User talk:Whoville/Archive 2

Common Sense
It's better to captilize it because it makes it look better and it's proper English. Mike41691 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike41691  (talk • contribs) 15:38, 12 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Question about External links to photo collections
Hello, recently you posted a message about not linking to photo collections. I don't quite agree with it since Wikepedia says "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." and this IS meaningful relevant content. But I guess since somebody commented so quickly it is not allowed.

By the way, do you know if there is a way to post a collection to be reviewed (I have lots of nice photos there and if people find it useful they can put it on wikepedia or some other sites)? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adznet (talk • contribs) 00:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you own the copyright to the photos, you can upload them instead of adding links. MER-C 08:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Movie locations
You have taken off an external link related to the Pirates of the Caribbean. Please explain why? I am not link Spamming. It is an informative relevant site which has been around since 2001. It has 1000's of visitors. IMDB is listed. The site has filming locations for 1000's of movies. Please advise. Is there a way to submit a site to appear on each movie page similar to IMDB. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.194.152 (talk) 08:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Orlando is supposed to be fun, right?
''I posted this on Vegaswikian's page. Thought you'd be interested too:''  (sigh). I see that you restored the CFD on Category:Visitor attractions in Bay Lake, Florida. thank you for that. If we're going through cleanup, then we may also want to do CFD on Category:Visitor attractions in Orange County, Florida and on Category:Roller coasters in Greater Orlando, and merge items as necessary into Category:Amusement parks in Orlando, Florida, remove the page List of amusement parks in Greater Orlando as redundant to the category. It's like a giant game of 52-card pickup over there on the Orlando pages. SpikeJones (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comment on Epcot. I would like for us to have some sort of basis of discussion to resolve this issue because it's simply getting out of hand. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 00:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I've added some additional supporting information, indicating this is definitely a pattern with this user. I'm also trying to determine if the puppeteer (Miamiboyzinhere) is actually a puppet itself of another user. Until I know for sure, or at least have enough evidence to back up my claim, I won't start a case into that. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 02:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Here we go again. User 74.225.163.175 has joined in the fun.  Thank you for the other heads-up.  I feel like singing We're All in This Together but that would be cheesy. SpikeJones (talk) 03:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The original puppeteer's block lapsed and he's at it again. The discussion started reasonably at Walt Disney World Resort, but apparently the user didn't like the response so he started editing away; as his main account is registered, the semi-protect isn't helping. It's getting worse over at Splendid China (Florida), and he's vandalizing the talk page of a user attempting to revert his edits. Any help would be appreciated.  Thanks --McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Resolving Folino & Gamers?

 * Whoville, if you noticed on your talk and discusion pages regarding these topics, most of the mistakes or links made were done out of ignorance and nothing more. Although I have no financial gain or official connection with the makers of this film, I've also promised not to touch these pages again to help maintain the neutrality of this article. With that said, what is the process for resolving this matter, as I am new to Wikipedia? Thank you.--Encyclopedia Mike (talk) 02:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your response Whoville. I appreciate your prompt reply and efforts to make Wikipedia better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Encyclopedia Mike (talk • contribs) 15:43, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

About 68.191.179.217's vandalism
68.191.179.217 continues to do vandalism, he completely doesn't care. He did vandalism in the List of Happy Tree Friends characters again. He realy should get blocked. Here's his | last change

--Mr Alex (talk) 00:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit on Disneyland Park Page
Hello, Please take a look at the edit I did today. I have done spam edits in the past before I fully understood how this site worked and I apologize for that. But if you look at my edits this time around you will wee that the addition of the site Original D is a fair addition because it contains organize videos of almost EVERY attraction available at the Disneyland Park. I would consider this a big addition to the article as if you are interested in Disneyland then videos are something you would have a rather large desire to see! Again, I apologize for my actions in the past, but please look at the edit I made today (5/14/08) as I clearly added official Disney Links for official information as well as Non-Disney sites that contain more information or things that the Wikipedia Article will not. Thank you. 71.116.162.179 (talk) 01:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Original D editor
Whoville: Just in a brief aside about your comment on my reply that the user may want to create a page on their website. I am rather certain that the article would not be permitted -- but if in-need it was vetted against policy, and it was discovered that this website was notable from reliable third party sources, then their would not necessary be a violation of COI/COS. And if that was the case, then including his links may be appropriate to the other Disney related articles. However, said that, I agree that it really wouldn't get past the other editors. Yet, this process may help bring to light, for himself, the non-notability of his own site. Tiggerjay (talk) 15:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Whoville, please read my comment on this page. Thanks! -Dewdrinker19 (talk) 01:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: CATALANO
''Please stop. Catalano does not have a Wikipedia article and is not sufficiently notable to justify adding his name to multiple articles. —Whoville (talk) 00:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)''


