User talk:Satori Son/Archive 6



Previous AfD vote
Hi. You previously voted in an AfD for Tim Bowles. Would you please pop over to Articles for deletion/Tim Bowles (3rd nomination) and give us your input again? Thanks. --Justanother 20:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Recentchangeslinked
Usage is rather simple. An example is Special:Recentchangeslinked/User talk:Satori Son. All internal links (for which the target page can have a history) on the page will be listed. If you need to remind yourself of its usage, it is the Related changes link in the toolbox right below What links here in at least the default skin. Kevin_b_er 20:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

EL stuff
This removal and freezing of the page is going to cause chaos when it gets noticed. Several EL wars have been fought and the only even semi-acceptable solution was to leave in official links plus the DMOZ link. Now if we remove that, without coming up with some acceptable alternative, we're going to open up a whole new can of worms. Removing the text and freezing the page while the discussion goes on (and it's going to take a LONG while) is going to be horrible. I am seriously thinking I need a break from WP - I just don't want to have to deal with what is going to happen. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 23:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I absolutely agree with you and emphathize completely. I have only reverted the EL page back to the last stable version two times in 36 hours (and would not have done so again, even without the lockdown), but the previous edit war and accompanying debate is heading in an terribly wrong direction for Wikipedia. I'm trying not to get discouraged, but it is clear that the editors and admins in opposition are not the ones in the trenches every day slugging it out over spam links. It's a thankless task anyway - this just adds insult to injury.
 * At least know that your hard work and eloquence are greatly appreciated by me and other Project members. If you end up taking a Wikibreak, please come back soon. -- Satori Son 02:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your kind words. I really hope they come up with some alternative wording, whether it's DMOZ or not, I really don't care. Given the way I was spoken to in trying to maintain the status quo while the discussion took place, I will not be participating in it. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 11:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I saw that comment about you, and it was quite uncalled for. I might have encouraged you to just ignore it and come back to the discussion, but I'm not sure I will participate anymore either.  The discussion has become completely circular and unproductive.
 * And yes, it would be nice if at least some decent alternative could be found, but that seems less and less likely based on the most recent comments. -- Satori Son 12:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Puffle
Hi, many thanks for the comment on Puffle. Actually I agree with you, I thought the close was incorrect and normally I would take this to DRV. I didn't in this case because I was recently in a disagreement with the closing admin at his RfB and I did not want to give the appearance of a vendetta against him. However if you wanted to take it to DRV, I'd be delighted. Best, Gwernol 13:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I'll give it some time and see if anyone can possibly find some decent references. If not, I will definitely nominate it for a second AfD. -- Satori Son 13:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not spamming!
Hi,

You warned me for adding an external link to the page on "A man in full". But I have seen other pages on books (An artist in the floating world) that have external links sections that contain links to reviews (I added one there too but didn't get any nasty warning). I am aware that you use "no follow" tags in urls so I know that there is no advantage to be gained by linking for the sake of page rank. When I find good articles (and I have time) I come to wikipedia to see if they can be useful as external resources. I don't see what is wrong with that.

I don't appreciate being labeled a spammer. In particular receiving warnings like the one you sent me.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.98.157.37 (talk • contribs) 01:32, May 2, 2007 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, if you do not want to be labeled a spammer, please stop spamming Wikipedia. And the reason my warning was somewhat firm is because you already received a more polite, milder warning twelve days ago but chose to ignore it and continue to add external link spam.
 * The warning messages templates are specifically written to become progressively more firm, but it was not "nasty".
 * If, for some reason, this is your first time adding an inappropriate external link, then you should seriously consider registering an account and logging in. That way, you won't be blamed for the actions of previous users of your shared IP address. Have a good day. Satori Son 01:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I would like to know first of all is where it says that adding external links is spamming?

Second, I didn't ignore the previous message I received. I just did not know how to respond to it (I do know now). I do not believe that I was spamming then either. The page I was warned about contained a "Notable Drupal Sites" section to which I added Free Software Magazine. Free Software Magazine is a notable Drupal based website. When the website topdrupalsites.org was running FSM was constantly in the top 3, often it was number 1. The magazine has been around for 3 years and is all about free software which is what Drupal is. You tell me how that is spam.

I fail to see how it is okay for people to add review links to a page on one book (Artist in a floating world) but it is spamming to do it on another (A man in full). In fact, I will quote from Wikipedia's own section on external links "Links to be considered ... For albums, movies, books, and other creative works, links to professional reviews." . If you are going to have rules, stick to them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.98.157.37 (talk • contribs) 02:22, May 2, 2007 (UTC)


 * Your contributions to wikipedia consist mainly of adding external links and is considered  WP:Spam. Looking through your contributions as a whole, the majority seem to be external link related only. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm.  You're here to improve Wikipedia -- not just to funnel readers off Wikipedia and onto some other site, right? see Spam policy Hu12 02:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * And the website you linked to, illiterarty.com, does not host "professional reviews". It is a personal blog, which is prohibited, that also contains an objectionable amount of advertising.
 * And you have now been warned by a third editor for link spamming. Please respect our policies and guidelines. Thank you, Satori Son 02:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

So you just delete my response to the above. I had a look through some of the other stuff you deleted from this page and I can see that I'm not the only one who doesn't like the way you work. But you just delete anyone's complaints about the way you work.

