User talk:UnfriendlyFire/Archive 1

Edits to Great Teacher Onizuka
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. BishopTutu 07:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFCN
Just wanted to say well done for talking to that user (wewewe...) regarding their name before requesting a block, giving users who don't understand policy and have a good faith name the chance to talk about their name before requesting community imput is certainly the right thing to do. I've blocked it now anyway because it seams obvious their not going to responsed. Well done again Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you. =) UnfriendlyFire 03:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

West Virginia trout fishin'
Never be afraid to be bold. The worst things that can happen are 1) it gets reverted or 2) some jerk makes comments on your user page alleging that you possess a particular fondness for the performance of fellatio. Either way, pretty harmless and easy to get over. Cheers.  young  american (ahoy hoy) 01:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Threats
You can stop with the threats. I stopped removing them. Now give a reason for putting an AfD an article about a bestselling album series. Tim Long 06:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, here's a reason: I did not AfD these WOW articles. I noticed that you contributed to the AfD discussion about these articles. Did you discuss your issues with the original nominator? However, you kept deleting AfD templates from the said articles, and according to Wikipedia policy, constitutes as vandalism. UnfriendlyFire 06:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

The AFD
Oops, sorry! Thank you for pointing that out to me; I must have edited an old version. I've corrected the removal. --Masamage 06:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you =) UnfriendlyFire 06:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment moved from user page
Hi I am tennis0808 and I create Holly Vietzke. I was hoping to keep that article. I know it is not great bu I just want to be on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tennis0808 (talk • contribs)
 * I know everyone wants to be on Wikipedia, but there are policies that we must follow otherwise the encyclopedia will become unmanageable. Please see WP:NOTABILITY UnfriendlyFire 03:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You're too fast
Hey man, you keep beating me at the Vandalism Patrol! I give you my congrats! Keep it up, dude. --JDitto 07:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks =) UnfriendlyFire 16:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Message from User:Ryoung122
Can you please nominate the below article for deletion? I tried earlier but it was right after his death. Now that the story has calmed down, I think we can probably win a deletion argument. This guy is noted only for DYING DURING FOOTBALL PRACTICE. Not even a major recruit! Pathetic.R Young {yak ł talk } 06:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeley_Dorsey


 * After reviewing that article, I agree that he is non-notable; however, Is there any particular reason why I have to nominate it for deletion other than the fact that I nominated Waleed's article? Remember that this is Wikipedia and everyone is encouraged to be bold. Is there a problem with nominating an article twice?UnfriendlyFire 23:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)



Orphaned fair use image (Image:Full_Metal_Panic_ep15.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Full_Metal_Panic_ep15.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 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. Bigr Tex  16:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Full_Metal_Panic_ep14.jpg
I have tagged Image:Full_Metal_Panic_ep14.jpg as orphaned fairuse. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add article name to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. Bigr Tex  16:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

LOE crackdown and fair use images
Thank you for being proactive about these images. The db-author tag should work on any images that you've uploaded. ~ Bigr  Tex  13:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

M. C. Gainey
Can you explain to me why the M. C. Gainey image use was inappropriate? Robert K S 12:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page. UnfriendlyFire 14:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That does help, thank you. Robert K S 14:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Terry row
Can we let this article remain.
 * I understand this is more or less self advertising. But the book is surely published. BalanceRestored 07:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, an author with currently only one book published does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia. According to the notability guidelines, a listing on an online bookstore is not an indicator of notability. Also, there are no secondary sources that discuss and analyze said book. I do not see anything else in the bio that could establish notability. UnfriendlyFire 23:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I did make my comment neutral. I am a bit confused. But if the book is available and there is nothing about the author, does it not make readers a bit half informed? Again, his second book is about to release, and once that's done, then we will need to mention the author details at both the books, that will be a redundant information. Still, I am confused. BalanceRestored 06:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If you are confused, please read WP:N. Because Wikipedia can't be about everything, this guide details what does and does not belong in Wikipedia. I noticed that you created an article about the author's book, which I think does not satisfy notability either. As for his upcoming book, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball either. UnfriendlyFire 00:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You all do what is right, I am sure you understand wiki better than me. May be we should wait for the author to become notable. I will still comment neutral. BalanceΩrestored  Talk 07:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Rules of the Death Note
Hello, I must say thank you for deleting this article and enforcing Wikipedia's policies to make the site a better place. Incidently I was just going to start looking into this subject as I've recently started reading this series, but now I can't find any halfway decent places on the internet to find this information. Could you kindly make the article into a user subpage for me so I can read it? Thanks. - The Norse (talk) 23:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page. UnfriendlyFire 00:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Apologies
If I insulted you during the deletion debate for the Lord of Darkness article. I failed to heed your wanrings and insluted quite a few people unfortunately. I am trying to patch up my behaviour because I have been lashing out at people a bit recently. I get a tad protective of the articles I create you see. Sorry again. --Illustrious One (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)