User talk:Logical Premise/Archive1

Your Accusations
I find your accusations to be absolutely sickening. I have added MANY new sources to the article, as well as improving its quality. Instead of seeing that, and (if it does not kill you to do so) show some appreciation, you have accused me of being unrepentent, and uncooperative. I have cooperated! What else do I need to do? Do I need to leave Wikipedia altogether to make this work? Arbiteroftruth (talk) 14:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Since that report was made, I have worked very hard to improve the Xidan article. Are you seriously telling me that that is for nothing? Arbiteroftruth (talk) 14:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I would like to apologize for my unfortunate lapse of good judgment earlier. Please accept my apology. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Your comment re:KMWeber
First off, I'd ask that you tone down the edit summary a notch or two.. Telling someone "Stay Classy" is not really that civil.. more light, less heat. And secondly, I'm a bit curious about the comment about "Well, I don't expect much from WR contributors.. so...".. because I'm looking over that section, and I don't see any WR folks on that list. Would you care to expand on that? SirFozzie (talk) 02:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason I say that, is because.. well... I'M a WRer myself.. and if I had to be quite honest.. I don't really think they claim him any more as "one of theirs" (if there is such a thing), any more then you would call him "one of ours". But anyway.. I can understand how you feel toward Kurt (Hell, maybe better then you.. he tried to have my administrator rights recalled at one point not so long ago).. but it's not helping the discussion, that's why I said More Light, Less Heat.. you know? SirFozzie (talk) 02:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

AGF
In the same apology on the ANI AoT continued his unciviliy, so spare me the lecture on AGF especially since s/he never apologized for all the insults.CdC—Chuleta de Chancho (talk) 03:13, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

well thank you, it seems you are very empathetic and caring. however i am confused at why you think it'd come back to haunt me. and taking the editor in question i find it doubtful anyone would find my rejection of the apology grounds for not being civil, especially since an other editor lambased AoT for the pathetic and forced apology. I would have preferred silence, as for removing your comments, I don't do that.CdC—Chuleta de Chancho (talk) 03:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Walnut Street Theater
Perhaps you could add some comments on the ANI discussion of this topic:  Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I try to amuse myself, and if someone else is amused, that's a bonus. :) I think the tone on that page has simmered down a bit. We'll see. So, a ball game... the Rangers? I guess you have to be a real baseball fan to follow them, as they have not exactly been overwhelming over the years. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And I was just reading your user page. I deduct some frustration. I can see why you avoid the ANI page. I probably should also, as I do not suffer fools gladly. But occasionally there is something I can do that might work. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I try, but at a certain point I stop. What that point is can vary. It's usually around the time an admin tells me to cool it. :) Well, my Cubs are about to clinch their second consecutive division title, which is unprecedented for them. They're enjoying success at present, but by and large during the decades I've followed them they've been more like the current Rangers than like their current selves. :\ Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:COMP Assessment
Hi there, you have indicated interest in joining the article assessment dept of WP:COMPUTING here. If you are familar with the WP1.0 Assessment criteria, you are free to help us out. Or please do read WikiProject_Computing/Assessment and join us. Welcome onboard --  Tinu  Cherian  - 10:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Problem?

 * You left this comment for me I am not following. What is the problem?

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eli Tene, you will be blocked from editing. Logical Premise Ergo? 18:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Demarco135 (talk • contribs)