So WP allows you to delete everything I post and I can't even complain about it because you just delete my complaints. Nice one! I guess if I come back tomorrow this won't be here either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.98.157.37 (talk • contribs) 19:50, May 2, 2007 (UTC)


 * What you placed here earlier was not a "response", it was angry venting only marginally on-topic. Wikipedia guidelines do not require us to keep unsigned, random comments from anonymous IP users on our own personal discussion pages.
 * And if I didn't receive a myriad of complaints here from spammers, POV pushers, vandals, and trolls, I wouldn't be a very productive member of this community. Editors have wide latitude over how to manage their own talk page, and we may decline to discuss issues with even registered users who are particularly uncivil.
 * Once again, my participation in this discussion is concluded, as there is no need for me to keep repeating myself. I'm truly sorry you feel slighted, and it was not my intent to personally offend you, but our content guidelines are very important. If I did not enforce them, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other editors and administrators who would. Please consider registering an account and contributing productively and in line with those guidelines. Thank you, Satori Son 21:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

ref messages on BLINKX discussion
I left 3 messages on the Blinkx discussion page (although they are anonymous they are clearly all from me as wikipedia tracks IPs)

Why can I not delete MY OWN MESSAGES??? You have reverted them claiming the action is vandalism.

The REASON I want to remove them is due to having been contacted by Autonomy's legal department. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.44.26.81 (talk) 15:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC).


 * I reverted your blanking of the Talk:Blinkx page for several reasons:
 * The removal of any comments, even your own, on an article talk page is strongly discouraged. See Talk page guidelines.
 * You did not just remove your own comments, you removed all of mine and another editor's as well. This is prohibited on article talk pages. See Talk page guidelines. But you already know that.
 * Blanking a page does not actually "delete" comments, just removes them from the top view. They are still available in the page history, and any site user can view and restore them at any time.  If I had not restored the page, another editor would have eventually.
 * But I understand your concerns, and I will try my best to help. Since you have legal liability issues, what you are most likely seeking is to have the entire talk page actually deleted, or at least the revisions of that page that potentially expose you to liability.  The ability to, and decision whether or not to, perform either of those tasks lies with users higher up the food chain than I. My suggestion is that you send an email to [mailto:oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org] explaining your situation and asking them for assistance.  If appropriate, they will assist you in deleting this material.
 * Sorry for the inconvenience, and good luck. -- Satori Son 16:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

User:1LINK-BD
Thanks for the note. I'll leave another message with them; the block log should already be transcluding usernameblock so the method of getting a new username is pretty obvious. If they can't or won't read the message, well, there's not much more we can do. ··coe l acan 20:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, obviously; the instructions in the block notice are pretty clear. Not even sure why they contacted me in the first place, but thanks for following up. -- Satori Son 12:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

John Lehmann list
You deleted the list of "Poets in Poems from New Writing 1936-1946 (1946)" from John Lehmann. How can you say this is 'unsourced'? The source is the book Poems from New Writing 1936-1946 from 1946 by John Lehmann. What more could be given as a source? Charles Matthews 20:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You are absolutely right - I made a mistake in my edit summary. Sorry.  I was going too fast and actually meant to say "remove unencyclopedic list", as in WP:UNENC - Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. But that article is no longer on my watchlist, and I'll be happy to leave it up to you and the other editors there to decide whether to leave the list in. Thanks and have a good one, Satori Son 23:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
I understand. I knew it wouldn't work from the start anyway.Mitchazenia 16:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Amira belly dancer
please justify your "delete" re amira belly dancer entry. Is it possible you have not seen attribution from paris match and Time ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drroberthtaylor (talk • contribs) 03:02, June 8, 2007 (UTC)


 * If you have references that you would like other editors to evaluate regarding the notability of the subject, please add them to the article and discuss them at the AfD debate. Thanks, Satori Son 03:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Ottawa Curling Club
I'm plowing a pretty lonely furrow with the cleanup there. If you could weed out anything you deem insignificant we would probably start to convince Earl Andrew that we're doing the right things. The website is already linked. Thanks!  Dei z  talk 14:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree! I just wanted to give them a chance to respond before I reverted the latest re-addition of the inappropriate material. If no comment from them in the next day or two, I'll take it out again myself so it's not all falling on you. Thanks for your hard work! -- Satori Son 14:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Request restore External Link
You recently removed my external link to www.irbuzz.blogspot.com Infrared Photography Buzz, presumably because it is built on a blog.

Please review the site and reconsider.

Although it is built on a blog, it is not structured as a typical personal daily blog. I provide information on infrared photography for anyone interested, especially beginners. My information is as good or better than any of the other external links, and I am not selling my photography. My site does not offer commercial print sales as some of the other links do.

I am currently offering a review of the new Sony H9 with Nightshot with my guest author planning 2 more parts to the review. I humbly submit that this article alone places my information much more current than the other links present in the external link list.

I appreciate your kind consideration.

Thank you,

Jerry Kneupper infraredbuzz@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerrykr (talk • contribs) 20:01, June 12, 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Mr. Kneupper, and thank you for contacting me. While I am still not sure such a blog meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria set forth in WP:External links, I have restored the link I removed from Infrared photography. I'll leave it to editors more familiar with the specific topic to determine whether the website is so unique and valuable than an exception to the guideline should be made for it.
 * Also, might I please make a request of you? Would you please start adding substantive content to our free encyclopedia? Since you started in April, all you have done thus far is to add external blog links to four articles.  This project depends on knowledgeable experts like you to add text and edit articles, not just work offsite and link there.
 * Thanks for your courtesy, and please consider my request. -- Satori Son 11:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Editing
I'm afraid it was not me who editted the articles - we use a communal computer and someone else has been doing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.203.181.91 (talk • contribs) 13:03, June 13, 2007 (UTC)


 * Just ignore any messages that do not pertain to your editing. In the future, you may avoid such issues by creating an account and logging in under a personal username.  -- Satori Son 19:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

R&R Report Writer citation blatant advertising?
Hello, I had left a request for review for the topic "R&R Report Writer" on another page which you said was no longer active. I'm interested in finding out why the topic in question was tagged as advertising and how it could be fixed.

