User talk:Zoe/December 31 2006

Brazil
I just wondered why you deleted the work on Brazil? SuzanneKn 21:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry SuzanneKn 21:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletions
You have been blocked for 24 hours for repeatedly recreating deleted content. If you disagree with the deletions, you can take the matters to WP:DRV, but just repeatedly recreating the material in question does not resolve the matter. User:Zoe|(talk) 20:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I've just started to write the material in my own words. Just because you are ignorant, the information you dont know doesnt become patent nonsense. I hope you have the sensibility to give sufficient time to comeup with a original article. Try to understand the world is a bigger place with more information than your little mind can comprehend. Lift the block and let me write the article

Hey Man!

The Speed of your work is appreciated but it shows insensitivity to not give sufficient time to create an original article. Also copyrighted material is not an esoteric concept and I very well better understand than you what it means. I was just trying to pool in information and rewrite in my own words. Cant you Hang on? Is this your day job or what ? I pity you Also, just because you are an admin doesnt mean you go around wikipedia deleting articles just to showoff your ignorance. Hope you understand world is a bigger place with more information that your little mind can comprehend and assimilate. Put your skills to a better use...Now lift the ban and let me write the article

I will summarize my experiences and the material I have found on the web.
I am sorry if I violated any copyrights.

Thanks,

Ed

No Shave November
I was disappointed to find out that you had deleted the "No Shave November" article and prevented its re-creation. I didn't see much detail as to the reason why it was deleted. Earlier on October 30, someone else had deleted the same article, and the small section of the article shown on the deletion log ("'No Shave November' is an informal tradition dating back to at least the 1990s. It is a friendly, loosely structured contes...") seems accurate to me.

The person who deleted the article on October 27 claims it's "obviously a hoax article." I don't have access to the complete article, so I can't say for sure that it's accurate, but I can assure you that No Shave November really does exist. I saw it firsthand when I attended North American Baptist College (now known as Taylor University College) in Alberta, Canada in 2000, and I have a friend who is participating this year along with many of his friends in California. He has a blog about it at http://noshavenovember.blogspot.com, and a Google search for the phrase turns up results from various parts of the USA.

I'd be interested to hear why you deleted the article, and I'd like to read the deleted article if possible.

Thanks,

Alex Scheuerman Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Standing in thge rain
I thought you were marking the article for deletion, not just reverting it. ??TotallyTempo 20:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

No Shave November
I would also be very interested in hearing the reasoning behind the deletion and protection of the No Shave November page. No Shave November is a very real activity, with hundreds of people participating every year across North America (and is demonstrated by the number and participants of www.facebook.com groups dedicated to this event, as well as other internet resources). It would be a great disservice to keep this page deleted.

Luke

Fresno, California

It's Pimpin', Pimpin'
Ok... but there are many many albums that arent released yet, and they have an article. Y cant this one have one?? Darkneonflame|(talk) 03:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Wissahickon Creek
...was actually User:Bonaparte. Jayjg (talk) 03:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You Assume Too Much
Zoe,

Unfortunately you have deleted an article that I spent the better part of the last 2 hours writing because you made an assumption about the author of the article. My name is Matthew Varpness and I am the cousin of the actor Dustin Varpness. I have no professional association with him and wrote the article as a contribution to wikipedia because I have been following his work for several years. As you can see from my wikipedia history, I have made contributions on a wide range of topics. Dustin's contributions are significant enough that an article was necessary and I documented all references appropriately. You made the assumption based on my username that I am Dustin. I will attempt to reintroduce the article. Please aid me in any way you can so that I can improve my own Wikipedia skills and the pages I write.

Sincerely,

Matthew

P.S. - I just read your message to me regarding the article being insignificant. I was in the process of completing the article when it was deleted. I saved the work I had completed in case I had a computer malfunction but you deleted it way too quickly. I understand you have a lot of articles to review but in the future I would appreciate some communication before an instant deletion. It is very frustrating to have several hours of work deleted and discourages me from contributing to wikipedia in the future. I'd say from the looks of it wikipedia can use all of the quality contributors it can.

Just to comment, you know about Dustin because he is your cousin, that violates the Wikipedia guidelines for creating biographies/autobiographies. If this person is notable, you should have found out through another means, such as you saw him on TV, in a book, etc. Second, don't spend 'hours' creating one article. Just start a stub and see how it floats. If it sinks fast, no need to add to it. And if Dustin becomes famous one day, then someone other than a family member or close friend will start an article for him.65.81.27.134 05:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't agree. "...and it's little more than a stub anyway" is often part of the justification for article deletion, so it needs to be completed before the SAVE button is hit.  I'd advise users to write it in a word processor and then copy it over to Wikipedia, so the article won't be judged prematurely if they hit the SAVE button before the notable portion is added. StuRat 15:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Zoe: George Sampson is a well-known man in the Silicon Valley.
Zoe, Please accept my humble complaint. George Sampson is a famous person in the Silicon Valley. He is part of the team of 1590 KLIVers. In fact, he is the leader of them. Please reconsider your deletion of my article located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Sampson

Hans Ekkehard Bob references
I did not write the article but someone I know, for whom english is not his mother tongue, asked me to proof read it and make spelling and grammar changes. I noticed the tag you added. I have improved the description of two of the four references that had been cited on the page for Hans Ekkehard Bob. Please let me know if these can be considered reliable sources.

