User talk:Superbeecat/archive/2007/July

Welcome! Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
 * Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
 * Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such unreasonable information or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, and will result in your account being blocked.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 20:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

About kittens and that internet meme
Well, we've started an RfC, so we need to give it time to run its course (count at least a week or two). If that fails to convince the editor, we can put it up to an informal request for mediation (MedCab). If the opinions are as overwhelmingly against including this meme, I think it will stop there. Otherwise, this will become a prime candidate for lame wars. For now, we do nothing but wait. These things take a bit of time. Did you post the RfC at WP:RfC?--Ramdrake 19:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the primer on policy, yeah I posted it on WP:RfC. Sounds good, and thanks again! -Superbeecat 19:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Holsinger
hi. I'm sorry you felt i vandalized the holsinger page. if i violated a rule I'm sorry. I referred to the original paper and corrented a misquotation. the version of the quote i gave came directly from the original paper. the quote, as previously written, took a quote from another paper. but without holsinger's surrounding commentary. i simply expanded the quote to include the snetences before and after. is this vandalism?? User:OsteopathicFreak
 * It certainly was not! The number of uses of particular words set off some red flags in some scripts that I use, and I was not careful enough in checking the actual text of the article. I apologize and shall immediately revert to your most recent version. -Superbeecat 20:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * wow! that was easily resolved. :) User:OsteopathicFreak
 * I promise next time that we can have a long drawn out edit-war then ;)

Cobrin Bleu
Thanks for the note (and sorry for the double post if you had my talk page watched)! It's not that I assumed bad faith on the part of, but rather that what he/she added was in violation of WP:BLP -- we don't want to have potentially libelous material on Wikipedia. In any case, I can definitely help with any questions, but judging from your edit history, you're already doing an amazing job! :) Rock star  ( T/C ) 00:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

RE:Dainius Zubrus
Article is a vandal mess - I'm pretty sure that the preds aren't a kansas city team and it's being edited almost as fast as I can revert by a number of IP addies. Suggestions? -Superbeecat 02:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've reverted him, and the vandals been blocked for 48 hours. Only suggestion I can offer is to keep at it. They'll get blocked or get tired of it sooner or later. Also if you don't already, you can try Pop-ups, TW, among other tools. Happy editing. K O S  |  talk  02:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

History of cats
About the last sentence: the Chinese emperor isn't unnamed at all. The story about cutting sleeves is well known across China and is elaborated in Wikipedia already. I guess the link to Emperor Ai of Han itself is a reliable source. Zuxy 09:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hiya. Saying something is well known is not a source, and another wiki article is never a reliable source. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability. -Superbeecat 09:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks! You're doing a great job too. Recurring dreams 09:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for your help too. :) - Deep   Shadow  09:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

peter 2599
hello, user peter 2599 has been vandalizing the article on Ajahn Maha Bua, I noticed he had vandalized articles before and you warned him then he could be blocked. Maybe it is time to do this now.Greetings, Sacca 04:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: vandal-only accounts
Hi, the IP 82.69.23.170 belongs to Zen Internet, and is shared by multiple, unrelated users. So, the user who is vandalizing now might not be same as the user who was given a warning in June. utcursch | talk 09:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007
Thank you for making a report at Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again.  An as  talk? 22:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The IP was 63.3.3.1. The final warning was more than a month ago. Usually it is acceptable when the final warning is 3 days or earlier. Thanks,  An as  talk? 22:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

What the Hell
My article met the guidelines you gave me
 * it was a couple sentances about a highschool senior which was trivial. Please re-read WP:Notability. It didn't meet a single criteria, which is why admin agreed and speedily deleted it. -Superbeecat 07:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

81.10.90.248
This user also just vandalized Molly Ivins, Esther, and Mary (mother of Jesus) with the same vuglar message. XinJeisan 08:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That is good that 81.10.90.248 was blocked. Anyways, how are you reverting vandalism.  I just go to the previous version and then save, but you seem to be using something better. XinJeisan 08:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I use Twinkle as a matter of fact. It's excellent, but only works well in firefox. -Superbeecat 08:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