Regards, Chris Strasser cstrasser [at] livewarepub [dot] com


 * I'll help as much as I can. First, I need whatever information you have.  What is/was the exact title of the article? Has it been deleted, or just tagged as potential advertising? Did you receive a message regarding it?
 * Any and all information you have will be helpful in determining what exactly has happened and why. -- Satori Son 19:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I don't have any idea of who added the entry to wikipedia (it could have been me many years ago) or who tagged it as advertising. The article was under "R&R Report Writer" and a user TipTreeGirl apparently tagged it as advertising. I can't find any information on her. The page that identifies the issue is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tiptreegirl

Regards, Chris Strasser


 * Good – that was exactly the information I needed. I see now that the article was deleted by an administrator on March 2, 2007.  See the log entry here.
 * There were two reasons given for the deletion:
 * The article was deemed to be "blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article." For more information, please read Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion - G11: Blatant Advertising.
 * The article did not contain an assertion of notability that would meet the inclusion criteria of Notability (organizations and companies). In general, a company, service, or product must have been the subject of non-trivial coverage by reliable, third-party published sources.
 * I do not know anything about R&R Report Writer, so I do not know if an article can be recreated that meets that notability threshold. If it is recreated by someone at some point, it will need to be written not only in a neutral and unbiased manner, but it will also need citations to sources that establish sufficient notability. For example, has the product been reviewed by a prominent industry publication?  Has it received non-trivial coverage by a nationally distributed periodical? If no such sources are provided, the article would likely be deleted again at some point.
 * I hope I have provided the information you need. I know our policies and jargon can be somewhat confusing, so please let me know if you have any further questions whatsoever. -- Satori Son 20:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for the update. Is there any way to see what the original article said about the product? There have been reviews over the years in various publications (although not recently, since we're small), so I might be able to write something that was more "academic" in tone.

Regards, Chris


 * I will request that the former contents of the article be posted to my subpage at User:Satori Son/Sandbox. Once it's there, I will notify you.
 * Also, you should seriously consider creating a username and logging in. It gives you several advantages, among them being much more easy to contact on-Wiki.  If you're interested in doing so, please read Help:Logging in and Username policy. Thanks, Satori Son 19:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Satori
When I posted the links, I had hoped that they would be viewed as contributions of a complimentary nature to the original wiki posting. I do not mean to go against rules.

Thank you for the invitation to contribute. I have a couple of ideas, now I must see if I have the writing skills to make it happen. ;^)

Small steps first, before any big ones.

(how about the other removed links???)

Again thanks for your kind consideration.

Best Regards,

Jerry

famous hoax article
Question. There was a famous wikipedia hoax article about a fictitious war with Canada for Michigan’s upper peninsula. I don’t remember how I came across it. Can anyone direct me to that page? --Billwsu 03:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * See User:Hanger65/Upper Peninsula War. -- Satori Son 04:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Rambutan
Thanks for reverting this.--Rambutan (talk) 06:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Lands of Lore 2: Guardians of Destiny
From Me 85.27.151.83 I have agreed to post a link to the materiale on a third party website and a mention of the link because wikipedia is not a howto guide. Please let me do so, lands of lore 2 page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.27.151.83 (talk • contribs) 15:37, June 19, 2007 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to say that I have solved the problem. Regards Mr_Dead_Meat

User talk:85.27.151.83 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search


 * [edit] Your edits to Lands of Lore 2: Guardians of Destiny
 * You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lands of Lore 2: Guardians of Destiny. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. -- Satori Son 15:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

From Me 85.27.151.83 I have agreed to post a link to the materiale on a third party website and a mention of the link because wikipedia is not a howto guide. Please let me do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr dead meat (talk • contribs) 15:52, June 19, 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. I'll leave it up to other editors to evaluate the link, but thanks for not edit warring any more. Good luck, Satori Son 19:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Rationales:)
Thanks ShakespeareFan00 14:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

R&R
did someone send you that page already, if not I will email.DGG 19:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No, not yet. Email would be great, thanks! -- Satori Son 20:49, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Film rationale
HI Satori -that rationale is very good. Its a great idea -so much easier -I'd suggest we only have one though -too many templates are too confusing. If you like you can moderate my template to incorporate details of your rationale. I have also creatd one for dead film bios - Template:Filmbiorationale ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦  "Expecting you"   Contribs 15:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Did I get it all?
I had some trouble digging through there to figure out what all should be back on that page.  K u k i ni  hablame aqui 00:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, what a mess, but it looks like you got everything. Thanks for the timely application of the mop! -- Satori Son 00:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That's pretty much why anyone has one anyway, no? Cheers,  K u k i ni  hablame aqui 00:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Your comments earlier
This is your message from a week ago:

"Chris —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soundpro99 (talk • contribs) 01:25, June 10, 2007 (UTC).

I went to your talk page to respond there, but after reading your previous messages from others it appears this issue is more complicated than I thought. After I get a chance to look into it a little more, I'll respond fully at User talk:Soundpro99 or User talk:Ccarfagno (no use filling up RJASE1's talk page while he's unavailable). And thanks for filing the name change request. Trust me, since your company's name is "Sound Professionals", it was only a matter of time before an admin saw your "Soundpro" username and blocked you until you changed it. -- Satori Son 01:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC) "

I haven't seen a response.....when you get a change, I would really appreciate it. Thank you very much! I would prefer the ccarfagno account if you don't mind.