I know the person who wrote most of the article interviewed Hans Ekkehard Bob (who is still alive at this time). If this can be stated in a different way please mention how, e.g. should it give interview date, etc?

For the flight simulator website I would suggest it might better belong in an external link section.

By the way, your talk page is set up nicely to leave messages. Mfields1 23:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

African-American firsts
Thanks for the head's up. I've made a clarification in the lead, and added two cite reqs based on your post, in addition to responding via blue-link source material. -- Tenebrae 21:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool. Indeed, we really need to have the first known African-American Major League player in here. (I'm assuming Moses Fleetwood Walker was one of but not the first, from what you wrote.) I can do a Web search, but if you know offhand and can put that in, I'll wait a few mins. It's nice to work with you! --Tenebrae 21:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Tell me what you think of this ref. for Walker, from a PBS site. I'd need to get a primary source, but do you think it's wroth pursuing, or just a truiusm? {http://www.pbs.org/cgi-registry/generic/trivia.cgi PBS page] --Tenebrae 22:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Guess one can't link directly. Go here, and scroll to bottom button that says "Play ball!" Also found this[blacklisted link removed], but again, it's not a primary source or an established encyclopedia or news outlet. --Tenebrae 22:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Getting close: This article cites "Fleet Walker" as being listed in baseball encyclopedias. I don't have any in the house, but I'll try just "Fleet Walker" online now. --Tenebrae 22:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Jackpot! BaseballLibrary.com: Fleet Walker!--Tenebrae 22:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, f'cryin' out loud ... I could have just gone to Moses Fleetwood Walker! Oy! I'll add him to the list.... --Tenebrae 22:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! All started with you!--Tenebrae 18:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

S&M Man
This is a famous Rugby drinking song performed all over the world by thousands of ruggers. Why was it deleted? There is no log to explain the rationale.

There is no copyright...lyrics are public domain...

NN podcast?
Just wondering why you deleted the page for The Weekly Geek. I believe we proved our worth in being on wikipedia. What does nn podcast mean?

Du glucose pour Noémie
Please don't create empty articles. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * you're not joking, are you? they're not empty, they are quite a bit of work, some in the middle of being created, and I can't imagine that you find it productive to prohibit me from saving mid-progress. Please don't delete blindly. --Murgh 04:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Not joking in the slightest. If you can't be bothered to make a real article, create it in your user space and move it into article space when it has more than an infobox.  User:Zoe|(talk) 04:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * but please, please, give me an opportunity to make those saves before you make irrevokably deletes. it takes me considerably longer to make these than it does to delete. isnt it customary to warn a deletion target? move the segment to a talk page?Murgh 04:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I can't believe it. on a 4 minute whim you took out 4 hours of work because why? you didnt see progress fast enough, and I dont even get to save it anywhere? what an entirely rotten thing to do!Murgh 04:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
No, it is not a copyvio. same author on the two. please leave the article on wikipedia. thanks.

Notability and saliency
The criterion most often relevant to handling conflict of interest via policy and guidelines on content is notability. It is also helpful to bear in mind saliency.

There is currently no consensus on the degree of notability required to justify an article. Consensus does exist regarding particular kinds of articles; for example, see Template:IncGuide. Borderline cases are frequently nominated for deletion and discussed on WP:AFD.

Submitted material often needs to be filtered, especially if it is peripheral to an article rather than salient. It must be in line with policies on content. Even in the case of people who are demonstrably well-known, their unrealized aspirations, thoughts, and hobbies are seldom included in Wikipedia. Wikipedia's policy on verifiability prohibits the inclusion of material not already published by a reliable source. But even if we could verify Tom Cruise's favorite breakfast cereal, that is something that is typically not included in an encyclopedia. [2]

Deleting non-notable articles
Articles that make no plausible claim of notability are usually found and deleted shortly after creation under the relevant criteria for quick removals. There are two other main routes:

Those that offer some claim of notability, however remote, are usually sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Deletion of the article normally ensues. Sometimes it may be moved to the author's user-page. Where article creators are not active editors, it is usually sufficient to remove content via proposed deletion, reserving AfD for the more contentious cases. Users who lightly create articles of obvious minor interest are most likely inexperienced. If there is nothing particularly offensive about the page, please be kind to them. Before nominating such an article for deletion, try politely informing the author. Pointing to this guideline may gain consent to the deletion. In practice these PROD deletions serve well to clear frivolous articles whose authors abandon them.

