User talk:TheHorseCollector/Archive2

This would be an archive (2), please don't edit it. If you must say something, go to the active talk page and copy only the text you wish to talk about from this page to my current talk page. Thank you JayKeaton 18:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Various edits to Talk:Steve Irwin
Thanks for your contribution, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Some readers looking for a serious article might not find them amusing. Remember, millions of people read Wikipedia, so we have to take what we do a bit seriously here. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the Sandbox to get started. I hope you can help us out! -- Longhair 07:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I was referring to the rape comment, not the satellite phone comment. One more incident of childish immatury from yourself, and I'll be blocking you to bring a stop to it. This isn't the first time you've been warned to contribute in a mature fashion. -- Longhair 08:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Just because other editors may act in childish ways, it doesn't give you licence to act the same. Suggesting I stay out of your way is not going to work. If you continue to make disruptive edits, it's only a matter of time before you are blocked. Whether I do it or not is hardly the point. One of the many administrators surely will if you continue. What post am I supposed to have deleted? My deletion log is here if you can point me to the deletion in question I'll answer your other question. -- Longhair 10:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Nobody wants to block you. Not all of your edits are deemed unworthwhile. Just be aware, if I don't block you for acting in a childish and immature manner, somebody else may. Let's leave this be for now. We've both got some serious editing to do. -- Longhair 11:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:NathanFillion.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:NathanFillion.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Tlusťa 13:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Unkempt * Untidy * Kempt
Umm... not really sure your redirects are that useful as they go to a disambiguation page. I wont delete tham but thought I'd just drop a note incase you were going to make more. Thanks! :)  Glen   17:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Andy tle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Andy tle.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 04:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Bilo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bilo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Images listed for deletion
Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them. Thank you. Bigr Tex  03:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:Keatonmask.jpg
 * Image:Keatonproof.JPG
 * Image:Keaton Drawn.JPG