?
Q1? I can understand most of your oppose (even if I disagree) but Q1? Was that a typo? --Dweller (talk) 14:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * His Q1 summary is "AIV, AN/ANI, CSD/PROD, RFPP" for all of which the tools are extremely useful or essential. Your other points are all reasonable (like I say though I disagree with them!) and would still remain there if the reference to Q1 was dropped. I can't see a reasonable Q1 opposition there. But hey I'm not going to hassle you over it - I'm not trying to change your mind about the !vote... plainly not, as I'm only addressing two letters in the whole oppose! :-) Cheers --Dweller (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for signing my guestbook
Also, thanks for the barnstar. You can see it on my awards page. Cheers.-- LAA Fan sign review 20:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Severed
I found that this film actualy had 4 releases between 2005 and 2007 in varoius countries. I did major cleanup and sourcing to the article, and found WP:RS reviews from experts in the horror genre. It is a better article now, and I think I have shown a notability. What else might you advise?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK
I am sure you will be pleased to see that Texas literature made WP:DYK! Bob (QaBob) 16:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again. I'm not sure I understand your use of the tag on Texas literature. The sources I used don't seem to be primary by any stretch of the imagination. As I read it, if the authors of the works considered within Texas literature were self-classifying their works, that would be a primary source. But Dobie and the Handbook of Texas contributors appear to clearly be third parties. They are not writing about themselves but the works of others. Care to elaborate on your thinking? Maybe more sources would be good, but I don't think the sources are primary. Bob (QaBob) 17:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Replied at User talk:QaBobAllah. Bob (QaBob) 18:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Would you mind if I changed the tag to one requesting more sources, rather than criticizing the current sources as primary, which simply doesn't fit the definition? Bob (QaBob) 19:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your understanding. I know we got off on the wrong foot, and I'm glad to see we can move beyond it. Bob (QaBob) 19:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Foxy Loxy's RfA
Hello, this message is to inform you that User:Foxy Loxy has restarted their RfA. The new discussion is located at Requests for adminship/Foxy Loxy 2. Glass  Cobra  09:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

National Amusement Devices
G4 is only for articles previously deleted under prods or an AfD. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Then tag it with an accurate CSD tag. Inaccurate tagging reveals article prejudice and discredits the editing team. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:20, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

MyRfA
Hi there L.P....So I was reading your "Neutral" and it said you were willing to be badgered..here goes. If I remember correctly, your comments were placed before I'd finished answering all the questions put to me. (checking history to make sure....yup--I'm right.) I was wondering if you'd had a chance to read my answers to those questions; I think they might allay some of your concerns about my inexperience and possible lack of policy knowledge. Might I convince you to stop by and give them a read? (There are two links there--one to Q11-13, the second to Q10.)

If neither of those convinces you, what if I smile very sweetly and say "pretty please"? Would that work? :)

Seriously, I appreciate your willingness to reconsider; I just wanted to make sure you'd had the chance to read all my comments before eternally-finally-forever-and-ever making up your mind. Thanks for being badgerable--even if it doesn't change your !vote! Gladys J Cortez 21:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Grimly?
No need to be grim. When I said "It doesn't make finding our friend any easier" I was referring to my frustrating searches for clear info. I wasn't suggesting you were wrong.   SIS   00:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Debito Arudou
I would like for you to explain why Japanreview.net is not a reliable source (It may help to refute arguments made by people in favor of using Japanreview.net) - Thanks :) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks
Logical Premise, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Though you opposed based on lack of experiences at XFD and AN/I, I hope I can exceed your expectations. (My admin work is going to done at WP:ITN and WP:AIV.) Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again,  Spencer T♦C 03:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Logical editors needed
Hello. I am looking for people who would like to help building the following article. It is currently in need of practical people who appreciate reality. If I could get people who are interesting in the medical aspects of living on a extra solar planet (people not bacteria) that would be great. I am lacking in experience in finding the right people to edit this article that we are trying to finish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Explodicle/Planetary_human_habitability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Explodicle/Planetary_human_habitability

