User talk:Tyciol/2007

=January 2007=

Library safety
Hello! I see you are here and so am I! Well this encyclopedia is likely not the best place to hash out library safety issues. I'll see what I come up with elsewhere and I hope you'll consider doing the same. Bye for now--I just stopped in to say hello.

By the way, would you be interested in providing input on the Jackie Robinson page? I say the article makes him look like a baseball hero, which he is, but he was/is more of a hero to millions of Americans who looked up to him for his leadership in his struggle against racism. Also, look at the discussion here. Tell me what you think, if you want, or get involved, if you want. I get the impression I'm at the mercy of a bunch of children who have no conception of history beyond sports and Google. Thanks. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 00:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Dental floss
You made a number of useful edits to Dental floss, so I just wanted to let you know in case it's not on your watch list that some of them are being questioned on their verifiability, some even removed because of this. --Ronz 04:23, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Garden Hopping
A tag has been placed on Garden Hopping, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template  to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kai A. Simon 12:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

=February 2007=

Separating disambiguation entries at Quint
I put the entries at Quint back into one section, and just wanted to let you know my reasoning behind it. True, MoS:DP does indicate that on disambiguation pages with many entries, they can be split up into related sections. However, there are not all that many entries at Quint, and having them all together does not make it hard to find the appropriate article. When they were split up, it was a bit more confusing to find the correct article, as the sections created didn't quite seem to encompass all the articles. If I've misunderstood your intent, definitly let me know. Thanks, -- Nataly a 22:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

LiveJournal
I was actually thinking of another similar section, sorry about that. I've been trying to combat the unsourced axe grinding that seems to go on that article and I jumped the gun a bit.--Crossmr 22:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

=March 2007=

WP:POINT
I'm surprised stuff like this goes on without Wikipedians even knowing they are discussed... posting this here in case the person I asked about it wants to discuss, or people in general. Tyciol 21:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Jesus and Mo
I have removed the Wp links you inserted to the articles on both the mythical and historical persons who happen to share the same names as the characters in the strip. My understanding is that the author of the strip does not intend that the characters should be perceived as referring to the mythical and historical persons. This might explain why the Ganesh character made only a single appearance since any representation is perhaps too unique. Albatross2147 03:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh come on! You know that's exactly what he's doing. If not then why all the references to him walking on water and having stigmata? Anything he says about it being a joke or a stand-in is part of the comedy mocking the evasiveness of people who criticize or who do parodies. I really think they should be added back. Tyciol 15:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps what could be done is to add a sentence or two which state what you have said as a critical point about the way the strip is written (if you see what I mean). This would maintain the conceit that the characters are not really meant to be representations but allow links to the articles. This might not be totally satisfactory for those who hold your view but neither is it totally satisfactory to those who would adhere to my view - so it's probably about right. This is not a die in the ditch issue for me by the way but I think we should not totally ignore the author's decalred intent which is part of the humour. I am sure we can reach a satisfactory consensus on this. Albatross2147 11:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

=May 2007=

Matt Furey
I noticed this page was |deleted by User:Zscout370 on April 17th and again by you on April 20th (I'm guessing it was recreated by someone in that interim or something), and that there was no discussion beforehand as to why. I don't think there's evidence this was an attack page. Many positive qualities of Mr. Furey were espoused, with links to sites supporting his views even presented before ones critical of them. Furthermore, the criticisms on the page were not unsourced. It's pretty confusing, what initiated this? Furthermore, criticism serves not simply to badmouth, but to inform people of the content and healthiness of the methods. It is much like listing the dangerous of pharmaceutical drgs. Tyciol 17:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The article you're referring to has been deleted twice if you look at its deletion log. After it was deleted the first time around, it was recreated as an attack page with statements such as "it is fair to describe his business persona as a slimy used car salesman". As to the nature of the complaint leading to the article being deleted the first time around, you'll need to contact someone from OTRS since I don't have access to OTRS. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  17:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've contacted the editor who deleted it the first time to attempt to resolve this. User_talk:Zscout370/Archive_8 Tyciol 14:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Nightmare on Elm Street
Hi - you've added this movie to Pedophilia and child sexual abuse in films. There isn't any suggestion of CSA in the original 1984 movie, but I have not seen any of the sequels. If there is clear indication of CSA in any of them can you specify which movie please, Tony 09:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)Tony
 * On the basis of what you say, why not enter details of the specific movie(s) you are referring to? Tony 11:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Tony

