User talk:Shereth/Archive01

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Here are some links I thought useful:


 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Foundation issues
 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Brilliant prose
 * List of images
 * Boilerplate text
 * Current polls
 * Mailing lists
 * IRC channel

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~.

Be Bold!

Sam [Spade] 00:25, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Paraná River picture
Hi! I've been working a bit on the Paraná River article and noticed your picture. If you took it yourself, as I assume it was, could you upload it to the Wikimedia Commons, with a license that lets everybody use it? That way the picture would be usable from all Wikipedias and other projects. Of course, if you have other pictures, and the time and the ganas to do so, could you upload them also? Thank you! --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 18:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Guarani mythology
BIEN AHÍ for the pages about guaraní mythology.

and, when will you come back to Paraguay.. uh?

--N0thingness 18:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the article 1 E2 K
Arkyan: The following is a quote from your own User page:


 * "The reason I cannot side with the inclusionists is because while I agree that "Wiki is not paper", I do not think that this equates to "Anything factual stays". Just because a useless article does not consume significant resources does not make it useful. A bar needs to be set and maintained for what ought to stay in order that Wikipedia does not degrade into a mishmash of useless articles and lose its value as a repository of useful, factual, and free information."

After reading your above quoted statement, I am at a loss as to why you deleted my request for deletion of the article 1 E2 K.

I just finished looking at the Category:Orders of magnitude which has 10 articles devoted to various types of "order of magnitude" and also has 8 sub-categories that contain a total of 230 additional articles devoted to yet other types of "order of magnitude". That makes a total of 240 articles devoted to what (in my opinion) constitutes a "mishmash of useless article" that you profess not to like. Can you give me one useful aspect of any of those articles?

I know that if A is ten times larger than B, that A is one order of magnitude larger than B ... or if A is 100 times larger than B, that A is two orders of magnitude larger than B ...etc., etc.

I see no purpose in having 240 articles devoted to telling me that same thing if A and B happens to be temperature ... or pressure ... or volume ... or mass ...ad nauseum! As far as I am concerned, the whole category should be deleted.

I am not going to revert your editing out my request but I would be interested in learning why you think these 240 silly articles are worth having in Wikipedia. - mbeychok 03:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Arkyan, my feelings weren't hurt and you didn't step on my toes. But I still want to know why anyone would think that a request for deletion would be voted down. See my response to your remarks on my User talk:Mbeychok and let's continue this there. - mbeychok 06:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Yacy Yateré and Ao Ao
Hi, I translate this articles to portuguese, in pt.wikipédia. Congratulations to your good job in Guarani culture. Sorry for my poor english. I'm not loged here, but you can find me in Jo Lorib, from São Paulo, Brasil.

Help with Translation
Hi, my name is Ricardo Ramírez, I'm from Colombia and I'm working in the article of Cúcuta. Can you help me to translate it from the Spanish Wikipedia?


 * Cúcuta - Spanish Wikipedia - Click
 * Cúcuta - English Wikipedia - Click

Thanks...

Ricardoramirezj ✍ 15:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

CDP vs Unincorporated
Well, first of all, because politically, there is little-to-no difference between a CDP and an unincorporated community. The difference really only shows in census results. Also, an actual unincorporated community often extends beyond the official CDP boundaries, or it may be much smaller.

Regarding your so-called "objective" definition, where you basically said that Pinal County is just not part of the metro area (I strongly challenge such an assertion, as Queen Creek clearly extends into Pinal County, as does Mesa, and AJ is entirely in Pinal County and at the same time is undeniably contigious with the rest of the metropolitan area), my definition is even more objective -- the areas that are included are those which are part of the contiguous corridor of "urban development" (that is, land that was "urban" according to over 25% of census respondents from the area) which includes most of the city of Phoenix. This excludes Buckeye, if I recall correctly, although that might not be the case in the next census. Also, you added all places in both counties, regardless of the fact that some are rural and are miles from any urban development (for this reason, Aguila could probably be removed). --Node 07:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: USMC film list
You have commented on the AFD discussion for List of films featuring United States Marines, the discussion can be viewed at Articles for deletion/List of films featuring United States Marines.

