User talk:PeaceNT/Archive 16

Thanks
Thanks for the note, looks like I wasn't subst'ing them properly. I've gone back and properly done a few I did yesterday. --Canley (talk) 12:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, you can stop now.
I've taken the heed, and am going onto the discussion pages for all of those episode articles, explaining why I redirected them. You do not have to undo my redirects anymore. Goodday. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

That's not what User:TTN did when he originally redirected these episode articles: "Iggy Vs. the Volcano/A Dip in the Pole" and "The Things We Do for Mud/How Much Wood Can a Wood Pecker Peck?". He redirected them; and edit war broke out, and then a discussion was brought up. I'm merely doing as he's taught me. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

If they really need a discussion first, then can you start the discussions and leave me links to them? I'm under too much stress at this moment to do so. It seems everywhere I turn, someone's trying to undo what I did, and it scares me that I can't metaphorically sit down for even a moment. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Did you really mean to block indef? -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 10:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm
Woody always comes out on top! Wow, that is some edit conflict, it must have been at precisely the same time because I didn't get a conflict! Even the software knows that I am top!! ;) Woody (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That is bizarre, I didn't notice it until you told me. It would be interesting to see the exact (ie. seconds) time code. Woody (talk) 21:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't think it is possible. Anywhooo, back to editing... ! ;) Woody (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hey
Thank you for the greeting :) My rather long absence from English Wikipedia was mainly because of the heated discussions between several editors over the issue of merging and redirecting of episode articles (and still going as far as I can see). It made me realise just how many policies and guidelines there is on Wikipedia! It was a hard blow for me to see all the Teen Titans episode articles I wrote being redirected to the episode list. Then there were all the notices of invalid fair use-notices for uploading of copyrighted material that really startled me (I still haven't quite figured out the rules for those). As I am sure you have noticed, my talk page is full of them.

So I have spent some time exploring and reading the different guidelines and policies, and also the help age all over, in order to really get the hang of all the regulations on Wikipedia. I believe I am finally ready to start doing some real editing again (Oslo Katedralskole is my first major edit since I went inactive) So thanks once again for the welcome, it was just what my motivation needed :) Michae2109 (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hi
 * Do you think we can forget this whole thing happened and start over?
 * Hello, My name is Seth Michael Campbell (a.k.a. Sethdoe92
 * —Remember, the Edit will be with you, always. (Sethdoe92) (drop me a line) 20:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

goodbye
Because of overzealous attacks against me by Jehochman, I will no longer be editing the three articles that I was working towards FA status nor Congo articles. Jehochman went on a rampage RFCU. His RFCU claims were disproven and according to another user, he lied about the category.

WP:SOCK#LEGIT allows multiple accounts for segregation and security. The multiple accounts edited separate articles.

A multiple account was necessary because of the controversial nature of User:Profg. Editing about him would bring stalkers to the 3 FA contenders. Edits about User:Profg were never meant to defend him but to point out things that the community was overlooking. The community shouldn’t overlook everything that a user says simply because he is bad. One member of the community said he was seeking a ban just to make it easier to accuse others. These is a diabolical scheme.

What good does is exposing User:HappyBirthdayClubMember? That’s like exposing the identity of Santa Claus. Congolese fufu (talk) 02:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!
Dear PeaceNT, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget . 16:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA
My request for adminship was successful at 64/1/2! Many thanks for your participation and I will endeavor to meet your expectations. Cheers,  Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 08:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Email
I have sent one :) - Zeibura (Talk) 03:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Cream Legbar
Hi, I was just about to decline the speedy because, well, it wasn't nonsense. It was describing a breed of chicken. It needed a bit of formatting. See. Do you object to my restoring it and formatting it? Woody (talk) 13:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, I had to look twice at it. It looked like a joke, but looking deeper, you could see it was well-intentioned. Regards. Woody (talk) 13:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Zeibura
I don't mind: it wasn't necessary to ask me anyway. :) Acalamari 17:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: AN
I really doubt. :) @pple complain 14:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Lying from You
Please be careful not to interfere with a C&P move fix, I was in the middle of fixing it when you came and moved the page, and as you know it is pretty easy to make things worse in Cut and Paste repairs. Make sure to check if someone is already doing it please. Prodego talk  18:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * When you restored the page you kept two revisions that should have stayed deleted (or would have made the history inconsistent). Those were the addition of the Rfrom template, and the moved message. It keeps the history more consistent to remove those, and doing so will not cause a GFDL problem in this case. Prodego  talk  00:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message
Thanks for getting back to me! I do feel I'm learning quickly and do plan to stay involved, though I'll have to restrict my time as I've got lists of other things waiting to get done! Cheers for now Fishiehelper2 (talk) 20:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Fly (artist)
No one who voted delete brought up WHY they think this artist is not notable. Completely lame that this article went to delete. Interview with the artist about her work spanning decades can be read here: http://www.razorcake.org/site/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7467

Just because wikipedians have never heard of someone, does not mean they don't meet wiki guidelines.