Chris


 * Sorry, I have been unable to locate your new username. Were you at one point? What about ? The name change request is really confusing.
 * I assume you've probably just created a new name as Secretlondon suggested. Please log into that account, respond here, and sign your comment with four tildes ( ~ ). Thanks, Satori Son 14:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Zi Wei Dou Shu external link
Hi Satori Son,

How are you doing? I was the one who made a big deal about the external links on Chinese Astrology. I observe a current external link edit on Zi Wei Dou Shu page's external links which I believe was not made totally appropriately by Hu12.

As you might remember, Hu12 archieved my call for consensus in the Chinese Astrology discussion page and I believe if I make any complaints, he would do the same to my call for consensus.

I believe he has a bias on this subject because of what he kept and what he deleted.

1. He kept a site with sole purpose of selling one book. 2. He kept the free online computation link that requires all users to register to even get any answers. Also, I have observe wrong information provided by the site. 3. He delete the free computation link (destinyandluck.com) that I already defended in my Call for consensus in Chinese Astrology page (see the archieve), which should be kept instead of the purpleking.com site.

Would you please take a look at the links that he removed and the links that he kept to see if he has made the deletion correctly based on WP:EL?

Thanks!

Wayne8888 (I forgot my password for Wayne888, so I use this now) --Wayne8888 17:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I've posted my initial thoughts over at Talk:Zi wei dou shu, but unfortunately I do not agree with you on this. I know you have been frustrated with your Wikipedia experiences thus far, and I sympathize with you, I really do. I just can't see how those two links meet the inclusion requirements of WP:EL. (The links that remain in the article may not either, but I have not looked at those.)
 * Of course, that is just my opinion, and I'm certainly more than willing to listen to the opinions of others, especially someone who has some experience evaluating sources for Chinese astrology and divination topics. Over at Talk:Zi wei dou shu, I've posted some options for you to get some third-party input. Best of luck to you, Satori Son 19:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've suggested on the Zi Wei Dou Shu talk page a suitable replacement for the amazon and adsense riddled destinyandluck.com calculator. --Hu12 02:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hay
Hay alfrd pakr is cool dont diss hime --Alfred Packer man 20:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Please stop vandalizing articles and images. Thanks, Satori Son 20:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

excuse me?
I did NOT vandalize his "talk" page. I was "talking" on his "talk" page. I believe that's what it's for. I simply left him a message in response to his egregious vandalism of a 9/11 tragedy page. HIS ACTIONS were vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.231.234 (talk • contribs) 00:20, June 28, 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right, that other user's edit was vandalism, but this one of yours was as well. And please read Civility and No personal attacks. I appreciate your passion, but this project only works if we all treat each other with respect and courtesy. Thank you, Satori Son 00:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Tompkins Table
Hello there. I see you have tagged the page with my table on it. This page was put up there by someone else a few years ago to include the information about results at Cambridge University which are published by The Independent every June. I am just getting ready to sign off on the 2007 figures.

If you need a reference to last year's publication it is http://education.independent.co.uk/news/article1205974.ece

The 2005 table is similarly at http://education.independent.co.uk/news/article302905.ece

Do you need anything else from me to verify it - and should there be a link through to the Independent publication?

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Tompkins (talk • contribs) 17:46, June 28, 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing this; I have added the 2006 cite as an imbedded footnote and removed the unreferenced template.
 * The article does, however, still contain a significant amount of unsourced information, especially in the paragraph following the table. Much of it appears to be original research, which is prohibited in articles, but perhaps the analysis there has been published by a reliable, third-party source. I simply do not know.
 * With that in mind, you may wish at some point to suggest further references at Talk:Tompkins Table. That way, editors who are more familiar with the article and its topic can incorporate them as appropriate. Thank you again, Satori Son 19:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Rick Roderick
A "" template has been added to the article Rick Roderick, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Lilac Soul 14:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've only edited this article to remove linkspam, but thank you for the notice. -- Satori Son 14:10, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

sock puppet vandalism
FYI: Marketingsupport has a new sock puppet account, NoMoBs, and is continuing with vandalism.--RandomStuff 19:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I just saw that possibility, too. I went ahead and added that new user to the COI report and placed 3RR warnings on all three user talk pages.  If edit warring continues, I'll file a checkuser request. Thanks for keeping on top of this. -- Satori Son 19:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

NoMoBS is NOT a sockpuppet account for Marketingsupport
I am a separate individual who happens to share the same corporate IP address as Marketingsupport. I have made no reversions that I'm aware of and I have violated no rules. Unfortunately, I can't seem to leave the same message for RandomStuff... — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoMoBS (talk • contribs) 20:53, July 13, 2007 (UTC)
 * I did not leave you a message warning against sockpuppetry, I left you a message warning against edit warring, which you have been doing. Please stop. -- Satori Son 14:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

No vandalism
I have reviewed the vandalism rules and nothing I've edited constitutes vandalism. I have deleted unsourced opinions and hyperbole that are absolutely not NPOV. This website is supposed to be encyclopedic and verifiable. You should appreciate my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoMoBS (talk • contribs) 20:59, July 13, 2007 (UTC)
 * I did not leave you a message warning against vandalism, I left you a message warning against edit warring, which you have been doing. Please stop. -- Satori Son 14:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Satori
Hi Satori, im guessing your a mediator for the site. i have never really been on wikipedia before but i understand that my article holds no relevence. please delete it if it is against the rules. sorry for causeing any trouble.