Following support for my suggestion, I have done a userspace rewrite of the article at User:Saberwyn/Films featuring the United States Marine Corps, with the rewritten article in the top half and the current article with annotations as to their inclusion or non-inclusion in the rewritten list.

I would like to request that you review the rewritten article, and if you think it is appropriate, amend your stance at the AFD discussion. -- saberwyn 11:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

List of films with disabled protagonists
In the articles for deletion discussion of List of films with disabled protagonists you commented that "A list of films about disabilities or that otherwise deal with the subject of disabilities as a primary plot point would be fine, but a list of movies with disabled protagonists by itself is arbitrary and indiscriminate." My understanding is that the "protagonist" of a film is by definition the person the film is about. The list itself may need clean-up, but I would expect that a list of films with disabled protagonists would in fact be a list of films that are about disabled people, and by extension, about disability in some sense. As User:ArnoldReinhold points out later in the discussion, either the disability will be a major plot point, or the way the character deals with his or her disability will be a major element of the story. I hope this is helpful. Crypticfirefly 05:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Cosmic Evolution??
Hi Arkyan,

I noticed that you removed the cosmic evolution page that was up and redirected it to Physical cosmology.

Please give me some insight as to why you decided to do this.

I would like to have the original page back up.

thanks, Ajaya

hi again
hey Arkyan,

Thanks for helping me out with everything. :)

amalla01

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic-group lists deletion discussions
Hi, I noticed you participated in the Articles for deletion/List of African Americans (3rd nomination) deletion discussion. If you haven't participated in the very similar Articles for deletion/List of Chinese Americans discussion, which involves essentially the same issues, please do. There's also the Articles for deletion/List of Caucasian Americans (second nomination). I'll asking everyone who participated in one to participate in the others. I apologize for bothering you if you already have participated in more than one. Best wishes, Noroton 04:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

About the AfD business...
Hey, I just wanted to say thanks for helping me out with the AfD nominations; I got somewhat incorrect information on how to carry this out (some told me that I had to nominate every separate article, rather than to bundle them, like you told me). I'm still new to some of the ways things are carried out on Wikipedia, so I also want to apologize for any inconvenience I caused you. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me  §   Contributions ♣ 19:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

'North America (Americas)'
Thank you for weighing in on this prior AfD. Even though an apparent consensus supported the prior AfD in some way, and the article has been deleted, this has reared its head again -- please peruse and weigh in. Thanks! Corticopia 23:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

RE: Unofficial Maps Project
I am glad to see people noticing my work! I try to get at least one new AZ county done a week, and currently, I am working on Yuma County. I originally did the Maricopa county map because I thought it could be updated (especially with how fast Maricopa county is growing, the map I made will be out of date before too long)

But you're right. It is proving to be a chore, so any help is greatly appreciated! I just thought that all the cities, towns and unincorporated places in Arizona deserved to have the same treatment as the cities in Maricopa county. Plus, Arizona was a good place to start, having only 15 counties, it would be fairly easy to get the whole state done. I fear for when someone takes on Texas or Georgia.

Regards, Ixnayonthetimmay 18:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I've been admittedly kind of lazy lately with this project, and so didn't complete all of the infoboxes for La Paz county. I do try and include the CDPs wherever possible, since it would reduce the number of maps that would otherwise be represented with just a red dot. I would have rather been able to include boundaries for all unincorporated areas, but I guess they are inherently abstract. I am curious to know why, if the Census Bureau recognizes so many other unincorporated areas as CDPs and provides data for them such as area, they don't bother representing them on their maps. Oh well.