Joseph Todaro Sr.
First and foremost, I've used the word alleged in speaking of Joseph Todaro Sr. and second of all I'm from Buffalo and if you take a good look I put him in a positive light compared to most other writings and bios about him. When I spoke of narcotics I mentioned the Buffalo Family's past ties and that they've dictated less time to the traffic operations, I didn't mention that throughout the 1980's and 90's that the Todaro regime was heavily involved with the Sicilian Mafia, the Montreal (Rizzuto) and Toronto (Caruana-Cuntrera) Families and New York Bonanno Family in large scale heroin and cocaine trafficking from Canada, up the East Coast to New York and Detroit, all the way to South Florida. There is a ton of informant and surveillance info on Joseph Todaro Sr. Look up the senate hearing statement of Buffalo Family informant Ron Fino who details all the Todaro Sr.'s and Jr.s direct Family ties to labor racketeering. The Buffalo news has run literally hundreds of articles on the Buffalo Family and Boss Joseph Todaro Sr. He's been called a murder suspect, drug dealer, labor racketeer, but I never mentioned any of that because the man has never been convicted of a crime and is also a good and influential community member. Holy shit, I practically advertised for LaNova in the first part! I did it more for myself anyway so delete it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Little Joe Shots (talk • contribs)


 * Hi Zoe, A web search indicates that the main thrust of the claims on the page are (were) supportable. And there are plenty of other wikipedia pages claiming mob connections for the guy.  Can I trouble you to undelete the page and discuss your concerns at Articles for deletion/Joseph Todaro, Sr.?  Thanks, Ben Aveling 05:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Zoe, I've raised Deletion_review/Log/2006_November_10. I'd intended to wait for your response at the afd page, but User:Coredesat closed the AFD, so I've opened a DR instead.  Regards, Ben Aveling 06:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello Zoe, here are some of the internet sources supporting Little Joe Shots' claims:
 * Gangsters-Incorporated.tripod.com article on Buffalo crime family
 * Note: the Buffalo family page, the Leonard Falzone page and the Joseph Angelo Pieri page all claim the Todaro involvement in, if not running, the Buffalo LCN family
 * Note: Gangsters-Inc.tripod.com is in no way a source to go straight off but is a source none the less
 * Mob Leaders chart on AmericanMafia.com, obviously these claims are back up by the AmericanMafia.com creator, notable true crime author, Rick Porrello, and the articles creator, one Allan May. The chart also cites the Justice Department and mafia turncoat Joseph Valachi as making the claims.
 * The site Namebase.com shows that the name Joe Todaro was mentioned in the 1995 true crime book Global Mafia: The New World Order of Organized Crime by Anthonio Nicasso and Lee Lamothe.
 *  I cannot put the link up because wikipedia have blocked the sites URL from being posted due to the site spamming wikipedia or something.
 * Laborers.org article claiming Joe Todaro, Jr.'s and Leonard Falzone's involvement in organized crime related union activity.
 * History of the Buffalo LCN family on AmericanMafia.com states leadership of Joe, Sr. and Joe, Jr., sources the Justice Department, FBI etc. Alexbonaro 06:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Zoe, We can't fix the page if you keep deleting it, but I take your point that it needs to be fixed before it can stay in the main article space. What I'd like to suggest to Little Joe is that we create a page under his user page, and work on it there, using the above references and whatever else we can find.  If and when we get it up to a decent standard, then we page move it to article space.  But I can only make that suggestion if it's OK with you.  Is it?   Regards, Ben Aveling.  PS.  Thanks for leaving the talk page intact.  06:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks.  Regards, Ben Aveling 08:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

no shave november
why would you get rid of no shave november it's a tradition — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.210.66 (talk • contribs)

Bryan Pata
You recently deleted Bryan Pata by nn bio, Wikipedia is not a memorial. But I think he is notable. WP:BIO states "Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports or other competitive activities that are themselves considered notable, including college sports in the United States.'''"

Bryan Pata was a member of the Miami Hurricanes. How is Bryan Pata non notable but Brady Quinn, a player in the same Division and same amateur level as Pata has an article......(not trying to start anything...but I think hes notable enough :D}Coasttocoast 06:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

We don't see every college football player ever played listed. Few if any people heard of Bryan Pata before his shooting death. I only heard about it because someone posted an obit on the Wikipedia deaths page. Brady Quinn was a Heisman candidate. If you have a compelling argument for Bryan Pata, it should be based on his accomplishments as a player, not that he was a player. → R Young {yak ł talk } 05:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Hans Ekkehard Bob references II
I was not familiar with the Wikipedia environment. Thank you for your support and help to set it up right. Nice user Talk side by the way....

Best Regards Redwulf 1 09:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Opri
What are you talking about? I added "mid-20th century" to replace "forty years ago", and added "Film" and Genetics" headers, to distinguish the sections. How is that nonsense?  206.165.137.194 05:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I'm trying to post information about our company because we have a unique process of creating custom longboards. I understand that their issues regarding advertising, but I dont see any harm in informing people about these unique boards. Will I be able to post the article without a link to our site?

David Allen Lambert
Greetings,

This person started an article for himself,

(cur) (last) 03:14, 30 September 2006 Davidlambert1987 (Talk | contribs)

which smacks of self-promotion. So Mr. Lambert 'discovers' one 110-year-old man, appears in the news, and now he's famous. First off, it's against Wikipedia policy to start one's own autobiography. If one is famous enough, someone else will notice.