Rebecca --


 * No trouble at all, and please don't be discouraged. Many, many new users end up having their first article deleted; it's really just part of the learning process.  I really hope you stay around and enjoy further contributions to our project – we need all the volunteers we can get. All the best, Satori Son 13:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Biltong
Dear Sir/s As we here tell the truth, about what is what with this product, you may contact me at any time, as what I read on this site is not the truth

Kind regards

Hilmar Hambloch

http://www.biltong-international.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biltongman (talk • contribs) 11:29, July 19, 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Mr. Hambloch, and thank you for contacting me. I apologize if the Biltong English-language Wikipedia article contains inaccuracies, but I have not spent much time editing it myself.  In fact, my only involvement has been to remove external link spam and revert vandalism, although I did add a fact tag to one unsourced statement.
 * The only reason I left a note on your user Talk page was to inform you of our polices regarding "edit warring" in articles; see Three-revert rule. Even if your edits are neutral and accurate, you are not allowed to make the same edit over and over again. Our policies are designed to encourage discussion and debate so that a consensus can be reached. If you would have continued to edit war, you would have been blocked from editing by a site administrator.
 * My suggestion is that you take your concerns to Talk:Biltong. Discuss the inaccuracies you have found, and please provide a reliable source for the correct information. I think you'll find that once you provide solid published sources for the information you wish to add or correct, most editors here are very reasonable. That being said, please don't hesitate to contact me again if you feel another editor is not handling things appropriately. Good luck and best regards, Satori Son 14:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion on the Social change article?
Hi Satori Son. I'm glad to see you taking an interest in this article. I recently suggested to User:SiobhanHansa that the article might be deleted, but she felt that it could be a real topic, and might be in need of stubbifying. Your opinion would be welcome. At present the article seems kind of content-free. Do you have any suggestion for what we might do next? EdJohnston 19:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I just stumbled across it working on my anti-spam patrol (which I noticed you were already on top of) and just couldn't leave that horribly written paragraph in there.  I'll be glad to take a further look and will reply at User talk:EdJohnston. Thanks, Satori Son 23:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the spamstar! I agree that Social change needs rewriting or deletion. It's not currently at the top of my list, though. Any input on what to do with it would be welcome. Someone could check a couple of intro college textbooks for Sociology 101 and see if it's a widely used concept with generally-agreed meaning. Since the article is completely unsourced, another option would be to stubbify it. EdJohnston 15:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Your removal of link on Indian amercian page
Hello, Please don't take this as any criticism, just curiosity. I noticed you removed a citation link from the Indian American page, please specify which part of WP:EL it violated. I could be wrong and may have misread WP:EL, but I don't see any conflict. Respond on Indian American discussion page where I've made a comment. Thank you.--Kathanar 20:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - I will be happy to respond over there. Thanks, Satori Son 22:07, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Bruce Springsteen
Thank you for monitoring this situation.

I've reverted as much as I can without running afoul of the rules. David in DC 20:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. I have filed a 3RR report. -- Satori Son 02:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Random Smile!


WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. -WarthogDemon 02:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Very cool - thanks! — Satori Son 02:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

sorry
but much of what I printed is substantiated. I will have to rewrite and cite articles, particularly critiques of the serologic testing.

by the way, much of what is on these sites now is unsubstantiated and biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.195.235.111 (talk • contribs) 03:26, August 18, 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, providing reliable sources is a good start, but statements like "Dick Cheney is criminally insane, and must be impeached" are completely inappropriate for this project. Please read the official website policies Neutral point of view and Verifiability.
 * I understand and can appreciate your passion, and I'm sure there are plenty of forums and blogs that would be happy to hear your opinions, but we are writing an encyclopedia. -- Satori Son 03:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

888 (manga)
I deleted part of the content from 888 the manga because it was a quote from a single review source that disparaged the content of the manga. I could have quoted other review sources that praised the book, but I don't think a review is an adequate description for what should be an encyclopedic page that barely contains any information to begin with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.64.231 (talk) 04:32, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
 * The section you removed seemed neutrally written and was well referenced. If you would like to add an equally brief summary of a review by another reliable source, that would be appropriate. Thank you, Satori Son 04:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Clarification
Dude, Seriously i am tired of reading TOS and these made up answers. My question is simple: why not allow Weblo sites if they are created by thousands of members and fan sites are 100% dedicated to celebrities. I am not trying to bring up the argument that whatever is on other pages should be deleted but I would like to know your straightforward feedback. If IMDB movie database is included as external link on almost all celebrity pages (so dont give me the "perhaps some pages have links that should be deleted) what do you guys based yourselves on specifically when it comes to deleting links. I am aware Weblo is tagged for speedy deletion because of some activity from Weblo themselves but is that a reason to penalize the work of thousands of members just as dedicated as Wiki writters? If you ask me sites like askmen.com, imdb.com are far more commercial which is why it does not make sense.

What do you think?

We, the Weblo Community, would like to have Weblo removed from the Speedy Deletion so let me know what can be done so our sites are not considered as spam.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.70.63.174 (talk) 14:55, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your query. I did not delete the Weblo article any of the three times it was deleted, so I am not really in a position to tell you exactly why that happened.
 * But I would be happy to point you in the right direction. To contest the speedy deletion of the article, please file a request at Deletion review. In your request, please explain specifically why you think Weblo meets the inclusion criteria of Notability (web). Provide citations to reliable sources. Usually, comparing it to other websites that have articles is not persuasive. Good luck, Satori Son 15:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

RfA
 Khukri would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Khukri to accept or decline the nomination. A page will be created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/, if you accept the nomination. Once created, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

You have absolutely impeccable timing (or you're psychic). I've been very seriously considering this over the past few days. I'll drop you an email to discuss. Thanks! -- Satori Son 16:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hehe, no probs look forward to receiving it and glad you are considering. Khu  kri  16:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * It's live! Wish me luck, and thanks again for everything. -- Satori Son 18:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I doubt you need luck, you've certainly earned it! Good choice Khukri ;)--Hu12 19:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words and support! -- Satori Son 14:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Dragon*Con
Glad you liked it! And as for the top 10, yes, I'd like to further improve it. I've got a scratch copy at User:Elonka/Top-10. Feel free to go in and edit. :) --Elonka 01:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