 * I was thinking that for the next iterations of these maps that data for national and state parks as well as other miscellaneous large lots of land should be included along with Indian reservations, but I am not quite prepared for that at this time. I'd rather wait and see if the maps currently done will withstand the test of time and editing by the Wikipedia collective consciousness. In regards to if I am going to spread out to other states, I am not sure at this time if I want to take it all on. I picked Arizona because I live here and it was fairly easy, and it took me three months off and on to just get half of the state done. Due to the time constraints of living and working, it might end up being a project spanning years before it ever reached complete coverage of the U.S. Also, the meaningfulness of showing just counties for some cities and urban areas might not be that great (New York City, for example, is spread over five counties). With that in mind, I think I might just try and take on mapping and infoboxing cities and towns in larger urban areas only and see if anyone else is interested in following suit and providing their own great input like you have.


 * Regards,
 * Ixnayonthetimmay 00:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Very good work on the remaining maps! Now that Arizona is finished, I feel compelled to ask if you will do any other maps for other states or cities in particular, and if so, which ones.


 * Ixnayonthetimmay 04:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I just read your follow-up and pretty much agree with your ideas. That is what I will probably do. I have taken a break myself, but I will probably start now with the Dallas-Ft. Worth metroplex next, since I used to live there. It should prove to be interesting, as the laws of incorporation differ from state to state. I just hope the Census Bureau's maps are sufficiently updated...


 * Ixnayonthetimmay 00:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Are the maps you are creating grouped into any category? (Perhaps "Maps of X" or "X Maps" or something?) Just checking; I'd like to take a look at your Metro Detroit maps. I'm also wondering what tool(s) you use to make them? Cmadler 18:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Intriguing...a script so that the computers can do the hard work for us! What scripting language are you using..I always wondered what was used to extract useful visual nuggets from data like that. I hope everything goes well and the script project runs into no snags. Good luck! Ixnayonthetimmay 02:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Quantum-Touch (2nd nomination)
Hi. I had to close 'keep' because it's been extensively sourced since nomination. If you want to nominate again, now's your chance. - Richard Cavell 06:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Clay Target Center
Hello, Can you recreate the article: Clay Target Center in the same way you created Ben Avery Shooting Facility: http://www.azgfd.gov/ctc


 * I think a redirect to the Ben Avery article might be more in line with that. I might be able to write up a section for the CTC there, but right now I'm working on something else.  But I will see what I can do.  A r k y a n  &#149; (talk) 16:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Matthew Revell
I attached PROD five days ago to Matthew Revell, I was wondering if you could delete this article. Politicalwatchmen 22:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

RfC on ... you know
No problem. Right now MBHiii sees both of us as being opposed to him. He isn't going to listen to what we say. Let him win his "see also" battle on Dixie Mafia... it isn't really a big thing (most people pay no attention to the see also link anyway). That will help him relax. Then he can go off to some other article, and have some other editor criticize his edits. Hopefully he will begin to learn. Good luck. Blueboar 23:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

DRV Vote
Radiant! did not do this well. If there is a swathe of arguments and debates, it is No Consensus. That is how AfD works. Radiant!, however, abused his admin powers. The keepists voted on the policies of WP:N and WP:ATT and on the encyclopedic status of the article in its current state. What Radiant! put as his closure was badly disguised opinion, a fact that can only be reinforced by the fact he nominated the remaining list articles for deletion directly beforehand, therefore suggesting he had planned his closure. He also went up to me and said "they're unencyclopedic" directly beforehand, furthering my last point. In short, Radiant!'s conclusion was what would have been his vote had the AfD been running and he did a terrible job of disguising his opinionated conclusion. This also suggests that he did not take a proper look at the Delete votes as they were grounded in the teachings of the Essay Listcruft and what the article was like before any cleanup. The Keep votes were grouned in policy and were made by those who took the tiome to recognise improvement rather than judge the book by its cover. Hope that's given you some food for thought. Bowsy (review me!) 18:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have, and Radiant! has refused to accept what he has done. I didn't post this on the DRV because comments there have been ignored on several occasions. Bowsy (review me!) 18:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