However, I don't want to be directly involved, so I leave it to you to nominate this for deletion or not, depending on what you think. Thanks.→ R Young {yak ł talk } 05:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

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

Opri
Apology accepted. It may be best to revert to the previous article, remove the film synopsis, and add this link as support for the genetic portion: Sequence Diversity of the oprI Gene, Coding for Major Outer Membrane Lipoprotein I, among rRNA Group I Pseudomonads (http://jb.asm.org/cgi/content/full/180/24/6551). 206.165.137.194 05:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Zoe apologized! Ring the bells!

Bubble07 01:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Skyscrapercity.com
The article on Skyscrapercity.com was requested. Besides, I see no reason whatever to speedily delete it as non-notable, because it is a notable internet forum among those that deal with the topics it deals with, having a considerable and worldwide userbase (greater and wider than that of other internet forums that already have an article). I think there are arguments to support its inclusion and notability. So I request for the article to be restored and, if you think it is appropriate, then put it on Requests for Deletion where the merits and arguments in favor of keeping or deleting it can be discussed. Uaxuctum 05:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

You can have an objective measure of this forum's notability by checking the statistics and ranking at Big Boards. Skyscrapercity currently ranks #102 among the 1,797 forums listed in the database (as a reference, the hugely popular Slashdot ranks #36 among those 1,797). Uaxuctum 07:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

"Wow", I thought moderators were supposed to be a bit more neutral when making judgements, especially when making judgements concerning speedy deletions that are not subject to the normal deletion process which would take into account the opinion of others. Maybe you should check that there are Wikipedia articles on many other supposedly "non-notable" forums that rank well below this one. It's clear we do not agree about the notability of this forum (which is one of the biggest dealing with skyscrapers and architecture, like it or not), so I request that the issue be resolved in Articles for Deletion. The matter should not depend upon your single subjective personal opinion. Uaxuctum 18:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

SpongeBob Star
The SpongeBob Star is given to you for your work on Family Guy related articals. Awarded by Cocoaguy 21:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

inappropriate external links
I've read the message and Wikipedia policy. My hands are slapped.

Although I'll freely admit that I added more external links than was proper, I feel that the webpages that I that linked to contained good information appropiate to the subject at hand. Please reconsider the author interviews. There's no advertising whatsoever on any of the webpages.

A token
Just to let you know that you're much appreciated around here. ➨  ЯEDVERS  21:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Jeffrey T. Capo
I have left a statement on the AFD for the article to keep it from deletion. If there is anything else I should add, please let me know. Thanks. JeffCapo

Thanks for your "help"JeffCapo 07:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

What's the Verdict on No Shave November?
I've been watching this page and the deleted No Shave November page for a few days and I haven't heard anything. I don't expect things to change overnight, but some communication would be helpful. Thanks.

Fergbrain 22:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Username change...
Wikipedia does not allow email addresses as usernames and you have asked me to change it. No problem. My questions are: It might be useful to inform a newbie on how to do this if you wish to pick on me about it ...and second, why did it let me create the account in the first place if it is against the rules of the system?

Orange (colour)
You seem to have endorsed American spelling in the article, although this is at odds with the manual of style. It should use colour throughout to reflect the name of the article. There's been some reverting going on, so I get that you may have misread the situation, but there's plenty of discussion on the talk page. I don't tend to edit war, so appreciate your thoughts here. Steve block Talk 21:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Steve block is right, and said in as many words what I would have said. Please also see User_talk:Cat%27s_Tuxedo, the message I sent to the user whose edit I reverted. I'll leave it to someone else - in the interest of not provoking any edit wars - to revert the page to the way it should be. Nihiltres 23:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Please note that User:Nihiltres is on an apparent crusade to change all of the color articles to British spelling, not just the Orange one. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do not make assumptions about my motives. In fact, for a long time my user page has only had the "color" spelling. I invite you to take a look at it and its history, which each are examples of me using the "color" spelling. In addition, I feel that all of my changes are justifiable as standardization of spelling. The only change I made for which the standardization to "colour" was not completely justified was on Blue, where there were many examples of both spellings. I then chose to standardize to "colour" rather than count every instance of both spellings, since the article is very long. Nihiltres 00:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See also User_talk:Nihiltres. Nihiltres 02:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to change both of Orange (colour) and Blue back to the British spelling, as per the Manual of Style's guideline on resolving these decisions. I will change Orange back to correspond to the spelling used in its title (per the rule that articles should be consistent), and Blue back to correspond to the dialect used by the first contributor. I'll leave Black - despite Cat's Tuxedo's needless change against my change that changed very few instances, it is the dialect of the first contributor. Hopefully this solution, aided by the MoS, can resolve this ultimately pointless conflict. I'll wait until I hear from (both of) you to go ahead and change any of the articles concerned back, to prevent this being construed as more edit warring. I'm posting this on the talk pages of both Zoe and Cat's Tuxedo. Regards, Nihiltres 01:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Please inform us
I'm very interested in what your idea of what personal attacks are. After your message, I'm confused about what you meant.

