User talk:Shoessss/Archive Apr 2007

Irisbus Citelis
Hi! I'd like to know why you tagged the Irisbus Citelis article under speedy delete. My intention is definitely not to produce advertising for Irisbus. I don't work for them! :) Furthermore, I don't see how the article is unencyclopedic, particularly as it doesn't make any value judgements or promotions about the Citelis model. I simply made an article about the bus model because it is used as the latest addition to Bucharest's RATB trolleybus network. I am interested in the Bucharest network rather than the company Irisbus. Ronline ✉ 11:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ♦Good Morning Ronline.  I was back and forth about tagging the article.  At first glance, I viewed it as spam.  Than went back and was going to remove the tag.  Than again, I shrugged my shoulders on what to do.  Finally, I made a "No-Decision" :-) and left the tag on. Than you came along and changed my mind.  I have removed the tag.  Have a great day. Shoessss 11:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Cheers :) Ronline ✉ 12:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

re Few Friends
shoessss wrote: Anastrophe, please do not take this the wrong way, but your tone, infliction and manner of writing makes me believe you most likely have very few friends.Shoessss 02:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

my response: the art of the sidestepped ad hominem. brilliantly executed. listen, if you don't like honesty, perhaps wikipedia isn't a good fit for you. littering articles with opinions and feel-good commentary is unencyclopedic. i suggest you start a blog, rather than edit what is ostensibly an encyclopedia. (i believe i hurt mr. shoessss feelings with the summaries i tendered for my edits on Hybrid Generator and related article.) Anastrophe 17:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

oh, and in the future, rather than littering user pages with your hurt feelings, why not merely discuss the changes and your disagreement with them on the discussion page for the article? it's much more symmetric. Anastrophe 17:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And by your response, you prove my point. Regarding the edits, when I post an article or add significantly to an article, I do not mind criticisms and suggestions from any and all editors.  However, the tone and infliction does give me pause on how I take their edits and suggestions.  Try diplomacy once in awhile.  You may be surprised with the outcomes.  Either way, have a great day. Shoessss 17:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * you seem to be deeply unclear on the concept (as well as the correct spelling of 'inflection'). your initial comment is an egregious ad hominem, that you attempt to cloak with syrupy intonations such as "have a great day". spare me the condescension. the number of friends I have - or lack - is irrelevant to the veracity of the summary i used in editing the articles. your use of ad hominem attack does nothing to counter my comments, nor further your argument. i would again suggest that perhaps you might consider another hobby if your feelings are so easily hurt by the cold slap of reality. and again, rather than cluttering the user discussion of both our pages, how about discussing the matter in the article discussion area. that's the wikipedia way of dealing with the issue. Anastrophe 17:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Biological Waste OrificeShoessss 18:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Contesting your decision
I question, and have officially contested, your decision to label my article, Climate conflict, as plagiarized. I request that you contact me with your reasons as to why you carried this out.

Sincerly

User:EasyPeasy21


 * Well User:EasyPeasy21 I thought is was pretty self explanatory from the message I left you, as pasted below:

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Climate conflict, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from { }}}. As a copyright violation, Climate conflictappears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Climate conflicthas been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Climate conflict and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions. If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Climate conflict with a link to where we can find that note. If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Climate conflict09:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

As you can see, this is blantant copyright violation. Shoessss 09:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not convinced
Where? I've clicked your search parameter as before and there is no result for the next two pages which fits what I've written. Most of them don't have anything to do with climate conflict. I want the exact source which I've supposedly copied from COPIED ON THIS DISCUSSION PAGE, and not some search parameter.

Sincerly

User:EasyPeasy21


 * User:EasyPeasy21 I don't know what to tell you. When I click on the above link it shows the article word for word to the one you supplied.  At this point it is moot anyway.  The article has been deleted.  12:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, there isn't much else I can do at this point. I just wish that, when an article is accused of being a copy, and the author argues that it's not, that's it completely original, the accuser would show a copy of the source which has supposedly been copied from, rather than relying on a search parameter. It clears up a lot of confusion in the author's mind.

List of Star Trek Blueprints
"Jackilsfrm if this gets into an edit war let me know.". What do you mean? ~a (user • talk • contribs) 04:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Arichnad....I just wanted Jackillsfrm to be aware that if the situation developed into an edit war to let me know and I would help him handle the situation through the proper protocols, rather than driving everyone nuts. Which I've seen happen all to often. Hope this answers your question. Shoessss 05:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yep, that sounds fine. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 05:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it looks like somebody nominated this article for deletion. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 17:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted the page I just do not feel that there is anything that I can do to make him happy, There are only so many hoops that I want to jump through. I will post this information somewhere else on the web, thanks for your time.
 * Point of note: I did not nominate the article for deletion.  Don't blame me.  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 18:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

♦LOL...are we getting Paranoid???? No I never blame anyone.....the final decision is not in mine or your hands...that's what is nice a Wikipedia. It is a consensus. Have a great day....and thanks for the heads-up Shoessss 18:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was just clarifying. I don't want him to be mad at me :)  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 18:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and encouragement. Being new to Wiki I am not sure if I would have fought this if I had not had at least one person in my corner from the begining. Again thanksJackillsfrm 02:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

They Killed the article, I addressed every one of there arguments for deleting the article but it fell on deaf ears. I was warned by most that the content of Wiki was censored by the few, I should have listened. The main line seems to be if someone does not like the page it will be put up for deletion over and over until it is finaly deleted. Thanks for your backing I do appreciate it.Jackillsfrm 19:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to hear that. As I stated before, I believe it was a well written article that would most likely have a wide appeal to Star Trek fans.  I hope this does not discourage you from still contributing to Wikipedia in other areas.  In the mean time, I hope you saved the work you did.  In a few months let’s try again proposing the article to be included on the site.  Good luck to you and hope to see you around the web-site with more contributions Shoessss 18:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ash Discography
You're right. I was too quick on the trigger this time. Shoessss 15:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. It's a pretty busy day for spam today...  Thanks, Clicketyclack 15:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Please Use Edit Summaries
When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this: The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.  Snowolf (talk) CON COI  -  16:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I hang my head in shame….Which one did I miss. Shoessss 16:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

re:my talk page
No reason for shame but the link your looking for is WP:AIV, which takes you directly to Administrator intervention against vandalism. Good luck in reverting the vandals! -  auburn pilot  talk  17:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Shoessss 17:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Parkwood, Philadelphia
Saw your post on the Wikiproject Philadelphia page about Parkwood, Philadelphia. Nice job on the article. I was wondering if the primary page for it should be reversed so that Parkwood, Philadelphia redirects to Parkwood, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania instead. I think the other neighborhood articles are generally organized in that way. Ar-wiki 03:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * ♦First thank you for the "Nice Job". Second, I agree with you on the redirect.  I had it that way to begin with and someone thought it should go this way.  I'll see if anyone else comments and make my mind up than. Shoessss 11:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Sutherland Springs, Texas
Hello,user:West London Dweller  I changed your copyright violation to a speedy delete. This was a blatant word for word plagiarism. Just a heads-up. Shoessss 22:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I've been trying to educate the original author in Attribution and no Original reasearch, but making no headway, so I'm reviewing their entire history. I'm not even interested in Texas history! Unfortunately, there's lots of articles to review and try and salvage. Regards, WLDtalk 23:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)