They aren't linked to any pages, that's fine JayKeaton 05:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Miller Park
Of course it was tragic. It was tragic to the families of those killed. However, it's also unencyclopedic to attach terms like that to an accident. When would a fatal accident not be tragic? Well, maybe if Hitler had been on board the Hindenburg, for example. But you were right to revert it, just not for quite the right reason. :) Wahkeenah 09:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Deaf-mute
Hi JayKeaton. Thanks for your comments on the talk page. I think it is clear by several uses of simply the term "deaf" in the the article that the preferred term is "deaf". For more detail about "what to call them" see the article Deafness. In regard to the Deaf-mute article "doesn't talk about, well anything else really", please note that it is not the article on deafness, and I refer you again to that article for much more detail about causes, treatments, and much more; and to the article List of deaf people for informaton about famous deaf people. The deaf-mute article is only a discussion of the historical but outdated term, not a comprehensive discussion of deafness. Ward3001 23:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia
Why don't you think Wikipedia will "last"? --70.142.42.81 01:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I would say it is unsustainable, but I don't think there is any substance to sustain. Wikipedia is more of the "faq" of the world, except maybe not as good because it doesn't retain the full breadth of knowledge offered by a single article by a single person/group. Instead, it offers mismatched information that doesn't flow, is not consistent with articles of similar subject and it's information seems to be based off single or multiple sources. There is no original research done, no one to keep everything in order, instead it seems any old page from Google is enough to be the foundation of an article here. Some corporation, probably one of the existing real life encyclopedias, will see a huge gap in the market and make an online encyclopedia that is both extremely accurate, smart and big. Of course there couldn't be as many articles in such an encyclopia, but then again they can just leave the information on "The Simposons" episodes to the faq of the urban-encyclopedia world (aka, Wikipedia). Don't get me wrong, if I want to know which episode of Mr Bean goes where in the Mr Bean series, I will go to Wikipedia, but as for anything truly encyclopedic... well, you get where I'm going with this ;) JayKeaton 03:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comment
Thank you for your kind words, Jay. Hopefully, if someone is interested in my background or such, they may gain insight by the content of my edits, or by talking to me. I always welcome conversation and discussion, so long as people can keep an open mind about most things. Have a great day! Ex-Nintendo Employee 15:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Un-called-for Talk Page Comment
Thank you for you condescending words, Jay. Hopefully, before you comment on my credibility, you will take a look at my edits. One of my goals as part of the South Park Wikiproject is to shrink the trivia sections to zero if possible, without discarding relevant information. Someone else added a trivia to Night of the Living Homeless pointing out that Cartman jumping his skateboard over homeless people is similar to a Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 challenge. I thought it sounded plausible, so rather than deleting it (as is my habit), I worked it into the synopsis. I'm going going to put it back, but I'm going to put a "citation needed" tag. If anyone can verify it, they may take the tag out. If you feel the need to delete it, please feel free to be more mature. One edit that improves the quality of an article by shrinking the trivia section that plagues those articles, is not enough to destroy any credit I have as an editor, but at least you acknowledge that I at least used to have that credit; I maintain that I still have it. More credit than you do, it sounds like after reading Longhair's posts on your talk page here. At least my posts aren't unfunny vandalism. Professor Chaos 02:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The Tony Hawk "reference" has no place on that page, I'm sorry but it has already been deleted JayKeaton 07:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, it may be a stretch. Someone else put it there, and I was sure that if I deleted it it would show right back up, so I decided to work it in instead, because it sounded somewhat plausible (what if Matt or Trey are a Tony Hawk game fan?).  As I worked it in, I thought, "this might be true," so I put it back myself.  I should have put a tag on it.  It doesn't mean I have no credibility, or that you can go making a fool of yourself with your comments. Professor Chaos 13:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * "If they liked it" is a weasel word, I try to leave out weasel words, thank you. I used my better judgment and deleted it, I knew it had no place on that page and I knew it had to go. I never said you didn't have any credibility, in fact I had never even noticed your username until you messaged me. I don't know why you think I would say you specifically have no credibility, but I AM certain that I am not the one you should be talking to about that little problem. Look, I'm sorry, but the Tony Hawk bit just has to stay deleted. JayKeaton 18:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude, lay off the Tony Hawk thing! It looks like it's back, and guess what: I didn't put it there! Just like I didn't the first time, JayKeaton! I would have deleted it, I routinely delete trivia, but I thought it was pointless as it would just show up again. I also would like it out of the article, unless there's direct evidence that it's true. You seem to think I'm crusading to have Tony Hawk included in this article, the only thing I'm complaining about is that you insulted my credibility (direct quote from you on my talk page: "completely destroys any credit you used to have as a wikipedia editor and makes you seem like a 12 year old adding made up fan fluff"), then denied it. I don't care what you do about Tony Hawk, but don't go after other editors with good track records when you don't know what you're talking about! Professor Chaos 17:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:SeatedOnBench.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:SeatedOnBench.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on  explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --69.91.62.179 20:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Bopo
I have added a "" template to the article Bopo, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Evilclown93 20:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There was a speedy deletion template, but I didn't feel the article met the criteria for speedy deletion. Because there was discussion surrounding it's notability, I've place a prod tag. Also, the last message was automated (sorry!) Evilclown93 20:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

You seem to...
You seem to have a very rough and course way of dealing with people, as if you were going out of your way to offend them with your choice of words. I have just noticed this quite a few times and thought that you might like to know. JayKeaton 05:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you're mistaken. I couldn't care less what you think. Peace. deeceevoice 19:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

FYI, it dawned on me after replying [on my talk page] that, perhaps, I should have responded to you on your talk page. I did so -- and that decision was actually confirmed by the instructions you, yourself, posted there! I cared to take the time to give you the courtesy of a frank response -- like it or not -- and that is all. That does not change, however, the fact that your opinions/observations about my disposition or conduct matter not one whit to me. But because, however, you stated that you "thought I would like to know," I deemed it entirely appropriate and warranted to disabuse you of that sad, little delusion. Surely, you must have more important things to do with your time! Peace -- again. Now go away. deeceevoice 10:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Slowly, simply, so you will understand