On demand
Hi, I don't know anything about wrestling - so I don't want to delete it - but this looks like an elaborate hoax, could you take a look please. OnDemand Wrestling and Matrix Digital Audio Corporation, images will need to be deleted too, thanks. --Peta 03:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

My apologies
I was not attempting to vandalize anything. The Matrix Digital Audio Corporation was legitimate. That is my corporation. Also, I only copied the WWE article in an attempt to be able to use certain HTML encoding that I am not familiar with, but was in the middle of ridding the majority and keeping the coding solely. If this seems like I was trying to do something wrong, I wasn't. But I'm not mad for you doing your job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odwrestling (talk • contribs)

That is understandable.
I have not yet read that, however I will now. Thank you for being patient. You are a true professional and that is nice to see now and then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odwrestling (talk • contribs)

James Hol
I am glad you got rid of that user, he was attacking everybody and making false accusations.

Thanks alot Kelvin Williams 08:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Bryan Pata debate
User Zoe,

First off, it was a commendable effort to try to delete a non-notable person from Wikipedia, but the proximity to the death event, coupled with the fact that Wikipedia has a disproportionate number of young people with too much time on their hands and little historical perspective, means that this is a lost cause, at least for the time being.

Bryan Pata, as a football player, had 13 tackles in 41 games. That doesn't sound like a great player to me. The Miami Hurricanes are 5-5 this year and weren't that great last year. Personally I think it's ridiculous how self-centered the 20-year-old age cohort is. It seems they only want to hear about themselves.

However, my message here is really about this, below:

Civility Warning Hi,

Your conduct with respect to me in the debate over Mr. Pata is completely unacceptable. Check my user page for my credentials, including an MA in history. Even if I had no credentials, your tone is totally inappropriate. Had I come across your comment directed at someone else, I would have given you a 12 hour-block for a civility violation. You had no reason to speak in that manner, and the only defects on display were your own. Please reconsider the manner in which you relate to others. Xoloz 17:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I simply used the word 'ignorant' to describe Xoloz's attempt to suggest that Pata's death was notable because Crispus Attuck's death was. I used the word 'pathetic' to describe the state of America's value system today. Neither word is particularly out of line. Rather, I feel that Xoloz's warning says more about his low tolerance for others and an inflated ego that makes him uncriticizable because he has 'credentials.'

This is part of my response, below. I'd like to hear what a third party has to say and also what I can do to insulate myself from people who think they are more important than they really are.

Notably, the argument on developmental psychology doesn't even have a single write-up yet about the psychology of aging. Yet Google returns 166,000 hits.

Results 1 - 10 of about 166,000 for "psychology of aging". (0.15 seconds)

But who has time for education when there's FOOTBALL??? Then we wonder why the USA trails Europe in Japan in math, science, life expectancy, etc.→ R Young {yak ł talk } 08:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Again, my response to Xoloz:

Your so-called 'civility' warning comes across as UN-civil and an abuse of power. 'Credentials' aren't everything...it's called a 'testimonial' fallacy. Simply because George Bush is powerful, doesn't make him right.

The FACTS of the matter are: 1. Your comment was WAY out of line. Crispus Attucks is in American history textbooks in probably every school in America. Bryan Pata isn't, and never will be.

2. Crispus Attucks was not famous simply because of his death, but because he stood up for the rights of Americans. This was an act of civil disobedience, where the decision was made beforehand to take a risk for a cause. In Bryan Pata's case, it was a random act of violence, there was no cause, there was no 'courageous' decision to take a stand for a nation. Comparing the two is an insult to history and damages the minds of young people, who are elready too far removed from being able to evaluate what really matters. Kids today need to know that "everybody is somebody" and they don't have to idolize Bryan Pata, who really didn't do anything special. 13 tackles in 41 games on a 5-5 team does not make someone notable. In retrospect, UserZoe should have known that trying to delete the article so close to the death event was a losing strategy (i.e., appeal to emotion fallacy). So, it looks like all the Pata worshippers will have their golden calf.

3. I used the words 'ignorant' and 'pathetic' to describe your comments. There words are used in mainstream media outlets like the NY Times. To try to claim that I 'crossed the line' is simply to once again miss the whole point.

5. What is the point? The point is, I am fighting for the education of the world. Popular decisions are not always right ones. We see in the Bible that Jesus was crucified and Barabbas the robber was set free. Barabbas was popular at the time. Yet 2,000 years later, who is defending Barabbas? No one. History will judge, and history says that Crispus Attucks is several magnitudes of historical importance above Bryan Pata. Deleting the article, or even suggesting that it should be deleted, really has nothing to do with Bryan Pata but has everything to do with what Wikipedia is. Is Wikipedia a tool to help educate, an encyclopedia? Or is it merely a popularity contest, where items such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Sunnydale, CA are 'encyclopedic?

