User talk:N Shar/Archive 1

Kappa
Hi, I'm troubled that you would tag someone who claims to be an "award-winning musician magician" as a non-notable bio. Kappa 01:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, I did? That's a mistake. However, the other problems stand. N Shar 01:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way, it's "magician." I should read the articles more carefully. N Shar 01:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The other problems didn't make it a candidate for speedy deletion. Kappa 01:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

As you pointed out, my rationale for the CSD nomination was a mistake. I did not see the "award winning" claim -- I guess I was reading the article to fast and drew some conclusions. (On the other hand... ~400 google hits for "Adam Keisner".) I still think that, given the name of the page and the fact that it was a copyvio (note: so are many of the google hits), a CSD is appropriate. N Shar 01:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry for moving here. I was just waiting for a response and I didn't get one so I thought this might be better. N Shar 01:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, why is this not a CSD A8 (blatant copyright infringement)? N Shar 01:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, one more of these: I have to go away from the computer right now, so if the speedy tag really does need to be removed, please go ahead. I am new and still learning and it is more likely that I have made a mistake than that you have. N Shar 01:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The source looked like a mailing list or something, not a commercial content provider. The subject probably owns the copyright, so it isn't an infringement. Anyway let's leave to be speedied. Kappa 02:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for clarifying CSD A8 (I didn't realize what a "commercial content provider" was). N Shar 02:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Userpage revert
Thanks for the revert. Somebody hates me for some reason... :) -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ /?!  22:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem :)

Unconditional love
Hi, thanks for the cleanup/stubification of the Unconditional love article. I think it still borders on original research, but as its now a stub, I don't have a big problem with that. If it doesn't get turned into something useful (and enclopedic) before long, I might suggest that it be merged with Love, but otherwise, I have no strong feelings on the matter. cheers, Xtifr tälk 02:05, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Acknowledged. --N Shar 04:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Bigbazoonga
I have found that, whenever it looks like a db-bio is likely to be autobio, there's a lot less conflict if you just go ahead and userfy it without asking, instead of tagging for db. Looks like I moved this just as you were tagging it. (You don't get an edit conflict when that happens, the edit and move seem to happen simultaneously.) Fan-1967 04:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the userfy without asking is, frequently, easier than trying to explain the difference between articlespace and userspace. In many cases, it was what the user really was trying to do, if they had understood the difference; they just didn't know how. It's easier to show them, by just giving them a fait accompli, than to try to explain it eight ways from Sunday. Fan-1967 04:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe that's true. It's sometimes hard to remember that not everyone reads the rules before posting. I certainly didn't read the rules before posting on your talk page ;) --N Shar 04:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Nine times out of ten, they don't try to recreate it in articlespace. When you just db them, they tend to keep retrying much more often. I'd rather deal with 10% recreating them than 30. Fan-1967 04:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Vashist Narayan Singh
This article has now been rewritten, so you might or might not want to revise your earlier comment. ~ trialsanderrors 06:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice; I've changed my vote to abstain after the significant rewrite. The article is probably borderline but does not really need to be deleted anymore. --N Shar 01:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your change of vote. I really appreciate your attitude of voting based on the status of the article. It is not the new vote that is important, but your willingness to base your opinion on the facts and not on whims and fancies. There are few users who have a king-sized ego that prevent them from changing their votes. They will first tell Not-Verifiable. If you give the sources, they will then say that it is Non-notable etc and will try to stick to their original vote irrespective of the fact that the article has been changed and thus act against the very purpose of AFD spoiling the spirit of Wikipedia.  Doctor Bruno  03:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I am happy to (:O)
I am very happy you are happy and I am happy, have I accomplished the task successfully? Enjoy! cya -nima baghaei 05:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't say anything for sure about the long-term fate of the article. All I can say is that it is much improved and you addressed the issues I raised. Though I am definitely a skeptic on UFO-related issues, I support the inclusion of UFOlogy-related articles in Wikipedia. --N Shar 05:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

<>
thanks for help on my talk pageOo7565 06:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * no problem --N Shar 06:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Environmental Protection Userbox
Hi ,

OhanaUnited 04:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Warn for blanking talk page
You asked in an edit summary if there was a template for blanking warnings. Yes, there is. Just as ArticleName to ArticleName are used for vandalism warnings, adding an "a" in the tag will modify it for blanking vandalism warnings; i.e. ArticleName to ArticleName. Be sure to remember to include "subst:" in the template, so that the proper text will be added to the page. Not using "subst:" will look the same in your browser, but the text won't actually be there in the page source. User "talk templates" can be found at WP:TT. Other templates are summarized at WP:TEMPLATE. -Amatulic 02:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, I'm astounded that someone actually found that question. It wasn't really what I was asking, though; the user blanked the talk page of an article (Blue), not his own, and I was wondering if there was a separate set of warnings for blanking Talk: space pages. Thank you anyway, because this is something I've often wondered about. --N Shar 03:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * On rereading your comment, I realized that you were answering yet a different question (I parsed "blanking vandalism warnings" as "blanking vandalism-warnings" rather than "blanking-vandalism warnings"). I seem to be completely unable to communicate with you! :)--N Shar 03:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. The template I suggested would have done what you wanted. I put a test3a-n template on that same user's talk page just below yours. -Amatulic 17:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

