User talk:NewTestLeper79/Archive 13

Reverts
TTN & I seem to have stumbled into a revert war with you over unsourced, in-universe, policy-violating, fancrufty junk: Eric Foreman and another, which I have forgotten now. Are your reverts serious? You are a serious and committed editor and surely recognise that these articles clearly don't abide by the standards articulated at WP:FICT. Discussion has adduced little more than fan peroration on the necessity for in-show biographies, which, as has become clear at several centralised discussions, would be better served up at tv.com or a wikia devoted to the show. Eusebeus 14:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The talk-page discussion clearly favoured keep, so that's the basis of my reverts. You can't give people the option of a forum and then disregard the result because it isn't to your liking. - Dudesleeper · Talk 17:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it therefore your view that the consensus of the talk page trumps the consensus of the notability policies as expressed at WP:FICT & WP:NOT? This specific issue has been addressed several times at AN/I (at the episode subpage, I assume you have seen it if you are following this debate) and the view there was very clear that the WP:CONSENSUS of policy is of overriding importance. Do you dispute this? This area has provoked lots of revert warring, but usually by dedicated fans of individual series, not seasoned editors with familiarity with general policy. Have you contributed to the ongoing discussions at WP:FICT to explain this view? Anyway, I don't mind bringing this issue back again to AN/I for further discussion prior to a protection of the redirect/article if you wish. Eusebeus 23:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I'd like to nominate you as an admin, as I think you're qualified. Let me know if you're interested. Epbr123 15:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Scottish Football
Hello, you delete some of my links I had posted under the reason "comment spam". I'm only after information why you decided to do this, and why links to that site were removed? Obviously happy to comply with any wikipedia rules but I didn't see the reason for this. Degsydegsy 19:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)degsydegsy

Sorry, it was the addition of the link on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrox_Stadium, to the Scottish Football Archive site. Degsydegsy 20:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)degsydegsy

Scottish Junior football
Hi, I'm sure you can clarify things on this AfD for a whole bunch of Scottish Junior football teams. King of the North  East  00:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Respect of policies on Wikipedia
The word you're looking for is "reading". You should specify what you consider "spam links", before reverting infos on the article, if you do persist you'll be warned! Firstwind (talk) 14:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Nope, the word was definitely readding. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Yep, it's re-adding. In that case, you're mistaken, Dude! Firstwind (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes i do agree, but those links conforms to Wikipedia policies, like on many other articles. Firstwind (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

West Lancashire Derby
I have created the above article, however it needs a lot more information including a statistics section with full details of the results of all the matches between the two clubs. Do you have that information by any chance? I intend to trawl through the two local Blackpool and Preston newspapers online for articles. For instance the Gazette not too long ago had an article about the famous 3-0 match at Deepdale from 1970 as well as an article about a 3-1 match a couple of years later. And of course it would be best if there was a wikipedia user PNE fan who could contribute if I can find one too! Your input would be great though! ♦Tangerines♦ · Talk 14:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, I don't have Roy Calleys book (for shame), I just keyed in the two teams on soccerbase.com - the link is below the stats box on the page with full listings of all the matches up to the 1999-2000 season. Can't remember when it starts though. I do have though two shiny tickets for the 8th December!!! ♦Tangerines♦ · Talk 19:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Leave It to Beaver episodes
I'm not exactly sure about synopsis lengths on episode list pages, but I don't see any harm in what you've done. Also, good job for updating the list. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 02:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The slightly warmer one
Hey, dudesleeper,

I'm living in Perth, Australia. I prefer the warm weather, I don't think moving to Perth, Scotland would have been much of an improvement to Germany, climate wise! I rolled the dice and up came WA insted. Thanks for the praise about the Amateur leagues, I think, the English version of Wiki now holds more information then the German one but I don't think I can be bothered rewriting it in German! I hope, winter is not to harsh in old Europe right now, I'm back to 45 degrees in Wiluna tomorrow. Nice job on the references, didn't know you could do that, still learning. EA210269 09:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

House MD
Saw your comment on the removal of my citation. I don't have a problem with that as long as the { { fact } } tag isn't restored, but to answer the specific comment:

The question was whether House is also known as House MD. If one site calls it that, then yes it is. Hence the IMDB link. Note that the IMDB link isn't evidence that "House" is called House MD, which is where, obviously, it wouldn't be an appropriate cite; but that wasn't the question.

Personally I thought the request to cite that it was also known as was, erm, unhelpful to begin with, I just didn't want to delete it without an answer. If nobody restores the { { fact } } tag then I don't see any need to put the IMDB link back.

--Squiggleslash (talk) 20:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Peterhead
I found four sources about the area's drugs problem on Talk:Peterhead. I guess there must be more as these were all from the first page of Google results.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 12:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Mourinho
Many thanks for that reversion. I don't know who the IP address is that doesn't want this update on there, but there are some strange people out there. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 18:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Motherwell disamg links corrections
Hi Dudesleeper, yea, I did some of the corrects and removed the motherwell links in the main page when it was already in the intro, because it was taking ages to get through the list. It seems a bit wasteful to have both birthday locations in the main page and the intro, but I was getting tired having to do, in some cases 10 links per page, when only one or two was needed. Hope it didn't impact anything you were doing.