GabrielVelasquez (talk) 18:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC) (your comments)
 * Uh, I have no intentions of editing this article. I just responded to what you asked for, editors to put eyes on the article. If you're going to respond in a hostile upset tone when I make suggestions and point out problems that the majority of people looking at the article will find, I will not disturb you or your project here further. Please do not contact me again regarding this issue. -- Logical Premise Ergo? 03:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I think you are being a bit touchy here: Hostile? - upset? -what did I say that was hostile. I was clarifying and I think you have read too much into what I typed. I gave you my (contrast) reasons for creating the article. If you are judging me based on my frustration of late, think again. If you think the arguments (over the confusion on things the article would clear up) are okay, then in that case, I will understand, in my way (you espouse to value logic, while enjoying chaos), fine. but honestly, without sounding like too much of a hypocrite i can say you are taking it too personally. As the Oracle said to Neo, "have a cookie." :) GabrielVelasquez (talk) 20:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Planetary Human Habitability
I've put my two cents worth in on the page. I'm afraid I'm strictly a novice when it comes to topics like this, my own skilsets are in areas other than extrasolar concerns, but I'm a decent copyeditor if this ever gets that far. I'll do some research after work and see what I can find. BTW, your page on Stargen is hilarious. -- Logical Premise Ergo? 19:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Based on these comments here you posted on my talkpage and the contradictory statements and tone on the page requesting comments regarding me, I am left to assume either you lied about doing some research (on the subject)... or you have let a few editors who need their edits to go through (as thought they are perfect) without check bias your willingness to help (with research). Maybe you could clarify to me what really made you do a 180 degree turn; If you think I was rude to you I think you should specify rather than going with the mob. You qualified the coments you made in the request for comments that you may be oversensitive which negates the value of those statements as exageration. Can you explain to me why you are exagerating your reaction for their benefit. Did you really read all the points I wrote on Stargen?  GabrielVelasquez (talk) 01:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

DBZ
Are you going to come back to comment on the claim your sources are fake? Or on the deletion review for Cell, or the mediations?JJJ999 (talk) 03:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

All is for the best, in this, the best of all possible worlds
One of the advantages of not having many supporters at your RFA is that there are fewer people to thank at the end. Thanks for your support and your willingness to look at my complete record. I'm going to try to interpret this resounding defeat as a statement that I should choose my words more carefully in the future, and remember that every statement I make gets recorded forever, just waiting to get carefully transcribed onto my next RFA. I would go insane if I believed that it was repudiation of what I truly meant: that no editor should consciously and willfully ignore guidelines and policies, and editors that repeatedly do so should not be rewarded for or supported in doing so.

I'm sure I'll get back to full speed editing soon, because, after all,, every day, and in every way, I am getting better and better.&mdash;Kww(talk) 05:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

MFD
Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Logical Premise/editorluv. Thanks. -- how do you turn this on  21:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back
Intriguing really that i was also busy on huggle about a month ago when you set up your userpage on your new user. Either way, i guess you already know what i am here about? Of course about User:Logical Premise/editorluv I could of course give you a useless talk on thisandthat should not be done, and of course i could just simply slam in a NPA template. Either would probably be useless anyway so lets just keep it at: Welcome back. Enjoy your stay, but please don't start making a mess. Now, ignore me and remove this message if you feel a need to do so. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 21:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Attack pages
I've deleted User:Logical Premise/editorluv as an attack page. While you may disparage our civility policies, it is what helps keep disparate editors from continuous brawling. as failure to follow policy is likely to result in blocks, circumspection may well be your friend. Thanks for your time, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 21:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Many thanks for supporting in my attempt to garner the admin tools. My RfA was successful, with no objection. Kindest, Lazulilasher (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Xymmax RfA
I'd like to take a minute to let you know that I appreciate your support in my recently-closed RfA, which passed with a count of 56 in support, 7 in opposition, and 2 neutrals. It means even more when it come from other AfD regulars like you. I'll certainly try to justify your faith by using the tools wisely. Happy editing, and thanks again! Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  22:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

False information during AfD discussions
Please do not provide blatantly false information, as you did here, in an attempt to influence deletion discussions (or any other discussion for that matter). The ''Anime Explosion!: The What? Why? & Wow! of Japanese Animation and 500 Manga Heroes and Villains'' references you mentioned have been shown to be completely false, and based on that it is likely the third reference you gave will prove to be completely false as well. Additionally, this violates WP:V and WP:VAN by deliberately attempting to include plausible misinformation intended to sway the opinions of others participating in the discussion. It is extremely disappointing that you would resort to such underhanded tactics, and further blatantly misleading and deceptive actions of this sort may result in the loss of your editing privileges here. This is an extremely serious matter and this may be your only warning on this issue. Thank you. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)