=June 2007=

LazyTown
A tag has been placed on Welcome to LazyTown, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- (Cocoaguy ここがいい contribstalk) 20:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Strength training
Hi, I'm just looking over a bunch of your recent changes to strength training. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but there's a bunch of stuff that you've done that's counters many edits I deliberately made in the past, and a lot of original-research type stuff that really needs sources before being included in the page. I plan on having a look at the page once your done and re-working what I consider iffy, moving it to the talk page or just re-wording as I think is required. I'll leave detailed edit summaries as I make changes so you can see my reasoning. Please let me know what you think so we can up the page quality. WLU 16:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Please don't refactor my talk page. I haven't looked at the changes in depth yet, so I've yet to make any myself. My gut impression is that I'll be adding a fair amount of fact tags and some wording stuff. The places where you've elaborated on entries to lists, I'm almost certainly going to be taking out (or suggesting taking out) the elaboration - wikilinks exist so people can read up on the topic if they want to, having little definition half-sentences just clutters up the page for no good reason. Aside from that, I'll have to look at it before giving specifics.
 * Another gut impression is that you may have made it a bit more 'how-to' than previously. However, to avoid pre-judging (because I do love my dearly perfect prose and automatically assume that mine is better than any other contributors' ever could be), I'm going to read through the article rather than comparing versions. More fair to others (equally) perfect prose. I'll start in about nowish. WLU

=July 2007=

Akatsuki (Naruto)
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.  Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 06:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox.  Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 06:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 06:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Tobi
That he is part of the Uchiha clan is irrelevant as it is never stated that he actually was from Konoha. Until we actually see him with a Konoha forehead protector or he states so, he's not.  Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 06:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * To speculate that he is from Konoha is original research. You cannot attribute his being in Konoha to a verifiable source; therefore, don't include it.  Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 06:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Naruto
Two reasons:
 * 1) We use "nine-tailed fox".
 * 2) Naruto says nothing about the fox letting him pull the technique off. Indeed, the type of damage would make that impossible. Therefore, it's speculation to assume why he's confident. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Regardless, it's speculation to assume that. Even a normal person would heal given time. Naruto is no doubt aware of what the technique does to him and how long it would take to heal. Guessing at his reasoning is still speculation. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Point 1 was part of my revert. Point 2 still applies. I'd only be wrong on 1 if 2 was wrong, which it's not. It's still speculation to assume his reasoning. Maybe he's overconfident? Maybe he's compensated for the backlash? There's a number of reasons why he would say that, and to focus on any of them is speculation, plain and simple. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Now it doesn't even say that. Naruto's resilience is discussed in his article, so it doesn't need to be posted after every mention. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

=August 2007=

Nonsense of Jives
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Jives, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Jives provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Jives, 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 14:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry about that. I forgot to look in the history teh_roflmaoer 20:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Meetup in Toronto
Hi, I am organizing a new meetup in Toronto where it will be more convinent for everyone than the current one. Please provide suggestions and feedbacks on the talk page. OhanaUnited Talk page  15:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:SOCK does allow for the creation of sockpuppet accounts for editors who want to keep aspects of their editing seperate. Wily D 16:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * See my comment on Wily's page, SqueakBox 16:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Corporate Justice accusation
Hey did you know that you are mentioned by CSO as an Ephebophilia. Jmm6f488 06:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I wish! Being called an ephebeophile would be a step up from what they've got! Ephebophilia/hebephilia is far less maligned and can be legally expressed. Rather they're calling me a 'pedophile' which is entirely inaccurate, not to mention making things up about my planning to go after minors and stuff just because I want a six pack. Unfortunately, CSO is not an actual wiki, it just uses the freely available open software. Try registering for yourself. Editing is open to a select group (I'm not sure how many, I'm guessing maybe a dozen?) and they don't have policies on neutrality, bias, fact verification, etc. I've e-mailed them a couple times requesting that if they must keep that up, to at least make it more accurate. They haven't replied. Essentially, it's a libel suit waiting to happen, but I can't afford a lawyer and for me personally it wouldn't just be an interstate, but an international issue. Far too troublesome, so for the moment I'm going to attempt to ignore it, and hope that I'll have moved out on my own before they get to the level of harassing me in person due to their hastily conceived conclusions. Anyway, I've removed your link because I'd rather not give them any more traffic than they already have by increasing their PageCount, but anyone involved will know where to look for it if they want to (after all you can just check the history if need be). I'm also not quite certain if I should leave messages pertaining to this issue up on my talk page. After all, it is not directly related to editing wikipedia articles, and might be better suited for MetaWiki, or personal communication between us. Leaving it up might be considered 'pedophile advocacy' or something, lol. It's moreso simply a personal issue involving false statements made by an independant organization, the leader of whom (Xavier) has actually been indefinately banned from Wikipedia for his methods of editing. Do you know who I could contact pertaining whether or not I'm permitted to have correspondance related to this issue up on my talk page? Tyciol 15:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool, I just wanted you to know. I only judge people by their edits and I haven't seen any "pro-pedo" stuff in yours. Honestly I really don't care what people believe, as long as they make good edits it shouldn't matter. Anyway, they have a cool picture of you as Zelda which was funny, but I really don't see the pedophilia in Zelda at all.  Jmm6f488 06:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. anyone can join the taskforce. The guy you were thinking of is Ed Gein. Jmm6f488 06:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

XavierVE
I've noticed you going around trying to develop a coalition to get XavierVE unbanned. Quite frankly, good luck - but I thought you should know about some of the (now deleted) history here. Xavier expressed several times his intention to continue being disruptive and making personal attacks, post links to attack pages/outing pages, and so on. I've offered him a chance already to behave and be unblocked - his response was something like "Take a long walk off a short pier". Truth be told, I'm fairly sure he has no interest in contributing (and having gone over his history quite extensively, he's said as much on occasion) and I'm fairly sure he has no interest in reforming.

