User talk:Seb az86556/archive8

Explanation
To clarify my involvement in the hornets nest: I was asked to review procedural issues by RashersTierney. I am quite well versed in the basics of these now: I deal with contemporary music which requires me to understand the nature of AfD, PROD, incubation, sourcing, pagemoving, etc etc, mainly due to the huge number of BLPs we have to deal with and the various new musical concepts/movements/etc that pop up all the time. I will help out where I can with procedural issues but I have no intention of getting drawn into the nitty-gritty of the debate—I already noticed the bad blood out there and I am, anyway, not at all versed enough in the subject to help much with the decisions they have to make. Thanks for the kind warning though, Seb! --Jubilee♫ clipman 22:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I've got Twinkle
I can warn as well. But thanks for helping.Abce2 (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I know... It appears we pressed the button simultaneously. Twinkle does that sometimes. :) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Huh, unusual to happen twice in a row, though, no?Abce2 (talk) 03:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yepp, but it does happen :) No offense, I know you can handle it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Too late. But how would I be offended by that comment?Abce2 (talk) 03:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well... I meant the double-warnings. I didn't mean to "patronize" you. Some people would take that as a offense. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:33, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm confused on what I'm supposed to be offended at. :)Abce2 (talk) 03:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent. So don't be :P Let's get back to vandal-fighting... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikiout
Wuh Wuz  Dat  05:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Had plans for that day anyways :P Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Why are you removing contact information of award awarding authority
HI, Seb, Why are you removing contact information of award awarding authority of the page IITK Satyendra K Dubey Memorial Award? Is there anything wrong if people contact the government of India officials to know more about it? Thanks. Rawat (talk) 08:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You have been given an explanation by I42 on Talk:IITK Distinguished Alumni Awards 2009-2010. I concur. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Not Vandalism
I don't know what you think counts as vandalism in my Justin Mentell edits, but you're obviously wrong.
 * Declaring someone dead w/o citing a source is vandalism. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Help needed
Thanks for your timely intervention. I don't mind saying that we could do with experienced help in addressing the histories and incubation issues. As i said elsewhere, I don't pretend to any expertise in this area, and personal life demands my time at the moment. Trying desperately to do the right thing wrt the Passports. What should our next practical step be? RashersTierney (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If the plan stands to create these "Visa requirements for..."-articles, the only way to preserve the histories is this:
 * Move the entire article to the new title
 * Convert the resulting redirect into the new stub
 * Look for people to turn the resulting stub into a full article.

It's basically too late for the "Romania" deal, but for all others, this procedure should be followed in order to comply with CC3-licensing Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:57, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This makes sense. How difficult are the first two points? What do the community at Talk:Passport need to be advised of as regards changing what we're doing - reversing procedures without raising worries that there is some sinister reversal of the current overall process. I'm not sure a dramatic 'stop press' on my part would be productive. Thoughts? RashersTierney (talk) 01:12, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Most important: don't copy-paste. That's the only thing that messes things up. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * So at least for the former AfD'd articles, we need to get them back to the status quo ante with the Visa-free section included, move them to 'Visa free travel for X citizens', and essentially start new corresponding new Passport articles? (sorry for being pedantic, can only dip into Wikipedia infrequently just now.) RashersTierney (talk) 01:37, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct. (I don't think copy-pasting the one-liner is a problem, and neither is the infobox.) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