James Earl Salisbury
You made a nomination for AFD for that article at Articles for deletion/James Earl Salisbury, the debate is scheduled to close today. If you would care to update or clarify your position, your input would be useful in executing wikipedia policy. McKay 15:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * So, if I understand you correctly, you think that the pages referenced in the article don't help to satisfy the notability criterion, because they are "trivial" references? If so, then I think that these are the true kinds of differences that can arise in an AfD, because different people interpret that policy guideline differently. Like I stated before, I thank you for your input on the matter. I personally think that the references are non-trivial, but that's just personal opinion. One thing that has soured me about the AfD process is I think most of the people don't understand the policies well enough, and just make a blind vote. I would like to thank you for the way you put your input in actually following your interpretation of the actual policy. McKay 18:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. I've been editing Wikipedia for a number of years now, and admittedly, when the article was nominated for deletion, that version of the article was inappropriate. When I created the article, I didn't understand the policies as well as I do now. I've mentioned this before, but I really do think that the article meets notability guidelines. I've read all the way through WP:COI several times now since the nomination of this article. Knowing what I know now, I think that I would still create the article. Like I've said before, if someone thinks I'm being biased in any way, I am very open to constructive criticism. I am very much trying to keep to Wikipedia policy here. I think there are several other events in his life, that if I were trying to create a memorial, I would mention, but they aren't able to be sourced in a WP:Attributable manner. I'm doing what I can to remain unbiased, and follow the policies of Wikipedia. McKay 19:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Godfather/popcult DRV

 * Thanks for the note, and I appreciate the attention you're giving this.
 * I'm aware of that part of WP:CON and, indeed, almost quoted it in my last DRV comment, but decided to truncate it for space. (I have a tendency towards verbosity.)  But while, as you rightly point out, "consensus" does not mean "unanamity", it also doesn't mean "majority rules," nor even "supermajority rules."  My feeling is that while unanimity is not required, what is required is an evaluation by the administrators of the quality of the arguments made instead of simply an evaluation of the numeric state of the "votes", no matter what quantitative standard is utilized.  My feeling is that even if all the comments were in favor of doing one thing, if one commenter made a strong and valid argument in favor of the other course, and that argument had a significant chance of being accepted by a sizable portion of the community, then the administrators really should give that argument the benefit of the doubt and rule that while the specific slice of the community that showed up to vote was in favor of one action, there was a good chance that the debate didn't accurately represent the consensus of the community, as opposed to the consensus of the people who commented.
 * I suppose this is my own fault, as I think I've been somewhat taken in by the claims made that Wikipedia operates on a community-consensual basis, when really, from what I can see, that isn't quite true at all. Instead while its official ideology is community-consensual, in practical action it runs on a supermajoritarian model based on the comments of statistical insignificant subgroups of the whole.  That's interesting too, I suppose, but not quite as intriguing as the community-consensual model.
 * At the very least, I have the answer to the question I kept asking inthe AfD debate, but to which I never received a reply: How is community consensus determined? It turns out that it really isn't, in my view. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk/cont) 00:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I suppose this is my own fault, as I think I've been somewhat taken in by the claims made that Wikipedia operates on a community-consensual basis, when really, from what I can see, that isn't quite true at all. Instead while its official ideology is community-consensual, in practical action it runs on a supermajoritarian model based on the comments of statistical insignificant subgroups of the whole.  That's interesting too, I suppose, but not quite as intriguing as the community-consensual model.
 * At the very least, I have the answer to the question I kept asking inthe AfD debate, but to which I never received a reply: How is community consensus determined? It turns out that it really isn't, in my view. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk/cont) 00:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * At the very least, I have the answer to the question I kept asking inthe AfD debate, but to which I never received a reply: How is community consensus determined? It turns out that it really isn't, in my view. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk/cont) 00:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Closing of Articles for deletion/List of fiction that breaks the fourth wall (Second nomination)
Maybe it's just me, but the 'keep' outcome on this seems lame. I'm going to talk to Cuchullain about it, but if that doesn't work I'm likely to take this to WP:DRV. Mangoe 11:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of ZIP Codes in Oklahoma
In your comment in this discussion, you noted that this discussion should be sent elsewhere. Now that the AfD has been closed, the question now is where to hold this discussion. I encourage you and the other editors (listed below) to find a suitable spot for this discussion and carry out the necessary steps for making a decision.