You may suspend or attempt to suspend my account, but in the long run, the losers won't be me. The losers will be those who were robbed of their education. It's like a kid who runs away from home and their parents, mainly to gain power. Assuming the parents were not abusive but the kid merely didn't want to accept guidance and discipline, the kid looses in the long run, for not learning and listening that the FIRST rule of CIVILITY is to listen to the other side of the story first.

In the alleged words of Henry David Thoreau: "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say them."

Ironically, someone who purports to be anti-Bush is attempting to be a censor. 'Emotion' should never trump logic, because at that point, anything can be justified...killing Jews in the name of "Allah", for example. It's not logical, but emotionally, it makes sense if you believe that "Allah" told you to.

There is nothing more dangerous than putting emotion ahead of logic. True, there needs to be a counterbalance, consideration for others. Last I checked, however, my comments were directed at the posters on the board, not Bryan Pata. I see nothing wrong with calling 'ignorant' something that is ignorant.

As for 'credentials,' I think summa cum laude says enough. Being in 400+ media outlets on six continents says more. But this isn't and shouldn't be about 'ego' or who has the bigger balls. It should be about, what are we doing for others? And I don't think giving people sugar-coated candy is healthy for them, in the long run. Just because I give people 'vegetables' doesn't mean it's wrong.

So, the ball is in your court. You can:

A. Attack me again B. Consider what I said and realize that, if not polite, the comments I made were helpful in pointing out the misplaced values of today's society C. Ignore the whole thing and pretend it didn't happen.

The choice is yours.

P.S. What you posted on the web page was a personal attack. What I posted was a criticism of an illogical comparison.

and
Hello! I noticed you deleted the article as a hoax. I contributed to it with my previous account "Kavadi carrier".

I suspect it is a real book but self-published; Google hits showing fervant praise for the book on various blogs and the Amazon entry itself are probably due to the author Sam Time himself making them all up.

Lastly, I blocked Numer1stan indef. I think he has shown sufficiently that the only thing he wants to do is to push this joke book; very likely he is the author. Regards, Kimchi.sg 01:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Prendergast
Warning the author is correct. But why did you not flag the article for speedy?--Anthony.bradbury 01:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * My apologies; either I misread the erdit history or else our actions overlapped.--Anthony.bradbury 19:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Alameda Measure A entry
Not true. This is of interest to people outside of Alameda - the world around - because Alameda is a microcosm of the ongoing debate in metropolitan centers around the world regarding land use, "slow-growth," affordable housing, and toxic waste sites. (Alameda Point is a federal superfund site that needs to be redeveloped.) It is instructive and useful to people all over the United States, indeed, the world over, to follow what goes on in Alameda regarding land use.

And anyway, so what if it is only of interest to people of Alameda? Who says that geography is the proper delimiter of communities of interest in Wikipedia? The Britney Spears page is only of interest to people who like Britney Spears. Perhaps the City of Alameda web page is also only of interest to people from Alameda? People from Alameda are entitled to look to Wikipedia to find information that is of interest to themselves as well, even if it doesn't have broad geographic interest, no? You would dis-enfranchise the citizens of Alameda from using Wikipedia to learn more about what goes on in their city?Mowster 04:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Todaro, Sr.
Zoe,
 * I recently created a temporary subpage at Joseph Todaro, Sr./temp in the hopes it might be considered for undeletion. This version is substantially cut down, however it does include relable references supporting Todaro's involvement in organized crime. Also, regarding the original deletion review, I believe there was also some concern regarding copyright issues although I'm not sure if that was discussed. My best guess would be the former article largely based off the La Nova Pizzeria official website. MadMax 16:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Zoe, I've just finished the changes and some minor editing. MadMax 21:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Klik (band)
I noticed you deleted the page I created for the band Klik. It was deleted earlier, and reverted so I could continue working on the page. I didn't get a chance to work on the page more when it was reverted. The reasoning of NN for Klik is flawed, as they've been featured in Rolling Stone magazine, and recently won the Ford Fusion contest Rolling Stone was holding. I believe that qualifies them as being notable. Even on Klik's home page they have a quote from Rolling Stone about them. This is the Ford Fusion contest page that shows them as the winner

I'd like for the page to be reverted, but I think it'd be best that it stay unreverted until I have the time to put in the sources, such as the ISBN of the 1000th issue of Rolling Stone that they were featured in.

So until now, leave as it is, but when I'm ready, I'm hoping you'll undelete it for me. Thanks.

--Xero Anarian 18:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Creating it under a userpage for me would be great. Thanks much. I'm still learning some of the more advanced features of Wiki, so I didn't really even know about that. Luckilly I've been adopted so that will change soon. Thanks again.