i dont mind your changed
I'm not a physics expert, or an article creating expert, so do whatever you want to the article, I greatly appreciate it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nickmanning214 (talk • contribs) 04:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Take a look at this!
coelacan is suggesting I'm using a covert method to gripe with my wikimob article. Is this type of talk acceptable in wikipedia?--Janusvulcan 05:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

complex conjugate root theorem
Could you, or could someone among those who've asserted it, explain how the proposition discussed at Articles_for_deletion/Complex_conjugate_root_theorem is a corollary of the fundamental theorem of algebra? I don't believe it is. I've deleted from the article the assertion that says it is a corollary of that theorem. Michael Hardy 17:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Afd Goof up
I fixed. —— Eagle  101 Need help? 03:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Equestrian surgery
Thanks, that was the first time I proposed a deletion, so I wasn't positive where to put it. Eventer 16:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

P.B. Pilhet
Thanks for the tip, N Shar! I was just thinking that myself, actually :-)  P.B. Pilhet  /  Talk   01:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. --N Shar 01:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

RE:
Please put new discussion at Articles for deletion/Real Social Dynamics (2nd nomination), not on top of an old archive. The reason is that is makes it deathly hard for any admin to close. -Royalguard11 (Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 00:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but are you going to put all the comments added after the ill-advised "reopening" into the new discussion or not? (I didn't express myself well the first time, I guess.) --N Shar 00:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Question answered, disregard. --N Shar 00:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * the point is that your recent post duplicated your previous one


 * Oops. I didn't realize Royalguard11 had copied it over. I've deleted the earlier version. Thanks for the heads-up. --Calton | Talk 02:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk: Spinal Tap discography
I think another voice would be useful in the debate I am having with a unregistered user. I posted an RfC but haven't got a response yet. If you have a chance your opinion would be helpful. --Daniel J. Leivick 01:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I added a few comments. --N Shar 03:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Harry Colquhoun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Harry_Colquhoun

I have done as you suggested and would now like you to revise your decision to delete.

Thanks

User:Smskk
Thanks for the heads up. I don't really mind if others copy my page, but there does seem to be an awful lot of vandalism on the Walid Jumblatt page lately, and I'll definitely keep my eye on this user. I wonder if all these vandals are sockpuppets? At any rate, thanks for keeping the vandalism in check! — George Saliba[ talk ] 07:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Geez, this user seems very upset that Walid Jumblatt isn't Israeli. Thanks for keeping an eye on my user page, and the vandalism going on there! I'm almost flattered to have people naming sock puppets after me. Cheers. — George Saliba[ talk ] 02:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

dimethylarginine dimethylaminohydrolase
Thanks for reviewing my definition. You asked my why I removed a few sources. I cut back on the definition and reduced the number of references because I thought I was droning on too much. John Cooke
 * Fair enough. I was just wondering if there were any unsourced statements in the article that needed to be sourced, but I guess there aren't. --N Shar 23:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Freshman Year Edit
done and done. Je vous en prie.
 * I don't understand what you're saying, but I assume you mean it's okay for me to do that. So I'm going to. If you have a problem, just revert my change. --N Shar 02:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply to comment
I'm not entirely sure why my ISP would block me, especially since, as far as I know, editing here is not grounds for termination of service. 68.39.174.238 01:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know -- by mistake? Because someone in the company declares a vendetta against you? Because your computer gets infected with a nefarious virus? I don't think it's likely, but it's something that would worry me. Of course, it's your choice whether or not to get an account, and since you have twenty million times as many edits as I do, my comments don't really count for much. On the other hand, I did offer you girl scout cookies.... --N Shar 02:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Night hag
Hi,

I changed the redirect because (I think, as this was 3 weeks ago) originally night hag, the D&D creature, re-directed to night terrors, the sleep disorder, which then had a disambiguation tag at the top that redirected you to night hag (D&D). The only use I know of 'night hag' is the D&D creature, so I thought it would make more sense to go there directly. I've also replaced the disambiguation tag at the top of Night terrors (the sleep disorder) with a tag that takes you to the category.

Looking at it now, I'm not sure why the night hag page is a redirect at all - why not just move Night hag (D&D) to plain old 'Night hag'? There doesn't seem to be any other uses for 'Night hag', on wikipedia or in the random clutter of my brain. Though a quick google shows that it does seem to be used informally for some type of sleep disorder. I don't know enough about it to say if it's parvos noctumus or not.

WLU 12:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. A couple of days ago I created a page Hag (disambiguation), so I put otheruses on Night hag as well. --N Shar 20:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty much done with the set of pages, reached the limits of my knowledge. Since you're satisfied as well, I'll assume all is good with the world.  WLU 21:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)