User page
Thanks. It's a wiki world, so feel free to use it! But, I wouldn't mind a mention if you do. ;-) — An as  talk? 10:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem! I don't know of one, so probably the best way is to follow the pattern of and learn from others' signatures. — An as  talk? 20:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Block them
Anon 76.190.142.57 just vandalised the Harry Potter (character) page. Therequiembellishere 20:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for the barnstar, it was my pleasure! Hmm, my awards page doesn't look empty any more now :) Keep up the good work yourself, - Zeibura (Talk) 01:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I Didn't Vandalize?
I didn't vandalize on the Perry Mason article. It says "Uses in Popular Culture" or something, and I put down another incident?
 * Fixed! "Eat shit Perry Mason" Looked like vandalism until I examined it closer. My bad! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 03:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Brian Souter page
Thank you for your message, but I beg to differ. I have simply added to the article in order to offer a more balanced view of the subject matter AND everything I have written has reputable valid citations. MassassiUK 18:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The words "underhanded" and "inappropriate" are very clearly POV. It is much more appropriate to describe the controversy without judgmental language. IF it's necessary to use such POV language to illustrate the view of someone other than yourself, directly quote and properly cite. I understand that your edit was in good faith, but I stand by the POV warning. Instead of reverting, I will add a POV tag so it can be discussed on the article's discussion page. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat  19:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Please vote for whether Gun Nut deserves deletion or not
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gun_Nut --BillyTFried 23:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * (user was alerted to canvasing rules in AfD) - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 00:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

My userpage
for removing the vandal's little tantrum from my userpage! &mdash; Coren (talk) 07:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You probably wanted to use  to prevent Wikipedia from eating the initial :   &mdash; Coren (talk) 07:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Faithfull
Marianne Faithfull already has her own article, so I think a link to her is warranted. I don't think an argument can be made that neither Faithful, nor her book, nor her best-of album/s warrents an article, but Pearl Jam's Song does. I will be quite willing to give up on the project if and only if the Pearl Jam song is taken down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuvtixo (talk • contribs)


 * Note that "BUT (insert other article) . . ." is never a reason to (insert anything here). If you have a problem with another article, feel free to nominate it on it's own merrits (or lack thereof). I've nominated many articles about albums and specific tracks which are unremarkable (as per notability, not as in bad albums). I've nominated the articles for speedy deletion (and admin has agreed and speedily deleted them) because they are not encyclopedic. IF you can make a proper stub out of any of those topics, including references to reputable second-hand research which asserts a qualifying reason that that particular album or bio (or..) is notable, by all means, do so. If you think (insert any article) fails notability, including albums (etc...) by other bands, nominate them for deletion as well. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 08:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion
$$Speedy Deletion$$

How do you mark an article for speedy deletion? !!!! Can I do this to the Pearl Jam song Faithfull, although its been up for some time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuvtixo (talk • contribs)


 * THOROUGHLY read Articles_for_deletion and then WP:SD - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 08:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

New at this
Hi, I am new at editing here and I have come across an article that has been bugging me since it was created. Manner (Online Etiquette), It seems to be full of info covered in other pages and the external links seem like an advertisement for a gaming group. I am not good with all the technical mubo-jumbo on here, all I really like to do is edit grammar and spelling. I noticed your name all over the Articles for deletionpage so I figured you might be a good person to go to. If you would not mind taking a look at the page to see if it needs to be deleted I would appreciate it.Gorkymalorki 01:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

?/
I was wondering if I could keep the bridge page since that one isnt practice.--Gorilla Sandwiches 18:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think the article passes muster as a stub, a list of 2 bridges is hardly encyclopedic. If the bridges are actually notable, and you have enough to write a good stub, I'd link to the appropriate article Ohio River, not an article which consists of two links. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 18:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Music at Harry's Place
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Music at Harry's Place. I do not think that Music at Harry's Place fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because a concert or other event is not a club. WP:CSD is intentionally limited to a few specific kinds of content. Use AfD if you think this should be deleted. I request that you consider not re-tagging Music at Harry's Place for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Roger that, nominated per AfD. Cheers! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 22:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nominations for articles from new editors
I notice a couple of the articles you've brought to AfD recently have been first contributions from new editors. While I agree both need urgent attention, it's not a welcoming experience for new users to get an AfD template on their talk page, and I wonder if you could consider using some other method of drawing attention to the problem article in future, such as tagging for notability or missing references, which might be less likely to scare new contributors away? You might also like to place one of the welcome templates onto the user's talk page, before listing the AfD notice there. Thanks! Espresso Addict 03:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the very good advice re: new editors. The only thing is that when I'm patrolling new articles if I go through each users' edit history, it will slow me down quite a bit. On the other hand, there are several new article patrollers. Also, a lot of the articles are patently unsuitable (i.e. a personal biography about that user) and will never be salvageable, so I figure it's better to tag them and let the user focus on suitable articles that won't ultimately be deleted. What do you think about a newbie editor template for a failed first article, that's much more gentle, because I think you make a good point, but ultimately, not deleting bad articles could easily create a backlog of cleanup tagged articles that really won't ever be suitable. Thanks again! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 17:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking this comment in the spirit in which it was meant -- I understand how hectic the new page patrol can be, but in the end there are many editors patrolling, and it seems worth taking a few moments to make sure newbies don't get bitten in the rush.