 * Whoville, You may have not checked the internet lately or realize Catalano was musical conductor/orchestrator for artists such as Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Vicky Carr, Natalie Cole, Glenn Campbell and many others. You might just check how many albums he's on spanning 1974-present. He was also a union card holder and band leader prodigy at the Beverly Hills Hotel at the age of 12.


 * AGY/tsi
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.78.150 (talk • contribs) 15 May 2008

Talk:Toy Story Mania!
Sure, just go ahead an make my talk comment regarding the name properly wikified and linked --- See if I don't notice it. heh! No, seriously, thanks for taking the time I didn't. Tiggerjay (talk) 01:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Good move on this article. Also it is a bit funny that there have been 14 edits between these diffs and the only real change is regarding the "th" on a date - otherwise, it was a bunch of RV & Midway Mania stuff. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk: pages
Whoville, I have a question. I had seen other people refer to each user effectively being responsible for managing his/her talk page, thus my blanking mine when I had absorbed the issues on it. It was my hope that it would be easier to manage new issues that way. Apparently that is incorrect (per Mannafredo). What is the correct way to remove things from my talk page? Thanks Bradrussell (talk) 14:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Epcot spam
Thanks for picking up the mistake - I was following a cross wiki trail! Cheers -- Herby talk thyme 11:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Wrcousert
Thanks for watching out for me... :) Have a great week! Tiggerjay (talk) 04:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reporting the vandalism, I took one look at the WP:AIV page instructions and my mind went blank!! BigThunderMtn (talk) 23:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks like the AIV failed because the user was not properly warned. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

RE:Disruptive Edits
Hi Whoville;

I think there is some mistake, I just revert a vandalism in Camden, NJ, please take a look again in the diffs. Regards; Caiaffa (talk) 23:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem Whoville. You might want to change your password or make sure you have logged off when finished if you're using a public computer.Ando228 (talk) 15:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Regarding "Disney Lawsuit"
I've posted a message on his page - this doesn't appear to be a lawsuit with legitimate facts and controversy. After you had reverted Disneysuit's edits on the Pirates of the Caribbean article, he had re-added the edits. I have left him a very lengthy message on his page about the legitimacy and supposed importance of this supposed lawsuit on his page, as well as a level 2 vandalism warning. It seems this guy is really persistent and will continue doing this. What do you suppose we should do? Aparna BlackPearl14 16:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Whoops! I thought I put that on his Talk Page! Seems I made a slight mistake :) I was judging the legitimacy of the issue based on his web-site regarding the matter, which states things such as press kits and whatnot having concocted lies about him. No reason for the franchise to write anything about him if they didn't know of his problem in the first place. Thanks for your help on the subject. Aparna BlackPearl14 17:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * He's put it up again under "Royce mathew" with a lowercase m. The guy's really starting to annoy me. Aparna BlackPearl14 21:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:TKE vandalism
Thanks for the heads up, looks like Hesperian protected the article again. I'll keep a look out on the other articles. Happy editing to you. Keegan talk 20:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Miamiboyzinhere back?
And, curiously, Miamiboyzinhere blanked his talk page earlier today... —C.Fred (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I just checked the logs. The new account was created 8 minutes after the blanking of M's talk page. Circumstantial evidence, and I'll assume good faith that he might be willing to go along with consensus and stop changing categories, but I am watching his edits. —C.Fred (talk) 22:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Want to have some fun?
Add List of Disney villains‎ to your watchlist, then take a look at the history through at least May 2007. A week or two ago, after having asked for citations and general cleanup back in May, I said "screw it" and found an official citable listing. On the bright side, the page is certainly clean and fits WP policy/formatting now, but "being bold" has caused some wailing and nashing of teeth by those who liked the willy-nilly feel of the messy, uncited, longer version. Just wanted to have another set of eyes (and perhaps an opinion or two) to assist if necessary. Hey, if the other way was better, I'll trust your opinion on that over others. Cheers! SpikeJones (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for your support on the Admin Notice-board, two users presenting a case/situation is better than one! Hope I can work together with you on a different article soon ;) BlackPearl14 Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 22:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

