User talk:Ryan Norton/Archive8

Final Fantasy IV
Hi! I am currently working on the Final Fantasy article, and was wondering if there is anything else we should improve, otherwise, would you vote on whether or not it should be featured? Thanks so much! -Mike Judgesurreal777 04:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Microsoft
Just wanted to drop a note to commend your fine work on the Microsoft article in recent days! I'll give it a thorough review later this week, though at this stage I don't feel like I'm going to find much. :-) Warrens 05:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

CRM article
RN:

One of the things that I was trying to get rid of in the article was the 'Proponents say that ....' type phrases. This seems to be more of a POV type. There are white papers on the topic that discuss these items.

147.240.236.9 21:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

RN:

I specifically meant to include the items in the list in the 3rd paragraph to make them stand out. These are the items that need to be included in a good CRM program; my intention was to list them in a list.

147.240.236.9 21:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Why
Because there are too many articles, LoL! Seriously though, it's hard to concentrate on many articles and bring them up to standard, so most people pick a few and focus on those, I guess. I've been bad, and there's already a backlog in my article inbox. Sigh... easy does it, I guess. :-) Say, I've been meaning to tell you, it's great to see you back again—you returned while I was on a break, I think. Good to have you back ;-) — Encephalon 00:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Could you review this image for me
Image:MSInfoPath2003.jpg - I tried to find a softwarecover-type template but couldn't - are these not acceptable? Thanks Carnildo :). Just another star in the night T 00:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Unlike the cover of a video game, the cover of a piece of general software doesn't tell you much about the software. Since the images aren't under a free license, and don't provide much useful information, it's better not to use them on Wikipedia. --Carnildo 07:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Ron Karenga
I have been watching that article with interest from time to time. I'm curious to know, what's up there? Since these edit wars started, I googled him again (I originally heard of him when researching Kwanzaa) and have found some good sources and others not so good. Also many mirrors and clones of the wiki itself. However, the Dartmouth Review, which, as best as I can tell is a reliable, NPOV source has this article from 2001 and I think it's good. Perhaps we could model ours on it. Anyway, I like to do a lot of observing and talk paage dialog - I think more talk is better. With that thought in mind, where can I find a list of articles where more talk dialog might help. I'd love to pitch in that way. Merecat 08:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

re: protections
No problem. I'll take a look at both of them tomorrow. -Splash talk 13:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have just unsprotected Ron Karenga; we can see how things go. But reading Talk:Lolicon, things aren't ready there yet. -Splash talk 18:28, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Contributions
I noticed your link to my contributions history in your oppose vote and find myself a bit confused; was there something specific on that page that you object to, or do I just not edit enough in the main namespace? Essjay  Talk •  Contact 21:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Sorry it took me so long to get back to you. - I've been flat out :-) I very much appreciate your well wishes! - Ta bu shi da yu 12:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

DaGizza's RfA


Hi, thank you for supporting me in my RfA which passed with a tally of (93/1/2). If you need any help or wish discuss something with me, you are always welcome to talk to me. GizzaChat  &#169; 11:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:NPA
First of all, let me start by apologizing. I did not indeed my comment on Essjay's RfB to come off as a PA. The suggestion that he had not contributed enough because his articlespace contributes were "low" just hit a nerve for me. The comment I left is very uncharacteristic of my behavior on Wikipedia. I felt to urge to come to Essjay's defense because I too have been somewhat criticized for not doing "enough" article space work. I am primarily a vandal fighter. While I intended to work on psychology-related articles (hence the selection of my user name :-) ), RC patrol struck my fancy and became my primary task on WP. While writing articles is the whole point of this site, protecting such articles is also important so that WP become a more legitimate source of knowledge (let's face it, we are somewhat laughable in the greater academic community).  In closing, I wanted to say that I am sorry, but I hope you can now understand the point that I was trying to make (albeit, rudely).  Sincerely, Psy guy Talk 13:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words
I'm just tired of these kids trying to pass their PE teacher off as somebody of note. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Lolicon
You were involved with the protection of this page. Please review recent actions on both the talk and the protected article page. Thank you. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 23:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding your comments on WP:RFPP
 * I think you did the correct thing, sorry if I implied otherwise. I placed the note in spirit of full disclosure, while at the same time confident that whomever came along to look at it would have examined its history prior to making a decision.  Carry on, tut-tut, good show, hip-hip, cheerio my good man, etc.  brenneman  {L}  06:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Embrace & extend
Thanks. People have a tendency to take the "everyone knows" shortcut on this particular subject. The Bill Gates article talk page shows a minor dispute I had with an anon who, after much pressing for sources, gave a source that he obviously hadn't checked because it said exactly the opposite.

You might get a chuckle out of a hack I worked on a while ago. I don't recommend running it yourself because it's woefully out of date and based on a broken understanding of COM. Gazpacho 05:01, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Reversion on George W. Bush article
I didn't 'add' that paragraph. Apparently, it's been there for quite some time, and I merely questioned it's deletion. Thus far, Rhobite has not explained his actions on the article's talk page. I don't believe there's consensus for the deletion of the text. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 06:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Gusev crater chaos
Hi,

As You can see here: Gusev (crater), there are 2 Gusev craters, one on Mars, and one in Russia.

Some redirected russian page to Mars page and changed name of mars crater page to Gusev Crater.

Since You are an admin, could You please just make it as it was before.