About Granada Hills High School
It's kinda hard to find 3rd party evidence about the school's corruption. The school is administration is directly controlled and funded by the Schwartzenegger Administraition. Any published articles regarding the school have been destroyed, peoples lives have been ruined for speaking out against them and its hard to post any evidence against them. I spent years trying to get the Los Angeles Times to investigate the curruption accusations but they were always reluctant since the school spent millions of dollars on a team of lawyers. I worked there for twenty years, I went to school there and everyone in my family went there, and i can tell you the school has gone down the drain for corporate profits and they cover it up with propaganda and lies. There are easily accessible documents from the school that show in black and white all the crimes of the school administration but are obviously not published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.93.96.62 (talk • contribs) 02:14, September 5, 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking the time to explain your position. I will copy this comment over to Talk:Granada Hills High School and reply there. -- Satori Son 12:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

From Eltigremania concerning the CLub Penguin Article
Hey thanks! I am kind of new here and could use the help around! Thanks for telling me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eltigremania (talk • contribs) 04:44, September 5, 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for being so understanding. And I'm glad you're not discouraged - the Club Penguin article has been problematic and really needs more editors who are willing to work within Wikipedia guidelines.  Have a good one! -- Satori Son 21:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar


You deserve this. -- Shark face  217  04:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much! I know that barnstars have kind of fallen out of favor with some experienced editors, but I always like to hear my efforts are appreciated. Thanks again, Satori Son 21:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Chris Stacey page
I am Chris Stacey

I am a soap opera expert and this is my career I have personally written it is this OK please don't delete the page

Everything written is factual correct

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soapstacey (talk • contribs) 21:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Mr. Stacey,
 * I'm not sure why you are contacting me specifically, but I will do my best to help. I see where you have created an article about yourself at Chris Stacey. Since creation, another editor (not me) has tagged it as meeting the criteria for speedy deletion. Specifically, that editor believes the subject of the article does not meet the inclusion criteria set forth at Notability (people).
 * At some point, a site administrator will visit the article and decide whether to delete it. I see you have placed a hangon tag on the article, but you will need to do more than that. Specifically, the assertions of notability in the article, such as the television appearances, need to be verified by reliable, third-party published sources. That is, you will need to add hyperlinks to such things as magazine or newspaper articles that confirm the information. Links to your own website, or other things you have written, will not be sufficient.
 * Remember, however, that you have a conflict of interest regarding this article. The best course of action is probably for you to avoid editing the article itself, and instead add suggested improvements and references to the discussion page at Talk:Chris Stacey.
 * Good luck, and please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions. -- Satori Son 21:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA was successful
Congratulations, I have closed your RfA as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana (talky) 16:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yayyy!!! Congratulations & welcome to the team :) - A l is o n  ☺ 17:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I had no idea how stressful that whole process could be. I'm looking forward to getting back to actually contributing (instead of displaying disturbingly compulsive behavior by checking the tally of my RfA every hour...). -- Satori Son 17:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, you call that stressful? Check out  mine.  ;)  Yours was a casual stroll in the park, with bunny rabbits and butterflies and rainbows. But yes, congratulations, well done!  --Elonka 18:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well done mate, n all the best from my holidays. Khu  kri  21:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Now get to work.... Cheers, -- Hirohisat Kiwi 00:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks with 80.70.22.121
Thanks for tracking down that IPvandal. Didn't notice I dropped that trailing '1' until after you had the block in place. CzarB 07:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem - I just traced it back from the cleanup in you contrib history. Keep up the good work! -- Satori Son 14:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey
I keep trying to put on zombie diaries as a zombie film - please put it up. Also realise 28 days and weeks later are not zombie films. Please make note of that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.14.45 (talk) 09:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Trying to add an entry or clean up something you disagree with is one thing. Deleting large sections of the article, as you did here and then here, could be considered vandalism. Please try to be more careful in the future. Thanks, Satori Son 14:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * As far as The Zombie Diaries movie goes, that is currently being discussed at Articles for deletion/The Zombie Diaries. -- Satori Son 14:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Rock to It
Hi, Thank you for redirecting Rock to It to Fast Lane, I tried to get it deleted but that was proving troublesome. --  ¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤   14:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hopefully it will stick. Let me know if have any other problems. -- Satori Son 14:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
For reverting the vandalism to my talkpage - I found a typo when reviewing it, so it was further "improved". LessHeard vanU 09:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You're very welcome. Mine got hit as well, so more than happy to do a little cleanup. See ya around. -- Satori Son 13:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Hey there, Congratulations on becoming an administrator. Obviously, it is unlikely that you will know how to use the tools at first and mistakes are bound to happen, so if you would like to practice using them, with step by step guides to follow, in an environement that you can do no harm in, then why not pop down to the new admin school where we have pages on blocking, deleting and restoring pages, protecting and unprotecting pages and viewing deleted pages. Once again, congratulations and best of luck with the tools.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  16:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