 * There's a clear trade-off between putting off new editors and having to deal downstream with suboptimal content; obviously, the new-page patroller action needs to depend on exactly how unsalvageable the article is. It seems to me, though, if the article is sufficiently debateable that it needs to go to AfD rather than be speedied, then there's grounds to hold off for a while with the less-threatening templates (eg notability, referencing, copy editing, uncategorised) which will at least mean an experienced editor eventually looks at the article. I work on the uncategorised backlog from time to time, and even though the backlogs sometimes seem impossible, they do eventually get seen to!


 * A more gentle newbie deletion template that combined the welcome info plus the deletion message is a good idea. I don't know if you could raise it with the Welcome Committee people? Cheers, Espresso Addict 20:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Point well taken. I'll make sure to hold off a bit on AfD if it's a first article, maybe leave a comment about the article on the talk page with the welcome message. I'll also bring up the new template idea, there might be some real benefit there. Cheers! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 20:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * PS, Scrolling through the directions for AfD listing, I notice that there's already Template:AFDWarningNew, which might be of use. Espresso Addict 02:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Worldware
Hi, thanks for your offer to help on the Worldware page. I sent the link for the page to user Sehrmann who made extensive changes. See what you think. A comment here is a fine place to respond. Nils Peterson 22:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Heya, still needs to be broken apart into paragraphs, wikilinking, and proper citations (footnotes). - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 00:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Law Practice managment software
Hi, yes I'll try to keep expanding it from its current state to save it from AfD. The problem is that many of the sources I want to use are hidden behind subscriber-only websites so I have to get around that somehow with my library Lexis account. Thanks for your message. Wl219 00:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good. I'll remove my nomination. Let me know if I can help with anything. Cheers! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 00:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for this actions. You are doing a good thing, first by giving us all a heads up by the AfD, and then removing your own nom.  I'll work more on it tomorrow. Bearian 00:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Arthur Lehti
Hello my name is Andrew Arthur Lehti and i ask with all do respect if i can have a temp site on this site and if i can i will gradely give a donation in the near Future

Andrew Arthur Lehti LS Jordon N. Hansen


 * No. Wikipedia is not advertising space for sale, it's an encyclopedia. Please refrain from spamming it, or your account could be indefinitely blocked. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 01:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Garden Answers
Hi, you tagged Garden Answers as CSD G1, patent nonsense. It however was not patent nonsens, as the content "I don't know any.", makes perfect sense, and G1 is limited to gibberish. However it met CSD A1, short articles providing little or no context, under which I have deleted it. Dsmdgold 03:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Heya... thanks for the comment. I do think that the phrase "I don't know any." without anything else falls under the definition: "Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it". Meaningful after a fashion is met, the words are English and form a sentence fragment. They are also completely confused as it's not a sentence, and no reasonable person could take the phrase "I don't know any." totally in a vacuum and make sense of it. Am I mistaken? - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 05:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Global Warming Games
I removed your db-test tag from Global Warming Games, because the page clearly no longer meets the G2 criteria. However, I am not sure it would survive an AfD due to WP:NOT, among other concerns. I have not prodded it yet, but since I removed your speedy tag despite my reservations about the article, I thought it would be courteous to notify you. Cheers! --Jaysweet 21:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool beans! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 21:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, right after I removed the G2 tag, somebody came along and just tagged it with db-spam, which I also think is not quite correct... Per WP:SNOWBALL, I'm just gonna leave well enough alone this time.  ha ha ha... --Jaysweet 21:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

One Breath at a Time, Inc.
I am just so tired. This article was up for five months, then deleted today because of a perceived copyright infringement. The organization's site borrowed copy from wikipedia...not the other way around. I made a note of the copyright and got permission to use the information from them anyway. Then seconds after I put it back up it's up for deletion. I am 59 years old and way, way, way too tired to have to go before a squad and justify an informative story about a very legitimate group. There are stories on here about many charities including United Way, Red Cross, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association and hundreds of smaller ones. They don't have to defend their worthiness as far as I can tell.

Please reconsider this if you will, if not delete the article and I just won't be back. I am way, way, way, way, way too tired to keep going through this. I've had a VERY bad year and I'd just prefer to forget this experience.

Many kind thanks!

