User talk:Quarl/Archive 2006-07

AFDs
Hi Ste4k, I noticed you've pasted this comment on at least two AFDs:
 * It is not my job as a reader of an article to do the research which is not listed on the page. The article must establish such resources to meet WP:VER. Anything that is written in an article which cannot attribute itself to a reliable source is considered original research by policy, and by definition. Per policy, rather than guidelines, Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed. thanks. Ste4k 09:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not interested in black-and-white policies vs guidelines and whatnot; let's use common sense. Okay, it's not your job to do anything -- we're all volunteers here -- but many of us expect regular AFD nominators to at least check if an article is true before saying "I don't see any citations in this article, therefore it is original research and must go." Most of AFD is about doing research on articles to see what's true, what's notable, etc. I want people to take your AFD nominations seriously, so I hope you will put more effort into them in the future. Also, please remember to distinguish between "verifiable" and "verified". Cheers —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-02 10:27Z 

You might want to leave the organizational matters of my talk page to me.

About your note. It is of little matter to me about the various types of ways or importance that one interpets policy. Policy itself is argued elsewhere, of course. If you have a serious interest in this particular article, though, you might want to make those concerns known to the editors. I can't allow myself to do the same, though, it would compromise my NPOV. For a look at just how seriously such things are, and how seriously critical some policies may be, please see [this earlier discussion], to the effect that in my opinion, popularity should not be considered when weighing the value of an article. From my perspective, for me to become more interested in that article myself, I would need to have at least some reliable sources to work from. Please don't misconstrue me to be saying here that I doubt, or have disbelief in your statements about the article, but an encyclopedia on the whole is to educate the reader, rather than cause doubts in the same. I noticed just now that you have made some improvments to the page. However, statements like "the richest man in Minnesota" need to have more reference in my opinion. I will not harass this page or edit-war it at all, it is only my intention to provide a better encyclopedia with better verifiability. Good luck with the article. Ste4k 10:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)



Criticism of Adventist Hospitals
Please review my comments there. If not for the merge suggested, it would have been AfD. Thanks. Ste4k 11:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've merged Criticism of Adventist Hospitals to Criticism of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-02 20:17Z 

The Will of D
Its a bit hard to source this page because it comes directly from the manga and anime itself, but everything in it is fact not fiction (as you've tagged it for clean-up). I've checked it through. I'd like you to remove that tag at least, you can leave the other one (though that merger thingy I would love to have removed because I don't believe its needed). I understand that its difficult for something based on a manga/comic book series is hard to source and all. Angel Emfrbl 07:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ste4k's AFDs
Hi! I don't disagree with what you say there, but you must understand that when there aren't any resources listed at all, that doing what you propose is impossible. I do research the best I can, and I hope you realize that. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Buell Anderson for a better understanding of original research, the comments after the first Keep vote you might find interesting. Thanks. :) Ste4k 12:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Cambridge corridor cricket
Gulp! Well, I certainly got hooked by that one. I suppose I should always read the history of anything that is unfamiliar. Thanks for pointing it out. --Jack 05:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

John5Russell3Finley blocked from editing Bernat of Septimania
Hello, 1) Please state exact reason for me being blocked, the generic page answer to the question is completely useless to me. 2) You folks wanted Bernat cleaned up, well, I was cleaning him up, he is my ancestor, I don't know if he is your ancestor, but I take a certain interest in mine, and you folks wanted him cleaned up and I was doing that. It takes a while to, as some one else stated in the talk section the English was very bad in places. It takes a while to sort it out, especially if one is unsure what is being said. However I have a BA in History, and have spent some time studying this period, so I feel confident that the changes I was making made sense. 3)Unless you have a very good reason for blocking me I expect an appolgy John5Russell3Finley 03:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)



User:Nokilli
Hello, Quarl.

I have been having issues with User:Nokilli's deletion of warnings from his talk page. This user seems to have a very specific anti-circumcision bias, which compels him to constantly remove sourced information, written in a neutral tone, with borderline child pornagraphy styled prose. I will be spending some time over the next few days putting together the diffs in case needs escalation, but, as a neutral administrator, I am requesting if you could please take a look at his editing of his talk page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANokilli&diff=62074097&oldid=62061788

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANokilli&diff=62131619&oldid=62116114 (including comment)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANokilli&diff=62143116&oldid=62138391 (including obvious personal attack in last line)

And let me know what can be done. I am loathe to take further action, as I want to prevent any appearances of personal bias. This user has violated WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL, WP:POV, and WP:3RR on numerous occasions. Thank you -- Avi 12:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)