DOUBLE STANDARDS & NOT BEING NEUTRAL
Dear Wikinews, Wikipedia and "WHOVILLE" since “conflict of interest” “neutral” is an important subject since “conflict of interest” is being herald by wikinews / wikipedia staff and volunteers, including being used by wikipedia/wikinews administrators and editors with which to have an article /story be deleted, and is grounds for action against a contributor, then please immediately provide documentation that editors, administrators and people providing articles and information to wikipedia and wikinews have no conflict of interest to the articles and stories they create, edit, supervise and/or contribute. For example, did any editor have sexual relationship with a porn star or purchase movies or magazines of a porn star whose bio is listed on wikipedia? This is a conflict of interest. Another example, does any administrator, editor or volunteer of Wikinews and Wikipedia including “BlackPearl14", “SVTCobra”, “Chris Mann” and “Whoville” own Disney stock, have gone to any Disney theme park, watch Disney movies and/or buy Disney products?  Then “BlackPearl14", “SVTCobra” and “Whoville” and all of these editors and administrators are in conflict of interest. Does the people involved with the wikinews articles about fossilized fish found in Canada, or with scientific discoveries or with lawsuits, have any connection to these products, places or businesses? Then this is a conflict of interest. What kind of verification did Wikinews and Wikipedia use to determine that volunteers including “BlackPearl14", “SVTCobra” and “Whoville” don’t sell Disney products and have no business with the Walt Disney Company and their affiliates?   As documented volunteers including “BlackPearl14", “SVTCobra” and “Whoville” together claim “conflict of interest” and delete any contribution in regards to Pirates of the Caribbean for either wikinews or wikipedia, and control it by upholding double standards. Thus first we must verify wikinews / wikipedia enforcement of their policy of “conflict of interest” and “neutral”.

Wikipedia and Wikinews editors don't follow Wikinews' own written polices... “Do you know of an issue that has been forgotten?”. Then you generate and justify reason after reason to state that the above article is not newsworthy, and that wiki does not write old news. You even say one thing, and then later change that to be different claims to justify deletion. You keep throwing different claims at an article you have targeted because someone had shown the charges to be untrue. Wikinews and Wikipedia continues to uphold double standards, and then make statements with which to justify it. Incredible, you ignore any details provided to your counter your claims, and then accuse the person of not acknowledging your control and your new set of claims. Are you aware that Wikinews editors and wikipedia are in conflict of interest as well? They proven that they have a network of supporting friends, using double standards, without following Wikinews and wikipedia's own written polices, and such.

Wikinews and wikipedia allows editors “fans” to be bias, controlling whatever they choose to write even placing things like porn stars penis size, (copies of that have been documented as well) and to write articles that are one sided, promotional and links to various sites that further promote their cause, yet the editors delete anything that is added that they don’t approve from other people, and then justify reason after reason, such as claiming other people as being a conflict of interest, not being neutral and such if they write or contribute. It's against wikinews and wikipedia policies to simple delete "when in doubt don't delete" and not to show respect when communicating. Yet you simply deleted the entire talk and all related pages and justify various statements calling it whatever you want to get your friends to sign off on your control. If you don’t abide by wikinews and wikipedia’s own written policies, then remove all of the polices and stop telling the public to follow standards which are double standards and more.. Does the owner of the company know you are doing stuff like this?

"Whoville" and “Blackpearl14" do you, your friends and family or any contributors, editors, administrators or Mr. Wales or their friends and family own stock within the Walt Disney Company? The Walt Disney Company page is not neutral, it is a series of promotional pages including links to products and causes of the Walt Disney Company.   Many of the other statements on the Walt Disney Company page don’t follow your so-called neutral definition.  Following your own claim of “neutral”, the entire page would have to be deleted per your own standards.  Furthermore, the lawsuit sentence that was placed on it, was exactly as the other statements of “criticism” within the Walt Disney Company page, yet you claim it’s not neutral.   Clearly you enforce double standards and don’t adhere to wikipedia’s own written polices.  They have deleted this section