Perhaps this message does not make any sense whatsoever. In which case, please respond to this message and indicate what you want me (as the closing admin of the aforementioned AfD discussion) to do to carry out the result of the AfD. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

c.c.: User:After Midnight, User:JzG, User:Elkman User:Dennisthe2, User:Arkyan, and User:FrozenPurpleCube.

Articles for deletion/Celine Dion awards and accomplishments
As you've contributed to this discussion, I thought you should know that a number of similar articles have been bundled with the AfD. --Mel Etitis ( Talk ) 09:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the Haslingden article
Thanks for your help on saving the Bruce Haslingden article from deletion. I really appreciate it. Chris 20:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

List of songs containing covert references to real musicians
You may want to weigh in at Deletion review/Log/2007 April 15, since you were involved in a previous discussion of this article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

James Earl Salisbury
Hey Arkyan, since you were involved in the James Earl Salisbury AfD, I'm letting you known that after discussion with Mckaysalisbury I've restored the page to generate more discussion, and hopefully a clearer consensus. You may wish to comment on the talk page.--Cúchullain t/ c 20:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:pnc nominated for deletion
See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. --Kevin Murray 23:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

followup on LGAT 3rd opinion requested
Not sure how to ring door bells other than this.. feel free to delete this post. Thank you. Lsi john 23:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking for input
Hello, you recently participated in this AfD. There is a discussion going on at the article's talk page about the title of the article, so I am notifying everyone who voted or commented on the AfD in case you wanted to participate in the discussion. Thanks! Tufflaw 00:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Mediation on Apple Inc.
Wow, that was quick. Sounds good to me, and thanks for the speedy response. -steventity 17:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA


Hello, thank you for supporting my RfA! I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0. Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen. Vivat Regina!

Articles for deletion/William L. Rowe
You're certainly welcome and thank you for the kind words. There are certainly occasions upon which I'll weigh in that way on an AfD debate and not have time to actually edit the article right at that moment. But even then, I do try to remember to at least state in the debate from what exactly I'm discerning notability. That way, even if I'm still leaving it to others to follow up, hopefully I've at least made it a bit easier. Happily, this time around, I was pretty much twiddling my thumbs at work waiting for a two-hour code compilation to complete, so that left me with plenty of I-can-do-it-myself time. 8-)

Cheers! Mwelch 20:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Map accuracy
Hi, there's been some discussion at Talk:Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan about a map you added. It looks like your map includes the water area, which makes an extremely tiny community look considerably larger than it is. Overall your maps have been a great addition, but they may need some tweaking with waterside communities. older ≠ wiser 01:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Same applies to Grosse Ile. Cmadler 13:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

user oo7565 thanks for the help and for the record yes i do prod but know i more forcus on looking at the other prod articles and makeing sure they hold up ok but again thanks for the helpOo7565 20:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Arkyan, thanks for participating in my successful RfA. You expressed concern about me not answer the questions; I've written some brief reflections, including an answer to Question 3, in case you're still worried: User:Ragesoss/RfA. --ragesoss 08:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments at the Village Pump
Hi, your comments at the Village pump [] were referenced in Articles for deletion/Grünfeld 4.Bf4. As I believe the editor who remarked on them is misinterpreting the substance of the discussion there, I'd like you to clarify your position so that a fuller understanding can be reached. If the AFD closes before you get a chance to respond, feel free to comment on my talk page and on that of the user. Thanks! FrozenPurpleCube 18:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Indian Mall
Hello. I just thought I'd let you know that I added much more information to the page on Indian Mall; it is no longer a directory-entry stub, and several reliable sources have been cited. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Actions • Words))) 20:09, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I really would appreciate if you'd take another look at this article, as your rationale for its AfD is no longer valid. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Actions • Words))) 13:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