 * Then you do care what I think, as you complied with my instructions at the top of my talk page. Jerks tend to get treated like jerks, and I noticed it was a common theme throughout your history. I thought you might wanted to be told to take it as a chance to turn your life around, start dealing with people better. JayKeaton 09:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you're being purposely obtuse, if you have difficulty with reading comprehension, or if you're simply feebleminded. But I'll say this. Responding to your post on your talk page, in compliance with your request, is just that. Nothing more. But if you want to take it as some sort of personal affirmation of the value of your opinion and counsel to "turn my life around" and stop acting like a "jerk," if it makes you happy and feel all warm and fuzzy, then -- great. I'm happy you're happy, you poor, delusional schmuck. :)

Oh. And please don't bother to post to my talk page again. Any comments you may have will be deleted. Unread. Peace. User:deeceevoice 14:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh well, I guess some people enjoy being offensive, it's sort of like a power trip, it affirms in their minds at least that they are strong online, when in the real world they are weak. Cyber bullies are usually bullied themselves in the real world. Oh well, enjoy your little life all the same ^_^ JayKeaton 01:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Lol, I didn't think it was ethical to delete messages on your own talk page for archive and event reasons, but hey, no one tells you what to do right? Rofflecopter JayKeaton 05:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to throw in my own two cents - the irony in JayKeaton's replies is positively overflowing.KrytenKoro 04:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh I am nothing, if not ironic. I try to positively overflow in all that I do. JayKeaton 04:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fresh Meat Cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Fresh Meat Cover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on You Are Empty, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. MarkBolton 14:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know that I deleted the article under speedy criteria A1. I don't think it was an advert: it simply had so little content that it was of little use. Constructive criticism: articles should contain much more than one line and a table, and should also contain links to sources independent of the subject to establish notability. The JPS talk to me  21:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Constructive criticism: Don't delete stubs for articles you don't think should have been deleted. I have recreated it, DO NOT DELETE IT, you have been warned... JayKeaton 22:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Wet Set Magazine proposed deletion
Hey, thanks for sticking up for this article. You might also want to chime in on the proposed deletion of Omorashi Tenshi, a manga also focusing on omorashi. Fsecret 19:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Your Omorashi Tenshi revision
This is really excellent, JayKeaton. I am glad to have finally some help in working on the omorashi articles. The main article on the subject has basicly been me working alone from the begining. I can't read Japanese (I speak a little but usually rely on my binlingal friends), so if you feel up to the task I could really use some help doing what you've done with the Omorashi Tenshi article for the other three H mangas I have in the list of anime and manga featuring omorashi. That way we can avoid Omorashi Ana Dorei, Omorashi Riko-chan, and Omorashi Sakura getting deleted. I did a little rewriting on the Wet Set article too, so they took the deletion tag off. My next move will probably be to work out a history of the magazine so I can add a section about that. Thanks again for all your help. Fsecret 22:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:The_Futures_Overrated.jpg
I have tagged Image:The_Futures_Overrated.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 17:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The deleters are at it again!
And this time they are trying to get rid of Omorashi Sakura and Wet Set Magazine. We need your vote to help stop them. Thanks! Fsecret 17:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you very much for the barnstar! I never thought anyone would actually care about my editing. Again thank you! Swirlex 20:09, 21 July 2007 (UTC) :} :} :}

Thin (body)
A template has been added to the article Thin (body), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Cyborg Ninja 03:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Bio-fran.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bio-fran.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Join Us! :)
Psdubow 15:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Divine.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Divine.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Slender
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Slender, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Slender is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Slender, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 22:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Whiskey Tango, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Iknowyourider (t c) 04:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I did not actually create this page, but thanks for the heads up anyway. JayKeaton 18:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

hp7, critical comment
I noticed you left a chat comment suggesting there should be more critical reviews added to the deathly hallows article. I rather agree, though more precisely my POV is that there should be more comment all together, whether pro or agin. I am interested to know what you think should be in. Sandpiper 00:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)