AIV Report
Hey, Sorry for wasting your time with that one IP. I was under the weird thought process that it had edited after the final warning, I apologize for backing up AIV. --Amaraiel 17:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't worry about it at all. You are doing a great job and I know how crazy things can get when you're in the thick of it. -- Satori Son 17:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for deletion
As far as your decline over my request to protect the article Dimitris Spanoulis is concerned, i suggest you think it over again since the same guy that was removing the template has been vandalizing my talk page, has requested articles i created be deleted and has vandalized pages i have contributed to. Many thanks. Sergiogr 21:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it looks like another administrator has already semi-protected the article, and while I disagree with his decision, I will abide by it.
 * But since the person has been vandalizing your talk page and engaging in personal attacks, that IP can be blocked, which I see another administrator has already done as well.
 * Sorry you had to put up with this, and let me know if you have any further problems with these guys. Thanks, Satori Son 21:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:AutoNation logo.gif
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:AutoNation logo.gif. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 10:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ Done. -- Satori Son 19:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Candy Bouquet
Didn't know it went through a AfD. I saw the history started with McEntire (founder of Candy Bouquet) and it screamed advert. I have rewritten parts of it and wanted to know your thoughts. Also, where can one see if an article went through an AfD so I can avoid tagging/wasting time :) ? Spryde 18:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * In this case, there was no way for you to know, so you certainly didn't do anything wrong. Since the article had already been speedy deleted since the AfD (which should not have happened), there was no history for you to see. I have restored the deleted revisions so now the history is complete, and I will also put a note on the talk page.
 * The only reason I knew was because I recognized it: I !voted "Delete" in the original discussion at Articles for deletion/Candy Bouquet. In my opinion, the subject still does not meet the notability requirements of WP:CORP, but a second AfD would be required to delete it at this point.
 * Anyway, keep up the great work with the CSD tagging. Thanks, Satori Son 19:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh. As Wikipedia turns... Spryde 19:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for supporting my recent successful RfA. I hope you've been enjoying your new mop. I've tested mine a couple of times already with no major screw-ups that I know of. See you around. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 03:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Need a third party opinion
Another editor Rita Skeeter is adding a whole bunch of articles surrounding PerfectDisk Competitors and such. Does that seem suspicious to you? Something about it is raising a flag for me. Spryde 15:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, the first thing that jumps out is that all four new articles they have created today are eligible for speedy deletion under WP:CSD. I don't want to bite the newcomer and just delete them right off, so I will leave a note on their talk page for now. Thanks for the heads up.  -- Satori Son 16:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Why is everyone so jumpy about defrag utilities? Why would PerfectDisk not be notable, but Diskeeper is regarded as notable? Is the Scientology link to Diskeeper corporation the only notability criterion?

My biggest problem at present is finding suitable references to JkDefrag other than its own web site and web-based reviews. If Open Sourced GPL software is not mentioned in the mainstram media, does that make it less notable. The notability guidelines are a bit vague and I'd appreciate some assistance. RitaSkeeter 16:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry to jump on you but I just keep on the lookout for spam and try to keep it out. I could go either way and wanted a third party to look at it. WP:SOFTWARE contains the criteria used to judge if software should have an article or not. Spryde 17:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, first of all, nothing against defrag utilities in particular. As part of his/her volunteer work here at the project, Spryde reviews dozens of new articles a day, in virtually every subject. As an administrator who is active in speedy deletion decisions, they were just asking me for advice.
 * Regarding the nature of the sources, I would suppose that the programs in question don't have to be mentioned in the mainstream media, but at least by a source that is "regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand." And to answer your specific question with Diskeeper... yes, the controversy covered by Wired certainly helps.
 * Right now, it looks to me like PerfectDisk is a keeper: lots of sourcing, including PC Magazine and Windows IT Pro Magazine. The Vopt and O&O Defrag articles are looking better, but still need a little work.
 * JkDefrag, however, may not be notable enough: only one trivial mention in PC Magazine. For your reference, I have restored the deleted version to User:Spryde/JkDefrag. When you are done reviewing it, please place a db-userreq tag at the top. Let me know if you need anything else. -- Satori Son 20:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Mother Teresa
Yes, I am sorry, I didn't mean it against you, but looking back it does look like I am refering to your edit... I will clarify things on the MT discussion page... S facets 22:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Joling & Gordon Over De Vloer
Where is the page Joling & Gordon Over De Vloer? See also Power of 10 and The Mole. Liveshop 16:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Liveshop and thanks for your inquiry. That article was "speedy deleted" for the following reason: WP:CSD - An article that does not state why its subject is important or significant.
 * If you wish to recreate the article, please make sure it meets our inclusion threshold for notability of the subject, else it will likely be deleted again. Most often, this is established by showing that the subject has received non-trivial coverage by reliable, third-party published sources.  Thank you, Satori Son 19:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

More vandalism from
Hi. I've just reverted some sneaky vandalism to Dyslexia by 209.7.107.24. I was going to put a notice on their Talk page but I think it'd probably go unnoticed. The final message there was for a six month block, placed there 6 months and 1 day ago, by Gwernol. So it would seem that the vandal is going right back to their old tricks. (I'll be watching their contributions, to be sure.) I visited Gwernol's page to let him know but since he's on wikibreak and you acted in lieu for the last message someone left him regarding vandalism, I thought I'd let you know instead directly. (I hope this isn't an imposition.) How should I proceed now? - ObfuscatePenguin 20:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello, and no imposition at all; I'm happy to help. First of all, please always leave a warning template on their talk page, even if you don't think they'll read it. You can find a full list of the available warning templates at Template messages/User talk namespace. In this case, I have left a uw-vandalism2.
 * If they vandalize again, you can leave a uw-vandalism3 or uw-vandalism4 depending on how blatant the vandalism is. Once they vandalize after receiving a final "level 4" warning, simply report them at Administrator intervention against vandalism. I or whichever administrator is monitoring it at the time will block the IP address from editing.
 * For more information on how we deal with vandalism, please read Vandalism. And, as always, don't hesitate to ask me or any other administrator for any help at all. And a good place to find out where to report various problems can be found at Requests for administrator attention. Thanks and have a good one, Satori Son 03:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. ObfuscatePenguin 14:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