Messwemade (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for replying. Take your time!! I would not need userfy as I had edited and re-edited this article to meet notability and wiki requirements months before the user set it to delete. Also, FYI: just before the user requested deletion, they had put up a "notability" tag and so I added a link to the above referenced interview and asked kindly that the notability tag be removed. Instead of reading the interview and coming back to me on the article discussion page with further talk about the biography and its notability, the next time I logged into wikipedia the article has been nominated for deletion, voted upon and deleted. This user did not even reference the discussions I had with them on the article talk page in the deletion remarks or vote...they simply nominated for deletion and voted "Delete". This is deletion vandalism. But anyway, take your time, and thank you for reviewing this article for me. You are very kind! Messwemade (talk) 16:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: My little mess at Santa Anna
Perfect. Thank you! --barneca (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Pee-Wee's Christmas Special
Any particular reason that motivated you to edit the article during a period of full protection?Kww (talk) 01:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the point of protection usually is to encourage discussion instead of endorsing a version of the page. Using it to your advantage to establish your preferred version is rather pointy. TTN (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw a report at ANI, reviewed the edits, was convinced that the redirection was unwarranted, hence the reversion. You're welcome to continue your discussion until it effectively reaches consensus, then I'm sure your edit wouldn't cause the problems that it does at present. - PeaceNT (talk) 04:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You don't think it takes an extreme case to warrant editing an article to match your preferred version while it is in the protected state?Kww (talk) 04:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it is not my personal preferred version. It is the redirected that was not endorsed by the supposedly consensus. I spent enough time reading the linked discussion, and found no such consensus on the matter, which was why I restored the legitimate page. Regards, - PeaceNT (talk) 04:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstand the concept of protection. I'll sleep on it, and figure out where to go from here.Kww (talk) 04:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * PeaceNT, I completely agree with Kww on this one. The protection policy says that "Pages protected due to content disputes should not be edited except to remove content which clearly violates content policies, such as obvious vandalism or copyright violations, to make changes unrelated to the dispute, or to make changes for which there is clear consensus on the discussion page." To make changes for which there is a clear consensus, not to revert changes for which there isn't one. They're not the same thing. Please consider reverting, even though, just so you know, I consider the version it's on now to be the "right" version. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 05:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Does it matter that I corrected what was woefully wrong? IAR here (and no, I'm not applying that policy blindly, it was an effort to improve Wikipedia, preserve and protect legitimate content from the hand of the unjustified Arbcom - subject deletionism) - PeaceNT (talk) 05:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I agree that the article probably should exist on its own (based on guest stars/Emmy nominations/the amount of coverage I've been able to find in a Google News search, which I laid out on the talk page), but I also agree with those above that it wasn't so pressing a concern as to require an edit while the page is fully protected. To quote the protection policy, "Pages protected due to content disputes should not be edited except to remove content which clearly violates content policies, such as obvious vandalism or copyright violations, to make changes unrelated to the dispute, or to make changes for which there is clear consensus on the discussion page."  I don't think any of these apply yet. JavaTenor (talk) 09:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocking of User:Kvanko
I realized you blocked the above user, and as there was a 3RR report open here I was wondering if you could state that. Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  06:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Arg, stupid browser and long refresh times. :P Though when you signed your name you forgot to include the time stamp. :O Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  06:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

AN/I review of admin action
Hello,. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at regarding.  BLACK KITE  07:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

re: DICE (summit)
hi, i am comixboy... i have been working on WikiPedia articles for over a year now, I think that the DICE conference is an important cultural landmark for the videogame industry... I added the tag to defer "rapid deletion" as requested, and yet the page was still deleted even b4 i was done editing... [please explain].

Sincerely, Comixboy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comixboy (talk • contribs) 01:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

yes, as per your Talk message, I would like a revert or some other means to edit the article until I have it complete. I am fairly experienced at editing ( and web issues in general) ut don't know a lot about wiki protocol and/or talk page syntax. like below, is my first time ever using four tildes or the "signature" button.

--Comixboy (talk) 02:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Belatedly thank you
for protecting Tsunami. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 07:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll do my best to be civil
I'm going to do my best to talk with you and keep my cool. I hope you will do the same in return. Your comments on Bulbasaur really frustrated me. As I pointed out here, the article has no relevant third-party sourcing at all. How can you describe the information contained as being relevant, well-sourced information when no third-party sources are used? How can you speak in support of the existence of articles that use no third-party sources? Kww (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

RFA
, Thank you for your support in my RFA which passed 43/0/1. I would like to especially thank Bibliomaniac15 for being my nominator and admin coach. I would also like to thank Rudget for being my co-nominator. I'm sure that I can live up to the community's expectations as an administrator, and not totally mess everything up. Thanks again for your support! Malinaccier (talk) 17:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

re: congrats
Peace, thanks a lot for your co-nom and for offering to nominate me in the first place. I was really surprised at how painlessly everything went, and everything's going okay so far! If you ever want to talk again just give me a shout, see you around, - Zeibura <sup style="color:#0088FF;">(  talk  ) 08:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

E-mail
You have one. :) Acalamari 20:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Serebiidex
Template:Serebiidex has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — MelicansMatkin (talk) 18:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)