FloridaFox


 * Heya, you have to understand that every article up here has to meet notability standards, that is, carefully read WP:N. That includes red cross, microsoft, and everyone else. That article had not a single citation of a reliable secondary source. Moreover, licenses that purport to give a free license to wikipedia, are not fair game to make wikipedia articles from, wikipedia articles are created using sourced material, not first hand research or reposts of public-domain articles. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 01:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem with that whatsoever. I can deliver sourced material, but not if the article is deleted. Why, after six months of being on the site, can't someone give me a day or two to fix it. There are all kinds of newspaper articles about lung transplantation and the organization. Can you just give me time to fix it? On an aside, I am amused at the thousands of articles on wikipedia that have no citations or secondary sources and remain up forever.

FloridaFox


 * This article looks like advertising copy, not an encyclopedia entry. Those usually get targeted first. That said, I'll remove the speedy delete template as you've shown a good faith desire to make the entry more encyclopedic. I'll keep my eye on it, and you can let me know if you need any help with it. Cheers! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 01:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. (^_^) ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 02:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:Superbeecat/archive/2007
Hey, Superbeecat. I got your message and I guess I must say that I'm a new guy to this whole thing, k? I don't know how everything works here. I did sign up on the 18th.

If anything I said was even in the slightest bit rude, sorry.

Soad liker 02:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Soad liker


 * Nope, nothing you said was rude, was just informing you about some article guidelines, so you wouldn't wonder why the heck your article got deleted! Lemmie know if you need help with anything. Cheers! - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 19:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Escats
You commented on Articles for deletion/Escats. I have re-listed this for further discussion, and you might want to look at the issue again. DES (talk) 16:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Still not sure it passes WP:BIO. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 20:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Ccnwashdc 19:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC) I am willing to edit Christian Newswire but am not sure what you deem as advertising. It seems to be the bare facts, but I will be glad to delete or amend to fit the requirements of this site.

Gary McCullough ccnwashdc@hotmail.com


 * This was speedily deleted before I could reply. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 20:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Outlaw Radio
Hello. I plan on expanding the Outlaw Radio as fully as possible. It's just that I have been busy at work. I'm really sorry if this offends. I plan on adding more and more information periodically, starting today. Please could you reply to my page?

Jay. Pookiejn00 19:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * (addressed on that user's talk page per requiest) - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 20:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello again! Thank you for the speedy response. I am not affiliated with Outlaw Radio - I'm just a big fan. If you go to my profile, you'll kind of see what I was going to add. This is by no means the complete article. I have other links and pictures. Just tell me what I need to do and I'll try my best to follow the guidelines. Please could you reply to my page again?

Jay. Pookiejn00 20:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I guess you could delete the page and I'll recreate it when I have the Notability thing down.

Jay. Pookiejn00 20:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Rozen-e-Deewar
Can you guide me about the reason for the Userbox warning for the article: Rozen-e-Deewar ? I like to inform you that i have just created the article & still in the process of editing it. --Doc sameer 22:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello! The notability tag was placed on that page because you have not provided any reliable secondary sources which establish notability. Please carefully read WP:N. Please continue to edit it, it looks like you are off to a good start. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 22:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help. I think you are satisfied or more needs to be done? :) --Doc sameer 22:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well you can (and should) always do more to improve the article, but as far as notability is concerned, I think it's fine. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 22:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you again for your help. I like to compliment you on your lightning fast speed, which seems more of a reflex than a reaction.
 * That's why I'm a super bee cat. ;) - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 23:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Superbeecat. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. ∆ 22:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If you get any feedback on 'why' you weren't approved and don't mind my being nosy, I'd sure like to hear about it. ;)  Douglasmtaylor 01:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, me too, I've reverted thousands of instances of vandalism, always apologized when I've accidentally made a bad revert, etc. I just don't get it. - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 01:38, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * My guess would be the length of time editing. I think they like to see 30+ days of editing.  That's my guess, at least.  I show your earliest edit as 07:57, 27 June 2007, so my guess'd be they want to see you pass that one month milestone.  I'd reapply (in fact, I'm going to) in a couple weeks.  Cheers!  Douglasmtaylor 11:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe, he never replied on his page when I asked, even though he did so to others before and after mine. Bizzare. I'll just not use it :) - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 22:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's strange...this edit would indicate that you were approved... --Onorem♠Dil 22:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm so confrused. :O - super &beta;&epsilon;&epsilon; cat 22:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: STEFY
Well, first, I would suggest you use WP:TW and then you can request a page for semi-protection(IP's cannot edit, and new users for 5+/- days since account creation) and you can just keep reverting edits easily and give warnings to the users/IP's who vandalize it, then if they continue, submit that IP/user for blocking/banning to the admins(which is a feature of twinkle). Hope that helped. Peace.  Sp art an- Ja mes  16:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)