yes sorry didnt mean blank the page, please delete my page, i was no vandal —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adroito (talk • contribs) 06:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
for this :-)  Anna Lincoln  09:20, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. I admire your patience... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:24, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Die Antwoord
Um,you should not be moderating articles on Rock'n Roll/Pop Culture,you don't understand it.Elvis was a hillbilly who drove to venues on dirtroads drinking moonshine with his buddies/bandmates making his legend.No one bothered to film the unknown Beatles in 1960 practicing in one of their houses but if that footage surfaced today how many millions do you think it would be auctioned for? During the last 24 hours while you've been trying to delete this entry this group's 2 videos on their official YouTube channel went from 100,000 views to 250,000,they've been up 3 weeks,that is some serious exponential growth.That Die Burger article you mentioned,they're not introducing the band are they? They're commenting on a well known entity,they are also expressing concern cause they've already determined that that entity has value.That article also states that when they recently launched their site it was so overwhelmed with worldwide visitors that it crashed twice in the 1st 24 hours.A site crashing? Is it 1997? How often does that happen in 2010? Also,i saw where you dismiss Facebook yet in that Die Burger article they say if you've seen that missing member contact them there.Anyways,since you insist on hoary media institution coverage,New York mag and San Fran Bay Guardian covered them(how many bands from S. Africa have been covered in any American media outlet,ever?)and they were on tv(Attack of the Show!).As of this writing iTunes doesn't even have this group but i guarantee they're scrambling to get them so check back soon and they'll be in the top ten so let that fact guide your deleting hand in the future... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ground Wave (talk • contribs) 08:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Take your rant to AfD... but before that, read WP:N and WP:RS. None of your claims had been substantiated thus far. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

What is your opinion? Share with us!
We are having problems to reach a stable consensus about removal of visa-free sections from the Passport articles. Please share your opinion with us here: Talk:Passport and here: a request for mediation Thanks.--Avala (talk) 16:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm observing the developments. If I feel I have something to say, I will say it; however, I really don't need to be canvassed. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 17:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Macai
You may wish to know that I have made a request for article probation enforcement against Macai. Please see General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement. -- ChrisO (talk) 10:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Climatic Research Unit hacking incident
Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed is on article probation. -- TS 19:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Creation Museum
Are you familiar with WP:FRINGE? I suggest you read it before reverting to a version that attempts to whitewash how rejected the creationism arguement truly is. 76.102.12.35 (talk) 00:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You are still edit-warring, just like the other guy. This is not allowed, regardless of topic or circumstances. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Chi Theta Omega Fraternity
Hello Seb az86556. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Chi Theta Omega Fraternity, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Deletion of this page may be controvertial or is under discussion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. User doesn't seem to be able to make up his/her mind. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems like user wants to have Chi theta omega‎ deleted now. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Big mouths = big checks, but cannot bank~!
See Articles_for_deletion/Criticism_of_YouTube, I'm sure you'd agree with my statement. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 15:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC) (PS: I've read yours...)

Scott Ables
I have removed the PROD tag from Scott Ables, because under current guidelines the reason given is invalid. There is context, and while sources do need to be found that is not a reason to delete. Ironholds (talk) 08:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Disagree. Was borderline A7. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

:-)

 * ;-)  Anna Lincoln  09:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Peter Bielkowicz
This person is clearly notable. I've removed the speedy tag. Bearian (talk) 02:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I was just making sure procedure was followed. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Scott Ables
I nominated Scott Ables for deletion. Joe Chill (talk) 22:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Mutual intelligibility
I've replied further.  Tide  rolls  01:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