Also, When you archive your talk page, is it just a case of creating a new article and name it per your talk page ? scope_creep (talk) 18:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of External Link to Wilton Bowling Club
Hi Can you please advise why the link to the Wilton Bowling Club Was deleted from the external Links under the heading New Zealand?

Amfnz (talk) 13:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Dudesleeper


 * Thanks. I understand.


 * Amfnz (talk) 13:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Danny Mitcheley
Hi, just wanted to ask you about him. He is now listed in the BFC first team squad number 35, which started from the Cardiff City home match where he was first included in the match day programme. He has been getting rave reviews and is sciring for fun in the Youth team and now also in the Reserves. He has recently been included in the first team match day squad as part of the 17 (though not as yet named as a sub). Yesterday Simon Grayson confirmed that he will get his chance in the first team soon. There is quite a lot of content about him now in the Blackpool Gazette (online). Does he qualify yet for an article, or do we have to wait until he actually makes an appearance for the first team? Thanks. ♦Tangerines♦ · Talk 19:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've been trying to get it confirmed one way or the other as unfortunately the club have used both Mitcheley and Mitchley. I suppose the only way of knowing for sure will be when he makes his first team debut as his name will then be on his shirt. I've got it ready anyway now in my sandbox. I was also wondering if Eamonn Collins should have an article given that he was the youngest ever 'Pool player and was for a long time thought to be the youngest ever player to play for any professional club in England as he was only 14 when he made his debut (very close to 15 but still 14) in 1980. ♦Tangerines♦ · Talk 22:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Tin hat
For pity's sake this is nothing about owning the article. The tin hat comment is trivial, and also does not prove either war, as you say tin hats didn't cease after WWI, so how does it prove it was WW2? It doesn't, thats why I removed it. We don't need to back our comment about it being WW2 with a trivial, non-defentive comment. I do not appreciate being accused of bad faith, which is what suggesting I think I own the article is. I hold no grudge against you after any previous dispute and it would be good if you could do the same and actually debate with me, not just accuse me. Thanks.--UpDown (talk) 20:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I still haven't found defentive in the dictionary yet, but I shall keep looking. - Dudesleeper   Talk  14:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Paul Merton
To be fair, I do actually find your labelling of my image of Paul Merton as "dreadful" a tad offensive. I'm not saying it (or my photography skills) are perfect, and there's no way in any form of heaven, earth or hell that it could ever even be the slightest bit considered anything close to a potential Featured Picture, but really so what? But is there anything inparticular that is really so terrible about it? It's quite clearly Paul Merton, and it's a head on facial shot, so what's the problem? Now if it was a side on view of him from half a mile away then maybe the "no image is better than a "bad" image" argument would wash, but it's not. Perhaps is you really think it ruins the article, you could try and take a better one yourself, or ask a Flickr to allow the use of one of their images. You'll probably be able to get a better one than mine, and that'd be great. But right now, what's so wrong with having it their? Gran2 00:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well sorry, but I do take it personally, because I disagree with your assertion that it's "dreadful". You're perfectly entitled to think that, but it probably would have been more tactful to keep it to yourself that's all, because I still don't really see how my image is really that bad... But anyway, that Flickr image is much better, so obviously should be used instead. Gran2 14:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, don't worry about it, I'm over it! You were just doing what you thought was best, and I accept your apology. As for the reverters, I've never dealt with UpDown before, but from what I've seen Brad a good idea editor. Ah well, see ya around. Gran2 23:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Joe Hart
Probably, but there's never any harm in a little extra AGF is there? Oldelpaso (talk) 10:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

John Paul McBride
Just noticed you edited the JPM article I was working on. I know I didn't place the in use and underconstruction templates on it as I thought I would only be a short time but wasn't I have reverted your edits just now on the page and I do plan to include these in the article once I finnish it hopefully tonight. I am just trying to get this article sorted out. Gorillamusic (talk) 18:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Accelerate (R.E.M. album)
I have fully protected the article in question. Consider taking this to dispute resolution, such as WP:RFC and WP:3O. Disputes should be resolved on talk pages, not in the main article space, and as noted above, further reverts can result in blocks for disruption to all involved parties. Work out your differences before editing this article again.--Jayron32. talk . contribs 20:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Dudesleeper - You are cordially invited to Talk:Accelerate (R.E.M. album) for content discussions on the article. As protection is set to expire in about 1/2 hour, it is imperative to the process that all parties concerned return to the table and set out a clear, civil and maleable agenda going forward. Thank you ever so much. Edit Centric (talk) 19:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Warning users
Hi Dudesleeper! Please be careful not to bite new users or those who may be trying to make good-faith edits. We have a set of pre-written warning templates that automatically assume good faith but escalate well. The basic one is here: Template:Uw-test1, and they grow according to severity in a logical manner Template:Uw-test2, Template:Uw-test3 and so forth. Thanks! ➔ REDVEЯS is standing in the dark 20:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As someone who occasionally lets sarcasm seep out (no, really), I have to say I don't think I'll be using the Uw-test1 template. - Dudesleeper   Talk  16:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)