Articles for deletion/Nigga know technology
For the record, I disagree with G4. It's not for CSD'ed articles, and in general, I think deletion of this blog is not certain. I would like to ask you to undelete, and I will open a new AfD discussion. In the event you refuse, I intend to take it to DRV. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have undeleted and submitted to AFD at Articles for deletion/Nigga know technology 2 (I didn't notice until now that you said you wanted to open it, but I hope that doesn't matter - feel free to rewrite the nomination). —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-06 05:54Z 

Articles for deletion/Nigga know technology 2
Out of curiosity, who contested it? -- Samir  धर्म 05:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I see from the above. (sheepish) -- Samir   धर्म 05:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I want that article back!! I was told to come to wikipedia to read about the sites history and its gone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.251.124.38 (talk • contribs)

Articles for deletion/A Course in Miracles (book) now resumed
Dear Quarl, In case you may be interested, the nomination for deletion of the A Course In Miracles (book) article, in which you placed a comment, has been resumed by myself. The nomination had been closed after only two days, and thus instead of submitting a new nomination, I have reopened the old discussion. Thanks for your interest and comment(s) on this discussion thus far.

-Scott P. 11:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Harry A. Ironside
Just curious why you changed the date format on the Harry Ironside entry? Standard encyclopedic format is to spell out month, numerical date. Akradecki 18:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I changed it so that date preferences are activated, thus you can choose to display it in whichever date format you prefer (click on "Preferences", then "Date and Time".) —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-06 20:04Z 
 * Thanks for the explanation...I can go to sleep happy tonight...I learned something new today. Akradecki 20:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop man
Please stop putting your messages on my talk page because i on;y keep things that i am working on, on the talk page. I read what you said and i disagree with you 100%. Thank You Salman


 * I only wrote on your talk page once to notify you that I blocked you for 3RR. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-06 21:53Z 


 * Quarl, bro seriously I have been editing at wikipedia for a while now and I know how things work a round here. I like to keep my talk page as short as possible, I am not only deleting bad comments, I have also deleted some good comments in past because it was making my talk page look out of order. If someone wants to be nosey and wants to find out what people have been saying about my edits, then they are free as a bird to go to my history page and see other editor’s comments that I have deleted. This is my talk page and I will decide what should appear on it and what shouldn’t. Thank You Salman

Old AFD full
Well, to be honest, I started doing it when I started closing VFDs/AFDs, because I would never remember the name of the closing template. It stuck, though, so I never thought about changing it to something that made more sense to a common person. I do remember the name of the template now, so I'll just use "Previous AFD result" or something similar now. Tito xd (?!?) 06:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Archiving
Thanks for the tip, Quarl. Since you sent that, I have actually noticed a couple of archived pages so I've made a note to look at it. I had though historic pages are like an archive but they're more of an audit trail really. All the best. --Jack 06:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

oldafdfull
You mention scripts that automagically write the date? I'm intrigued. I have a script that enables me to put the tag on the page, but I could only get it so I entert the date manually. How do you do this? &mdash; 9  cds (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't have one (yet) but it would have to parse the date of the nomination, most likely from the history page of the AFD page. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-11 12:25Z 

Me? Sockpuppet?
It was just a joke, to turn that silly userpage into an article. I didn't realize it had been done before. Can you remove that now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nropsevolselawobmij (talk • contribs)

WP:RFA/Samsara


User:Samsara (talk • contribs) 21:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Unpaiktable
Hi, Sorry for the confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unpaiktable (talk • contribs)

Could you delete it? It's been AfDed... -TrackerTV 00:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Stephen somerville
Please don't contribute to the suppression of information regarding this matter. Stephen's work has been banned from society, and we've learned to accept that, but at the very least let this modest record of his life remain. Wikipedia is a repository of information for people, by the people. Please don't let the disease of censorship spread to this last vestige of free speech in the world. - H.P. Wilner http://www.salmonpoetry.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpwilner (talk • contribs)

bring back the mini mammoth! thankyou. Madeleine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.253.20.177 (talk • contribs)

Adminship
''Hello, Viridae. We haven't interacted directly before but I've looked at your contributions. I think you will make an excellent administrator; I'd like to nominate you at WP:RFA. You've participated in RFAs so you probably know how it works; more reading for nominees is at WP:GRFA. What do you say? :) —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-31 21:05Z ''
 * I am honoured! Thanks! The biggest problem I can see with an RfA for me would be that I have only been here a little over 3 months, so its up to you if you would be happy to support an RfA at this stage, go for it - otherwise give it a month or so. But a huge thankyou! Viridae Talk 23:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)