 * Independent film maker Royce Mathew had sued the Walt Disney Company, Jerry Bruckheimer Inc./films, Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio in Federal Court in regards to the Pirates of the Caribbean movie. Detailed in the lawsuits www.disneylawsuit.com  filed in Federal court “PUBLIC RECORD” (2005 & 2006), and in various national and international news and press releases, state that in the early 1990's independent film maker Royce Mathew had pitched his original supernatural pirate story to the Walt Disney Company which is about “cursed pirates” of the Black Pearl pirate ship; pirates who don't want anything to do with the plunder/return a treasure because they are cursed, with effects of the curse they endure is fully revealed by moonlight and the gold medallion on a gold chain with mystic properties able to summon/call.  Royce Mathew had made a short derivative video work in 1994.  Royce Mathew’s credits included projects for Paramount Pictures, Allan Carr, David DeCoteau and Charles Band and his Full Moon Entertainment company.

Then years later, as the lawsuit details, via Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio, the Walt Disney Company, had incorporated various homages from their Pirates of the Caribbean theme park ride attraction into Royce Mathew’s supernatural pirate story, and are selling it as Walt Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl movie franchise. The Walt Disney Company states that Royce Mathew’s claims and lawsuits have no merit.

During legal proceedings, the Walt Disney Company, Jerry Bruckheimer (films/Inc.), Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio “The Defendants” were all represented by the same team of attorneys headed by Sanford “Sandy” Litvack, who is a close associate of the Walt Disney Company (Michael Eisner), who also was the Walt Disney Company’s attorney in the noted lawsuit of Jeffrey Katzenberg vs the Walt Disney Company.

YET through WIKIPEDIA editors and administrators - continue to uphold double standards and violate their own written policies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.4.182 (talk • contribs) 30 August 2008

Royce Mathew is Back
As can be seen, Royce Mathew is once again going against several WPs.

A little assistance would be greatly appreciated here: as he is personally attacking myself and others once again. Thank you very much! BlackPearl14 Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 20:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Pirates of the Caribbean
Well it has quite a few BRITISH actors and people seem to think Harry Potter is an american film because it has a few american actors, so why should this be any different? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hithere2008 (talk • contribs) 15:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Royce Mathew's comments
He has written comments of harassment against you, so I removed them ;) If you want them for reference in the sock puppetry report, it's in your history. I didn't think you'd want to read the rude comments against you that I had to endure against myself ;) BlackPearl14 Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 20:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please don't remove content from my talk page. I restored the comments; I'm not threatened by them and they would remain accessible in the history anyway. You shouldn't let this person get under your skin so much. &#151;Whoville (talk) 21:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I won't, anymore. I'll try not to get him so far into me, but it really hurts reading all the rude things he has to say about me. Take for instance, the new things he has added against me on the Admin notice-board? And when do people respond on the Sock Puppetry page? Sorry for the questioning, I'm a bit... upset ;) BlackPearl14 Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 01:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sig
Thanks! I was a little worried about the signature! Now I'm going to try to work on my coloring correctly ;) &#91;&#91;User:BlackPearl14&#124;BlackPearl14&#93;&#93;&lt;sup&gt;&#91;&#91;User Talk:BlackPearl14&#124;talkies!&#93;&#93; &#91;&#91;Special:Contributions/BlackPearl14&#124;contribs!&#93;&#93;&lt;/sup&gt; (talk) 01:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, apparently "Raw" wasn't checked. Thanks for your help! BlackPearl14 [ talkies!•contribs! ] 23:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Submarine Voyage
Thanks for backing me up on removing the urban legend from the article. I had heard one a few years back about WDW's lagoon, that the reason the lagoon sat for so long was because it had become infested with poisonous snakes that no divers wanted to go near. No proof of that, either. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 00:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Meg Crofton
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Meg Crofton, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Meg Crofton 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. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Meg Crofton, 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) 20:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

character page
I know you don't often wander to character pages, but feel free to watch Disney Villains for a little bit. The page has recently been changed from a POV listing of "bad" characters into a page that is more in line with content on Disney Princess or Disney Fairies, and there is still some desire by some to add uncited material. Just trying to maintain article integrity, dontcha know. Hope all is well with you. SpikeJones (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

disney timeline
as somebody who has edited The Walt Disney Company page in the past, please bookmark (if you would like) the now-separated Timeline of The Walt Disney Company page. SpikeJones (talk) 19:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, still needs work, thank you for fixing my stuff. Concept should work (summary paragraph, followed by more detailed listing) I think. SpikeJones (talk) 21:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)