Blocks aren't punitive, they're preventative - as long as XavierVE's stated intention is to be disruptive, he'll be blocked to prevent that disruption. Based on a lot of his comments, it seems that's what he wants anyways - pariah status. But I may be wrong. Feel free to pursue whatever actions you like. I just felt you should know the backstory before you did. Cheers, Wily D 17:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * XavierVE was indefinitely blocked not for what he did, but what he stated he would after he is unblocked. I am obligated to block him to prevent further disruption of the encyclopedia and the community, and will only unblock when he has explicitly withdrawn his threats to do so. — Kurykh  18:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, next time, please post a more concise comment, as I will decline to read long winding posts that can be summarized in succinct phrases. Thank you. — Kurykh  18:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The short answer is XavierVE was blocked for 24 hours for making personal attacks (the nature of which I assume you're familiar with). During this time, he continued to do this, and made explicit his intention to resume campaigns of personal attacks as soon as his block expired.  His announced intention to continue making personal attacks is why his block was extended to indefinite - and nobody will unblock him unless he renounces that intention - this is inflexible.  Furthermore, his persistence in posting such attacks to his userpage is why it's locked and deleted.
 * I offered to unblock him if he would behave, and he declined. He also expressed a sentiment to the effect that he wanted to be banned from Wikipedia:

"I'm not interested in having a "formal appeal", nor am I interested in the opinions of the administrators here. I will not compromise with you because I don't care about what you think when it comes to noting the obvious biases of individuals on the project. ... End of the day, there's no better reason to be blocked from Wikipedia than this one. This is the best reason I could have ever imagined as it confirms the "don't ask, don't tell" acceptance of pedophile activist editors here on this project. So block away and protect the talk-page :)"

- XavierVE


 * If XavierVE's interested in being unblocked, he needs to learn to behave himself. You know his real life identity,  and I'm sure you can find his email easily enough.  Send him an email, see what he has to say.  Talk to Squeakbox, who expressed the desire to see him unblocked, and who I've already offered assistance to.  Since a lot of this is in the deleted history, I felt it was best you knew before you ran off without all the facts.  Cheers, Wily D  19:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that without a desire to be unblocked its unlikely that Xavier will be unblocked and I suspect we shoudl be concentrating on other issues such as getting the pro-pedophilia activism article unlocked, the PJ article more neutral etc, SqueakBox 19:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

My email
My email is jmm6f488@gmail.com if you want to discuss what we were talking about. Jmm6f488 07:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

=September 2007=

Re: Toronto Meetup

 * Thanks for the reminder of the invitation posted 04:15, 2 September 2007 by User:Nat but I shall regrettably by unable to attend. Tyciol 21:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Talk Pages
Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. --Yankees76 04:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Ass Pie
Asspie was deleted. Ass Pie, a redirect that you created, might be next. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 15:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Nooooooooooooooo!!!! Tyciol 01:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Forbid comments from anonymous editors?
There are two ways to create an account on Wikipedia. One requires a graphical web browser and good eyesight. The other requires a valid e-mail address that the editor is willing to disclose to e-mail spammers who have put WP:ACC on their watchlist. For this reason, some editors of Wikipedia don't have an account at all. How should such editors contact you? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 15:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you can't e-mail, you can leave a message on the talk page. Or vice versa. Or IM. I can't really think of other methods of communication. Oh and I didn't know comments from anonymous editors were disabled. I'm actually not sure how to enable that. I figured anonymous could edit whatever they wanted. Tyciol 01:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

=October 2007=

Articles
Ha ha, all your articles are horrible and 90% of them aren't even real. --85.210.42.110 19:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree, I like those articles, and I'm not sure what you mean by 'real'. You should register for a named account, it's hard to communicate with an IP guy. Tyciol 20:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2009

 * Cool, that sounds interestng to go to. Thank you for making me aware of this Nat. Tyciol 08:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

=November 2007=

In Remembrance...
--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 00:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tohko Aozaki
Tohko Aozaki, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Tohko Aozaki satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Tohko Aozaki and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Tohko Aozaki during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hammer1980 ·talk 15:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

If you would like the article deleted, feel free to blank the article and then add. This will cause an administrator to speedy delete the page per the author's request, since you are the only substantial contributor. Saves time compared to the AfD process. Thanks! ZZ Claims~ Evidence 16:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Battle ball
A tag has been placed on Battle ball requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Clamster 02:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I used WP:TWINKLE to put the speedy delete tag on it and then it automatically places a notice on the talk page of the user who created the page, so I can't say I remember seeing your username as the one that created it. As far as I recall, the page was about a online ping pong game. Clamster 22:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Very confusing! Tyciol (talk) 11:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

=December 2007=

No content in Category:Kara no Kyoukai characters
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Kara no Kyoukai characters, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Kara no Kyoukai characters has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Kara no Kyoukai characters, 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. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)