IPs AFDing articles
May I draw your attention to the paragraph in WP:AFDHOWTO stating that An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I, note his reason on the the article talk page, and then post a message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion asking for a registered user to complete the nomination. As the IP has left his deletion rationale on the talk page, and also has left a request on WT:AFD, I am uncertain about the basis of your revert and 3RR warning. Tim Song (talk) 00:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The spirit of this (and you may disagree) is that an IP may occasionally do this; however, if you would like to be a footsoldier to this IP's regular AfD's, go ahead, I have no problem with your doing what s/he should be doing. Cheers! Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 76.102.12.35 (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Um, yeah, btw, I just blocked you for 24 hours. (I was just coming over for the notification -- sorry I was slow.) And yes, I was aware when I blocked you that it was WP:F*CKYOU you created. Still not cool.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to repost your comments here to ANI, if you like. Just make sure they're clearly marked to be copied, so I don't get the wrong ones. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe that you're being accused of creating F*CKYOU, not FUCKYOU. I'm not an admin so I can't check who created the pages. You don't need to be unblocked to make your case at ANI, as Sarek has noted. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Counsellor of State  ─╢ 17:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Seb, don't blame others for your mistake. You know as well as I do that I did not create that page. I simply moved it because Wikipedia is not censored. In other words, that is not creating an inappropriate page. - Zhang He (talk) 17:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Ross Straw
I wanted you to know that I've declined a speedy deletion tag on this article, but that I sympathize entirely with what I perceive to be your motivation for tagging it. It was certainly hard to wade through the "memorial" material but I found a nugget in it, the assertion that he had coached an Olympic team, that led me to decline the tag. I've stripped the article down to a two-sentence stub. I apologize for substituting my judgment for yours; if you have any questions or problems, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste: talk 17:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Seb, just to let you know that I deleted the Ross Straw article that you tagged. It was obviously a copyright violation and I had a quick look on google and found it had been cut and paste from a baseball.com page that has a "copyright, all rights reserved" notice on it . So I deleted it and just restored the clean edits. Cheers, Sarah 03:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thoughts
Hey Seb, I didn't notice this thread until after you were already blocked, otherwise I could have commented at ANI earlier. For what it's worth, I think that the IP does have a bit of a point&mdash;maybe he shouldn't be prodding or maybe he should, but that's probably best handled through a centralized discussion somewhere and in the meantime both sides should have been refraining from escalating the situation. I don't pretend to be familiar with the whole background of this, but it does look to me like some of your edits, while I can sympathize with the frustration, are nevertheless a bit overboard. Creating an essay in your userspace detailing your stance about CIV, for example, would have been fine (I've done similarly before, for instance, when I got pissed off over behavior at WP:AN3 I wrote something in my userspace about my 3rr philosophy), but doing it in mainspace and making the shortcut you did were a bit over the line&mdash;an essay written in general about this stuff probably would have been ok, but at the time you wrote it it comes off more as making a point at one particular editor. Likewise, as for your revert on the IP's talk page, I'm not sure what was going on there (my first inclination to was to think it was pushing the button by accident or something), so if there is an explanation that would be welcome. I don't doubt that the IP has presented a one-sided, cherry-picked selection of diffs in his report, but even so he does have a bit of a point.

Sarek's block and deletions may have been a bit hasty and cavalier, but that being said, the block is only for a day and it wasn't totally out of line. At this point the best thing to do, I imagine, would just be to accept it (as it will be over soon anyway) and acknowledge that there was a problem with some of your edits&mdash;that doesn't mean saying the IP was "right" or anything, it just means recognizing that a couple of your edits weren't appropriate, even if your motivation was right. Discussion about IPs and deletion can still continue after that, and if you show a willingness to acknowledge fault I think it would go a long way towards de-escalating this situation, and making the block not look like a "tarnish" on your record. The less big deal you make of it, the more trivial the block will look in your record.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts; feel free to take or leave what you like. I can't claim to be in any position to really offer "advice", as I've frequently made the same sort of mistakes that I'm advising against right now, but at least I can understand the feeling that comes when you're stuck butting heads against someone and it seems to be going nowhere. I hope this all gets resolved soon. Best, r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 18:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

To be copied to Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents
(copied from userpage) In light of a particular user's (see last point) response to his thread, I would like to post the following:


 * 1) I acknowledge that the creation of the redirect in question was pointy and that I should not have done it.
 * 2) I acknowledge that my interaction with the IP in question was partially inappropriate.
 * 3) I request a mutual indefinite interaction-ban between myself and the IP in question (and any subsequent IPs that seem to be the same person)
 * 4) There remain my grievances concerning the circumstances of this block, because:
 * 5) I have seen other people engage in mudslinging that was way worse, yet they were almost always given a chance to respond.
 * 6) The 4im-warning exist for a reason, and numerous reports I have filed were rejected as "not appropriately warned".
 * 7) There remain the grievances I voiced in the (now deleted) essay. It is ironic that precisely the practices I was venting my frustration about were repeated in applying this block. (Note for crystal-clear clarification: This point is not about the validity or merit of the block, it is about procedure)
 * 8) I suggest that these grievances will be addressed in the near future.
 * 9) (And last point) User:Cube lurker: You have a new message at User_talk:Seb az86556.

Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC) (end of copy)
 * Copied.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 06:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 07:49, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Cube lurker (to be copied to his page if s/he so wishes)

 * Thanks--Cube lurker (talk) 14:17, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Block for nv:user:Crochet.david
Hello

I see that my account was block on the nv wikipedia. The problem is from an user in the greek wikiversity wich add an interwiki link, but to an another project (instead of an another wikiversity) and run a lot of change on some wikipedia : the explain here. Sorry for the problem. Crochet.david (talk) 09:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Cause for concern.
I'm unsure why you have opened a page about be at the NV project. [] would you mind explaining? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism reverting
Any tips, homes? Adult Swim Addict (talk) 07:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Not Clear
(in regards to wepay) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vkbeall (talk • contribs) 09:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I was obviously fighting with you about the contest page because it wasn't clear that in creating a new page that I should use my own user page.

It also doesn't help that you don't have a "wikipedia administrator" as your name, I thought you were just some user screwing with me.

Sorry for the inconvenience but I think it could be easily understood what happened.

Best,

Vik —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vkbeall (talk • contribs) 09:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I am indeed "just some user" as most of us are, but that doesn't make the warnings any less potent. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Seb. please help
I know we have had tensions between us but I trust your judgement more.

Can you be a moderator for a few days in the Obama article?

The 6 improvements suggested are all very reasonable:

1. I discussed whether the political positions section should reflect his current position only or evolution of positions. I didn't forcibly advocate change but started a discussion on a valid topic.

2. I suggested re-wording health care to focus on the Obama biography, not just current U.S. history. This is a good idea not proposed by anyone else. I wasn't trying to inject opinion, just help people focus on writing a good article.

3. I suggested that the Nobel Peace Prize be relocated to a different section, not the image section. It is an honor and an award, not an imagel Again, very logical and very constructive. (But again, opposition)

4. I suggested that the faculty rank of Professor and the generic term professor can be confusing so I suggested multiple ways to eliminate this confusion. I also suggested more succinct prose. No attempt was made to inflate his achievements or diminish them.

5. I suggested being more specific and increasing the information on the infobox to show that his religion is non-denominational Protestant (since corrected to non-denominational Christian because of references found). I pointed out that the Christianity reference has mistakes and may not be optimal and sought comparison with other Presidents in the past century (all of whom have a denomination). Again, this is for article improvement.

6. Consider that we must follow the citations carefully so if the dog was a gift to the daughters, that's the way it is, not a gift to Barack. Furthermore, this could be trivia and other trivial things should be compared so only the most important trivia is reported and less important trivia is omitted due to space considerations. I do not oppose the dog. I only think we must be careful not to include too much trivia and much quote the citations faithfully, not sloppily.

No POV is being pushed, just valid ideas and neither pro or against the President.

Can you help seb? I am counting on you and will cease editing any Obama things for at least 36 hours in a show of restraint and to show that we need some help, maybe your help. JB50000 (talk) 05:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe I have my own views on these, whatever those views may be. I therefore can be neither neutral nor a moderator. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, anyway. Maybe we can write an article together sometime? JB50000 (talk) 06:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

DB-copyvio: good catch
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 08:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
 * 1) Proposal to Close This RfC
 * 2) Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip  03:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Gábor Horváth (footballer)
Hello! A dictionary entry like this exists really. Thank you, I did not notice that you spoke! I am listening better nearest! --Canysp (talk) 11:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)