Thanks, Ante Perkovic 11:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Autism epidemic
You expressed an opinion on this on the talk page last year. Your suggestion whcih was not bad was not follwoed. I listed the article for eletion, and shortly afterward as a result of a suggestion in the discussion, took the content, stripped out all non-verified material, POV, cruft, and anything that did not relate to incidence and made autism (incidence). Either or both of those, and the afd debate may interest you now. (For avoidance of doubt, the incidence article is not a direct replacement - prevalence is also relaevant, and autism (epidemiology) may also be a viable article into whcih to subsume or merge incidence and perhaps others, and arising as one possibility from a renaming of "epidemic". Regards.  Midgley 13:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Tupac Shakur
I updated the featured article candidate Tupac Shakur, to reflect yours and other reviewers' feedback. Thank you.SqlPac 17:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

PRC on WP:FARC
Thanks for voting on Featured article removal candidates/People's Republic of China. The objection you made about inline citations (WP:FOOTNOTEs) has been taken care of with the inclusion of nearly 30 footnotes. Please re-review the article, and make any necessary changes to your vote. Thanks, AndyZ t 15:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikitruth
Sorry if I went a little overboard with the trimming; my main priority was to make the article easy to read (and therefore easier to add to). Appart from commenting out that section, I didn't delete anything except the portmonteau image caption (which seemed like it had been added as a joke); I just split up long stretches of text with paragraph breaks. (Online, short paragraphs are usually more readable than long ones.  Cheers. Tlogmer Talk / Contributions 11:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I've gone through many featured articles adding paragraph breaks. =) (Er, I didn't realize the portmonteau line was yours; sorry. I thought it was a joke by the WikiTruth authors because a portmonteau must be a single word, not two, and because Wikipedia tends to mention when things are portmonteaus possibly more than any other source in the world =) . )  Anyway, I'm going to bed. Cheers. Tlogmer Talk / Contributions 11:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

You!
I went on break, came back, and you're back. Good to see :) Redwolf24  (talk) 02:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

A favor please
Hello friend, do you remember me? In the month of September 2005, your vote had made me an administrator. we all know that the life here is exciting and full of challenges. I would request you to please spare fem moments for me, and favor me with your comments and suggestions (here please) on my performance as a wikipedian. Let us continue to build the Better than the Best global encyclopedia. Thank you and regards. --Bhadani 10:26, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

TaisukeMaekawa
Pity it was snubbed, but thanks for making the effort anyway! &mdash; Matt Crypto 11:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Castleroid reborn
Hey, I noticed that you were the admin who deleted the Castleroid article. Well, it looks like the people who started it hijacked an article that used to be called "Non-linear exploration" (which survived an AfD under the title "Non-linear exploration") and turned it into a new Castleroid article. They've also hijacked the term Metroidvania as a redirect (which itself needs some more verifying) and are being very belligerent about any attempts to change it. Please look into this. Thanks! Luvcraft 16:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Aero
I don't want to pick a fight, but the phrase "parts of the similarity" strikes me as awkward. The original phrase was "The striking similarity to Mac OS X is purely coincidental, we're sure." I know what you're getting at -- they didn't find the whole interface similar, but this edit seems to not only move away from the quote but simply not read well. While I'm at it, I still don't think "Criticisms" is an apt title for this class of commentary. Imitation, flattery, and all that? -- Gnetwerker 01:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Your sig tag
Hi RN, can you modify your sig? You are using deprecated HTML font and small tags.

Change it from: Just another star in the night T

to:

Just another star in the night T

Just another star in the night T
 * Old rendering

Just another star in the night T
 * New rendering

Ta bu shi da yu 11:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Give me a sec... I'll sort out the colours. - Ta bu shi da yu 11:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Sigh, forget I asked... I can't override the colours :-( Ta bu shi da yu 11:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Studies related to Microsoft
The problem I have of including all studies related to Microsoft in the Criticism of Microsoft is that it can't note the studies that support Microsoft's position and don't actually criticise them. That's why I oppose the redirect to that page. MS release studies and pay for studies all the time, and I think the most appropriate place for them is on that page. - Ta bu shi da yu 11:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
, thank you you so much for validating my RfA! I am grateful for all the supportive comments, and have taken both the positive and constructive on board. If I can ever make any improvements or help out in any way, please let me know, ditto if you see me stumble! Thanks again for your much appreciated support.

 Dei zio  talk 18:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Michael Woodruff
The article Michael Woodruff has just become a featured article. Thanks you for your help in bringing it up to that level! Cool3 20:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Microsoft
The Criticism section of the Microsoft article looks pretty well sourced at the moment, but I'll take a look at it. My general impression is that it isn't very well-written, and the Criticisms of Microsoft article, last I looked at it, wasn't a very sophisticated analysis. Though I am going to be busy with real life for the next couple of months, I'll try to have a look. In any case, thanks for the heads-up, and for your good work on Wikipedia. -- Gnetwerker 23:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

DRM move problems
This move -- your work as I read the history -- has had the unfortunate effect of losing the long and illuminating discussion and history which went with the earlier article name. I'm an admin here too, but have never learned enough about the machinery behind the curtain, to be able to repair this sort of damage. It's also happened at symmetric-key algorithm at which a neatener has subsumed several articles and in do sdoing lost lots of meta comment and information. I may have to learn something, I guess... but in the meantime, till I have time, might I ask you to fix at least the losses at digital rights management. It's going to be a very much bigger topic than it has been, if only because of Sony/BMG's stupidities and the subsequent lawsuits, and because of the upcoming DRM which is supposed to be in the released version of Vista. We need all the back story we can retain. Thanks, ww 18:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't move anything - I just fixed the cut and paste move between the two DRM article names. Yet another lame sig I came up with T 18:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio???!!!
How does my page History of Microsoft look like copyvio????

Category:Anti-Semitic people
Vote They are attempting to close the +cat AGAIN, please vote to KEEP.