFDL makes clear that the original author(s) must be credited. Since they were not, despite me pointing out that they should be, then this is a violation of the GFDL.

He continued to upload similar images despite being warned that doing so was a violation of copyrights, and has been being a pain in the bum generally through his insertion of TTTE fan fiction as canon.

The other issue is that his uploads had very limited (if any) value to Wikipedia, and although GFDL-licensed, I'm not sure their original authors would be entirely happy with them being used in that way.

So I don't think he can be trusted, or understands the basics of copyright, but I do think it's best that we are firm with him.

But the main issue was the copyright violations. &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 21:04, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Seduction
links have been there for weeks. thanks. you are deleting material that has existed for weeks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.225.167.24 (talk • contribs).

hi do u plan to block yourself? because that would only be fair since otherwise it would seem admins are above policy.70.225.184.6 15:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

are you gonna block yourself or not? you are blanatly violating 3RR and it is just as worse as me so by not blocking yourself you are asserting you are above wikipolicy. 70.225.183.209 15:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

the links have been there for weeks and have been reviewd by numerous users and are to satisfy users who want afd. they are NOT spam or whatnot 70.225.183.209 15:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you human?
I would like to know if you are a real human or an automated bot. Dark thief of 7 feet 19:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you're a bot Gwernol, I'd love to meet your programmer ;) Petros471 19:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Why Wikpedia Is Gay
Wikipedia sucks. I will never forgive you, user:Gwernol. The whole verifiability thing is completely retarded and gay. All I wanted was a simple article for Westside, and could you give that to me? No. Apparently, everything needs to be reviewed and published by the New York Times before you can put it on Wikipedia. I understand that there are certain things that don't need to be on Wikipedia, but Westside isn't one of them. Are you suggesting that Westside doesn't exist? What the fuck is the world coming to when these are the criteria for my article? In conclusion, fuck user:Gwernol, fuck Wikipedia, and fuck your ridiculous verifiability criteria. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KewlierThanThou (talk • contribs).

Please stop saying that. It's not nice. Felix 18:48, 16 August 2006

Thanks
Thanks for the heads up. I've just posted the AFD, so we shall see. Proto /// type  14:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Shay911
FYI: I have reblocked this account as a vandalism only account. We both blocked about the same time, but your shorter one would have expired out the block. If you disagree, just let me know and we'll figure it out. Wikibofh(talk) 15:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Message from 86.7.132.163
Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale was a militant terrorist bandit

If people claimed Bin Laden was a terrorist in twenty years time - would you allow anyone to claim he was a freedom fighter - The answer is NO.

So, in that case Bhindranwale's facts should be published, he was a communalist, terrorist, murderer and subversive and served the ISI - see the BBC Video report which I put at the bottom of the article. The people who object to my input have also claimed the BBC is biased even though thy wernt born at that time ?!?

You blocked me when in fact you should have blocked the terrorist apologists, other liars and propaganda proliferators.

Who will take this site seriously if the facts are either flawed or denied ?

My info was:-

Early background
Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale or Jarnail Singh Brar was an un-elected leader of Damdami Taksal, a Sikh organisation based in India. Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale (Feb 12, 1947 – June 6, 1984). He was born in the village of Rode, Faridkot district, Punjab, India. His father Joginder Singh, was a local Sikh leader. Jarnail Singh was the seventh of eight brothers. He was brought up as a atrict vegetarian and was of the Jat caste. As a child he was hyperactive and anti-social, once described by a BBC journalist as 'not being very intelligent' and with such acute learning disabilities he failed to attain any qualifications and dropped out of school at an early age. Being unable to read, write or speak any English, his only career option was to enter religious politics and eventually made a career by becoming an attention seeking firebrand cleric.

Lumberjack
I went back and forth on whether to include the Real Ultimate Power lumberjack spinoff jokes in the article. Maybe they belong, maybe not, if you don't think so then I'll go along with not including them. However I do think the Johnny Cash song deserves mention in the article. Dragomiloff 23:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, no prob...the title of the Johnny Cash song is "Lumberjack" Dragomiloff 23:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

eon8
I don't catch why did you deleted eon8 page since it was major media news and popular website. And still is. --Oldadamml 23:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Churchie Dance Off
You deleted my page. I do not understand why you would do such a thing as it does not breach any of the deletion policies of wikipedia. It is a real event, and will soon occur frequently. There's no sense to why, as it links to a 'real' school and is a 'real' event, it is also known quite well in this city known as Brisbane. Please do not delete it.

01:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aeryck89 (talk • contribs).

Last Resort
You obviously never played that game, if you had you'd have known that the story i submitted was compeletly true to the game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kyle j (talk • contribs).

Beths Grammar School
Thanks for correcting my mistaken edit here. I was tidying up after a vandal and must have hit the wrong button. --Guinnog 10:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Mergers
I notice we have some similar intersts!