--Xero Anarian 19:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

re: 27 Club
I have fixed the link on the talk page, so it should point to the AfD I was actually referring to now. As this was 8 months ago I really don't remember the AfD very well but I suppose my closing note should explain what my rationale was at the time. --W.marsh 21:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandal
Thank you for blocking User:Smorgisborg, who vandalised my userpage four times and was really starting to annoy me!--Anthony.bradbury 00:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. Did you notice that he/she received seven warnings before you pulled the plug? --Anthony.bradbury 00:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Surely: but my point really is that not enough editors are aware of the four-warning cascade series in WP:TT, and not enough editors know about WP:AIV.While perhaps too many new-ish editors are prepared to insert vandal warnings. I have no solution - just an observation.--Anthony.bradbury 00:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I do when I can. But new ones (which ok, are welcome) keep apprearing. Some way of sending a blanket message to all users, or all new users, would be nice. But I don't think it's possible. All we can do is keep working. Sorry - sent without name tag first time.--Anthony.bradbury 00:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the talk
Just wanted to drop you a note thanking you for talking it out with me on the Deletion Review. I know it's a discussion ya'll are probably all sick of, so, I appreciate you hearing me out. It's one of those things-- when you're a plebian non-admin (which is all i'd ever want to be), you don't want to be the leader of the nation-- you just wanna know that your ballot got read. What I mean by that is just-- I havent' been through what ya'll have been through, and I probably wouldn't do as well as you are doing with it. I'm sure it'd be easy to not reply to me-- the vote on the issue is obviously strongly in your favor, there was no impetus on you to banter with me except out of a desire to help me understand so... seriously and truly, thanks for listening and letting me listen to you. --Alecmconroy 01:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Doh!
Leaving the warning was an accident. I meant to just click "Rollback", but I must've clicked "RB+T1" instead. Well, I'll try to avoid that mistake in the future! &mdash;The Gr e at Llama talk 01:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

User:sloth_monkey and User:wentwj
I gave him permission to edit my bio. People keep trying to stop him. I realize their (your) intentions are good but please stop. sloth_monkey 05:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

IM IN UR BASE KILLIN UR D00DZ
Just wondering why you deleted the "IM IN UR BASE KILLIN UR D00DZ" page that I made. Thanks.

IM IN UR BASE KILLIN UR D00DZ #2
You wrote: "The article failed to provide any reliable sources as to the so-called meme's notability. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)"

My source came from Encyclopedia Dramatica. Unfortunately, Wikipedia blacklists anything from that website, so I couldn't include a link to cite as a source.

It is also pretty common knowledge in the Internet community that the phrase originated with Starcraft. I also had a BoingBoing post and a Metafilter post referencing the origins of the meme in the "resources" section of the article; unfortunately, you deleted it and I didn't save a copy, so I can't refer you to these.

Also, why didn't you discuss this with me first instead of simply deleting the article without discussion? I would have liked to work this out with you and hopefully come to a conclusion without me having to rewrite the entire thing all over again.

''It's pretty much impossible for me to contact all of the editors of every non-notable article I delete. There are far too many. I can move the article to your User space at User:Kosmonaut/IM IN UR BASE KILLIN UR D00DZ, if you want, so you can work on it there. But we do need reliable sources. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)''

Yes, could you move it to my User space, please? I'll try to find a more reliable source that isn't blacklisted (Encyclopedia Dramatica.)

No Shave November
Why did you delete the No Shave November article, it is real, I ahve participated in it. --Witeandnerdy 23:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I deeply apologize
Dear Zoe(Moderator)

I have a hacker in my system and I dont know what to do so I am sorry

Sincerely, Matt Harper A.K.A Stompy

Hey :D
Quick Questio are you actually typing or is this all Computer operated? What OS are u guys running?

YA
Linux is cool but im srry im having PC problems and im about to do the thing where the people come and help u with ur computer over internet. Hope goes well.

Bicycle Day deletion
Why did you delete the Bicycle Day article? At one point there was a good article there. Any nonsense would have been vandalism. Alphonze 10:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. I find this appropriate for an article.  Sources:
 * Hofmann, Albert (1981): LSD, My Problem Child. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-029325-2
 * maps bulletin v16n2
 * The first LSD trip, April 19, 1943, is also widely known as “Bicycle Day” because of Hofmann’s wild bike ride from his lab to his home through the streets of Basel, full of perceptual distortions, not knowing whether he would ever return from his madness.
 * Would you please undelete it? Without knowledge of the prior content, I can't be certain, but I do not feel this qualifies for speedy.  Otherwise, we can just recreate.  &there4; here&hellip;&spades; 18:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Bicycle Day to WP:DRV based on:
 * new york times Jan 7 2006, THE SATURDAY PROFILE; Nearly 100, LSD's Father Ponders His 'Problem Child -- Bicycle day noted as named date.
 * maps bulletin - Also in print, widely distributed, scientific journal. The first LSD trip, April 19, 1943, is also widely known as “Bicycle Day” because of Hofmann’s wild bike ride from his lab to his home through the streets of Basel.
 * erowid established resource for psychoactive plants and chemicals and related issues. Bicycle day noted in Hoffmann's summary.
 * Island Views E-Zine #2 - Bicycle Day Commemorative Issue
 * Many local, often less publicized events taking place on April 19th.
 * Regardless of the outcome on this article, you really made a mistake here by skipping AfD. At the very least deserves a redirect.  I'll chalk it up to honest misunderstanding, or plain 'ol laziness.  Thanks as always for all your work.  &there4; here&hellip;&spades; 02:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Bicycle Day on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bicycle Day. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. &there4; here&hellip;&spades; 02:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleting & protecting The S&M Man
Hello Zoe,

My name is John Mehlberg. I want to work on the rugby song The S&M Man but you have deleted it and protected it from recreation. What was the problem with the article? Copyright? Can't this be avoided or mitigated?