deletion review of List of Philippine Presidents by longevity
I've asked for a deletion review of List of Philippine Presidents by longevity. Since you participated in the deletion discussion for this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -Fagles 20:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Dutchess Mall
Just a friendly little note to let you know that I gave this article a significant rewrite. It's no longer a stub/directory entry; also, there are several references, and assessment of notability (it's on land that's in the National Register of Historic Places; also, the mall's flea market was the subject of a 2006 documentary). Ten Pound Hammer • (((Actions • Words))) 02:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * P. S. Thanks for the barnstar! Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Actions • Words))) 22:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review of Dražeta
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Dražeta. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Duja ► 14:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Apple Inc. Dispute
Arkyan. I wanted to take this opportunity to say thank you for your work in mediating on the Apple Inc. dispute, and apologise if some of my posts there have recently come across as less than generous in tone: I was becoming increasingly exasperated at the no-budge response of one editor. In this regard, I've made my comments on your proposed compromise, but I think I may take a step back for a while from the dispute. This is not that I may never become involved again, but I feel for now that I've said all I can, and cannot see my input being of value when, in his words, one editor 'will not budge'. Again, thank you for your input (and patience!). I would be happy to take discussion/comments on my own talk page. Yours,  Wala  frid  | talk 20:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you please modify your mediator responce, as it sounds like, from what you say, I was unwilling to compromise in any way, which is inaccurate, as there were two middle grounds listed, and I accepted one of them. Also when you list "unwillingness to budge on the issue" you don't list what "the issue" is.  I don't think its fair to note only my unwillingness to go with one proposal, but not list my willingness to go with the other.--Zeeboid 16:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * purrrrfect. Thanks.--Zeeboid 17:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

DKP
I am requesting a speedy keep on the DKP discussion in light of the references I've added to the article. The article can still use improvement, but this should be more than adequate to satisfy the original reason for deletion. I respectfully request that you withdraw your nomination. Tarinth 20:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd urge you to rethink your position on the Castronova whitepaper. Please actually take a moment to review the source, rather than depend on second-hand claims that describe it as using Wikipedia as a source.  When you review the document you'll see that it is an extensive analysis of the economics of MMORPGs focused on DKP, which includes quiet a bit of synthesis and references to sources not connected with Wikipedia.  In fact, the only mention of Wikipedia within the whitepaper is when he mentions that Wikipedia happens to maintain a list of known DKP systems. Tarinth 23:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Queen Anne close
Hi Arkyan, I just noticed you speedy closed the Articles for deletion/Queen Anne, Queen Anne's County, Maryland AfD (wish I knew how that one came about, especially since it really looks like a bit-for-bit copy... oh well).

Anyway, I had thought about doing that myself but then decided not to on account of some vague memory that the proposal to introduce Speedy Redirects, made way back in VfD days, never really got anywhere.

Just out of curiosity (especially since it's my understanding that NAC speedy closes of non-keep AfDs are essentially verboten frowned upon), did the Speedy Redirect thing ever really take off?

Oh, and just to be clear, I'm not questioning your judgment -- just wondering since I like to stay on top of developments in policy. Thanks & cheers -- Seed 2.0 18:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not a big fan of 'procedure for procedure's sakes' myself. ;) It's just that I wasn't sure what had happened to that proposal and I didn't have the time to really research the matter (Wikipedia ain't paying the bills, sadly ;) so I figured I'd just leave it be for now. Anyway, thanks for the quick reply. Hope you have a great evening, eh, lunch (guess I'm a couple timezones to your East). Cheers, -- Seed 2.0 19:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: Just a quick heads up: I just noticed that the Agnostic userbox you have on your userpage has been moved.

Question
Am I allowed to ask you questions during this mediation, and if so where is the best place to do so? Hiding Talk 10:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

DKP redux
I've added a comment in response to your willingness to work on the DKP article on my talk page--feel free to continue the discussion there. In short, by all means--let's get you involved in enhancing the article if you think you can do so. Tarinth 12:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks for the help!
Thanks for moving Afghan training camp

Thanks for your note.

I replied, in detail, on my talk page.

Cheers! Geo Swan 22:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

North-south divide
The person has to disscuss before puting the tag in the first place. He does not give any explanation to why he put the tag on. Why is it a problem for bringing the tag down due to lack of explanation? I hope you reconsider that. Kingj123 22:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry and Thanks.--Kingj123 19:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)