I proposed merger because the wiki suggestion bot suggested I work on both the HOn30 and OO9 articles as they are stubs. Looking at them it seemed the easiest way to get a reasonable article was to merge them and HOe. If you want to work on the articles and expand them, great. I'll leave the merge proposal to see if anyone else pops their heads up. I might assist a little with your revisions, too. Good luck.--Michael Johnson 12:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Civil
Thanks for the heads up. I read my post several times before submitting, and thought that even though the "bag of hammers" line is in there, I'm clearly not saying he is that dumb. By continuing with "My hunch is that you understand it perfectly well" I showed what I really thought of him. But I'll go back and re-phrase. Thanks. David Bergan 14:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Snicket File
Thanks for the clarification on that. It does read like nonsense, but perhaps the article can be cleaned up. Wildthing61476 20:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Slyder Pilot
It seems that Slyder Pilot could use a bit more of your sage advice. Rather than create archives; he's just deleting stuff from his talk page that makes him look bad. I've tried explaining this to him, but I'm not going to get into a revert war over his own talk page. If you can help him out, great, if not, he's not likely to fair well on his next RfA - as this is very likely to come out. Rklawton 20:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Will read up on archiving later tonight. That is all and good day. -- Slyder Pilot E@ 21:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

User:GvvernoI
Gwernol, I wanted to alert you that the above user account has been created and may be mistaken as you. Regards, Accurizer 20:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry
I'm very sorry for vandalizing earlier. I promise I won't do it again. 63.23.3.195 21:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me out with vandals on my user page
I appreciate it =) Bwithh 07:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
I am pleased and surprised that you didn't block me for being your "evil twin". you truly deserve to be a sysop for your patience and applying the policy WP:AGF. Happy editing. (Message from User:Gvvernol left on my user page and moved here Gwernol 11:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)}

CLUE
Get A CLUE!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LowtaxNetwork

BLOCK ME THEN!!!!!!! LowtaxNetwork 14:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but it just P's me off when people don't listen or even realise that it is Information LowtaxNetwork 14:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Our site does not need any extra exposure we have been out since 1999 and rank highest in most search engines so we are not after more exposure. I just want to get the information out to people in other ways and this is what this site is made for is it not. If this is not online reference material please tell me!

About our site:

This expanded set of sites dealing with tax in the USA is the latest addition to the Lowtax Network of sites, which was launched in 1999 by an established international business publisher to fill a perceived need for an electronic source of information on offshore and 'low-tax' regimes worldwide.

Now the Lowtax Network covers more than 70 offshore and onshore countries world-wide, focusing on legal ways of minimizing tax for business operations, individuals and investors. LowtaxNetwork 14:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok well does it help that I do not own or maintain these websites LowtaxNetwork 15:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
I emailed you about an autoblock and put the unblock template on my page. Someone told me there was no block in place! So if you removed it and just didn't tell me, thanks a bunch, and if there was no block in the first place and I just... got confused or something, sorry for the trouble! Happy editing, Psycho Master (Karwynn) 15:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
===>Thanks for the heads-up -Justin (koavf), talk, mail 21:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help
Thank you for your help with re-direction of article on Eduard Ingris - Ross.Hedvicek 23:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.
Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage! — Natha  n  ( talk ) / 04:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Ryan Toby explanation
I'd just seen the repost of deleted material ... and didn't understand the db-repost as well as I should :-( Now I do... Brian 17:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball

Thanks!
Thanks for your note re the guy who wants to insert his view on spelling two chemical elements, and that "Wikipedia is immoral". If only they were all as easy to spot as he is! Thanks too for your comment on my IB work; I'm a great fan, which arguably makes me less good at writing this sort of article. Great that you noticed; it's lovely to get a pat on the back sometimes! BTW I am a Scotsman moving to the SF area soon and may wish to pick your brain about the locale, if that would be ok? --Guinnog 18:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Aw wow! Thank you so much for the Barnstar, that means a lot to me. Really nice of you. Thank you. --Guinnog 18:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And yet another thanks for reverting his (I feel sure it is a guy) vandalism to my user talk page. --Guinnog 20:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be so predictable but I've awarded you the random kindness barnstar for going the extra mile to help me with this. I've never done this before and hope I've done it right! --Guinnog 20:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you please leave his last edit to my talk page in place? It isn't really vandalism and I am just going to leave it as is rather than tempt him to an edit war, which I know he is capable of. How come he is still editing at all, anyway? --Guinnog 20:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Re Rfa
Thanks for the advice. I take it as fair waring that I probally wont suceed in this endevour. However, I'm gonna let the nom stay for two reasons. 1. there is always the possiblity of a merical. 2.. I might be able to get some good advice/comments out of it. Hopefully one day you'll se me as an admin. Bye! Nookdog 22:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)