That dude vandalized TKE, Pike, GSU and Pi Kappa Phi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PikeBoy (talk • contribs) 13:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Blocked indef. Thanks. — Satori Son 13:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

block to User:72.4.71.66
Hi... thanks for blocking this IP. I did a Whois on the IP and discovered it belongs to a school. Would you consider switching to a softblock and shortening the length of the block? The vandalism will probably stop at 10:00 when the student has to move on from computer lab to his next class. :) --Rrburke(talk) 13:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, the account has a long history of blatant vandalism. My block was its sixth this calendar year. The last two were for 1 month each, so 3 months is not really out of line.
 * And it should be a soft block: existing registered user accounts are unaffected. I have also added a schoolblock template with detailed instructions for anyone who needs to edit from that IP but doesn't yet have a user name.
 * I just really don't feel comfortable changing the duration of the block at this point. My experience is that when there is a school where the faculty has taken no measures to monitor students' online activities or prevent Internet abuse, the vandalism from there will continue to be a significant problem. I hope you agree, but I'm certainly willing to discuss further. — Satori Son 14:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Bebi (Dragon Ball)
I put a speedy template on it because we have a Bebi redirect already. Why is Bebi (Dragon Ball) needed? There are a bunch of other very redundant Dragon Ball-related redirects I'd like to see deleted such as: Son Goku (Dragonball), Son Goku (Dragon Ball Z), Goku (Dragon Ball), Goku (DBZ) — the only shortcut needed for his main article is Goku, the rest are superfluous and will most likely never be a useful typing hit on Wikipedia. This is understandable? Can you get rid of these? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Have you looked into this matter? Maybe you missed this thread. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Sesshomaru, and thanks for following up. It's not that I think the remaining Dragon Ball redirects are "needed", I'm just not sure they qualify for deletion under the WP:CSD criteria for redirects.
 * As you know, I have already deleted Bebi (Dragon Ball GT), and I just deleted two more of the above, but I don't see any harm in keeping the more basic ones for now. Most importantly, it helps keep them from being recreated again by someone. — Satori Son 17:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFPP
Please note that when you respond to a request for protection you should use one of the RFPP templates so the bot can recognize that certain items have been addressed. --  tariq abjotu  06:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I couldn't find the one for that; do you know which one the bot uses for completed edits to protected pages? -- Satori Son 11:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Doh! - should have checked your wikilink above. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. -- Satori Son 11:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

My talk page
You protected my talk page because I put some silly CSS there to hide it. But, I actually removed this myself before three other people showed up to do so. It was only there for 8 minutes, and it was in response to the scary sounding comcast whois boilerplate which had just previously arrived. I thought only the person who put that boilerplate would ever see my hidden page, but then they went to the noticeboard to call others over. In short: I know hiding pages with CSS is bad, I undid it before you even protected it, so please unprotect my talk page. Thanks. 76.103.204.210 11:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough - done. -- Satori Son 11:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It is still protected... did you forget or is something broken? 76.103.204.210 12:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh... that's weird. Tried again and looks good. Sorry. -- Satori Son 12:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. Thanks for cleaning up the Project Zero page! 76.103.204.210 11:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll keep an eye on it and most likely WP:PROD it soon. -- Satori Son 11:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

JkDefrag
Please could you have a look at the JkDefrag article if you have some time, and advise me if there are any obvious weaknesses I could fix. Thanks in advance! --RitaSkeeter 20:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Based on the discussion at Articles for deletion/JkDefrag, it looks like other editors are satisfied with the article, so there are no obvious weaknesses.
 * As other published sources cover the subject, you should add those sources to the article, but no major work is needed at this point. Have a good one, Satori Son 20:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Why?
Why am i being warned? i am just putting up what i have heard from people that work with those companies, and those who have heard it themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.246.196.96 (talk) 20:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You probably didn't know, but Wikipedia has very strict policies about such information. Please read:
 * Biographies of living persons
 * Verifiability
 * No original research
 * Your edits here and here are prohibited by those policies.
 * Sorry our warnings to you were so firm, but I'm sure you can understand the liability Wikipedia could incur if we allowed such edits to be made without providing a very reliable source. Whether the information is true or not, it absolutely must have a published source.
 * If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. -- Satori Son 20:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

redirect to Splender
I have found an article in Modern Drummer that was written about Mr. Slutsky. http://www.marcslutsky.com/mdArticle03SM.jpg It is a link on his website. Is this acceptable? I also found his television appearances, with dates. He is also searchable on AOL video (a site referenced on Ben Jelen's Wikipedia page that wasnt contested so Im assuming its a valid external link) How long do I have to wait until I can recreate a page on this drummer? Thank you for your help. Abkagan 04:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)Abkagan


 * Unfortunately, since there is an established consensus at Articles for deletion/Marc Slutsky to keep this article as a redirect, it is not really my call. We must honor that consensus.
 * If you would like that decision to be reconsidered, you must file a request at Deletion review. Basically, you submit the information you found and ask that, based on this new information, the original article be restored.  Editors there will review your request and again come to a consensus, which will result in one of the following:
 * The full article will be restored as you request;
 * The article will be sent back to AfD for another debate; or
 * The result of the first AfD will be upheld, and it must stay a redirect.
 * I know our policies can be confusing, and at times seem overly bureaucratic, but it is only by us following these established policies that an open-wiki of this magnitude can function. If you have any questions, or need guidance filing the DRV request itself, please don't hesitate to ask. -- Satori Son 18:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Abkagan 21:05, 27 September 2007 (UTC)Abkagan

''The above discussions are preserved as an archive. Please do not modify them. Further comments or new discussion should be started on the current talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.''