Please advise.

John Mehlberg (email) 21:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Zoe, I have made a preliminary article for The S&M Man (see here: User:John Mehlberg/The S&M Man). Any comments or suggestions are welcome.
 * John Mehlberg (email) 23:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * John Mehlberg (email) 23:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Zoe, yes, if you would, please use my version of the S&M Man article: User:John Mehlberg/The S&M Man.

If you would like for me to monitor the The S&M Man article for lyric additions and clean them out now and again, I will do so.

John Mehlberg (email) 21:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Accusation of Racism
Where do you find racist edits being made on Wang Wei (pilot)??? That is highly offensive to come out with such an accusation. Please try and have a professional debate regarding the edits rather than resorting to this type of low-class race card maneuver. I am Taiwanese-American for God's sake... *rolls eyes*

Not only my point of view
Zoe,

This is not a POV- these are the facts- sourced as Wikipedia asks them to be. It presents all viewpoints- not just Princess Maria's supporters. The Almanach de Gotha states Prince Nicholas to be the Head of the Imperial House- who are you to argue with them? I, however, present all cklaimants fairly and with source material. The current article does not.12.146.102.46 14:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Not only my point of view
Zoe,

This is not a POV- these are the facts- sourced as Wikipedia asks them to be. It presents all viewpoints- not just Princess Maria's supporters. The Almanach de Gotha states Prince Nicholas to be the Head of the Imperial House- who are you to argue with them? I, however, present all claimants fairly and with source material. The current article does not.Tim Foxworth 14:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Almanach de Gotha that Mr. Foxworth cites has as much value as a roll of toilet paper. Charles 18:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

dear Zoe, if you have something to contribute about the problematic RUSSIAN SUCCESSION DISPUTE, please join the discussions at the talkpage Talk:Line of succession to the Russian throne where the complex problematics is analyzed, genealogies and sources are studied in detail, and so forth. I am able to certify that there are several Points of View in that matter. I will now refrain from commenting upon the above allegation of availability of toilet paper. Shilkanni 21:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

wrong way
I re-added the wrong way section removed by you. Te fact tag has nothing to do with it. I mean, I just realized I removed it along the way, but I guess it's an honest mistake.--Certified.Gangsta 00:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC) Btw, why did you block User:Wrong Way when you are part of the content dispute? [] This is a defninite no-no for admins. Not to mention you did this without warning, discussion with fellow admins and consensus.--Certified.Gangsta 00:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for Mediation - Alameda Measure A
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Alameda_Measure_A, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Zoe - could you please direct me to these mysterious and unknowable rules you appeal to for deleting the article? Mowster 04:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion request
I noticed your remarks on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Discuss and Vote; I would appreciate it if you could take a look at WP:DDV, and indicate if it accurately represents the way Wikipedia works (and feel free to reword it if it doesn't). Basically it states that AFD (etc) are not decided by vote count, and in general voting is discouraged (but not forbidden). Thanks. ( Radiant ) 10:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Sources for No Shave November
Per your request, here are some articles I found regarding "No Shave November":


 * http://fp.uni.edu/northia/archives3.asp?ID=4234
 * http://www.webcyclery.com/pages.php?pageid=83
 * http://chips.luther.edu/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4826

Fergbrain 20:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

What nonsense all thing's stated about Jared Bushman where true.

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 05:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC).

Orphaned fair use image (Image:NatalieWood.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:NatalieWood.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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. Rossrs 11:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Wang Wei (pilot)
As a participant in the debate, I invite you to comment on the straw poll I have set up. This straw poll has been listed at Current surveys as well. enochlau (talk) 22:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear User:Zoe, if I may take a moment of your time, it appears that User:Certified.Gangsta appears insistant in including 'that' section again, this based upon one of your edits that may have erroneously included the section. Would you be kind enough to clarify your thoughts on the matter? No offence intended, but I would be happy if there were some closure for this situation. Thank you for your time and attention. Nic tan33 00:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

User:64.229.209.85
I've temporarily blocked him as well. I've seen IP editors (probably this one) do this exact kind of thing before on other antisemitism related "Deletion" type discussions. Jayjg <small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk) 22:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Why Test 3
I suppose it was a mistake, and seeing as though I'm human I'm bound to make them. If you'd like to upgrade that to a 2nd test4 by all means do so, but I see no real purpose. The vandalism from that user seems to have subsided anyway. <span style="font-family: georgia, times; font-size:13px;">--  dhp 1080  (u&middot;t&middot;c)  00:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well then I guess this is all pretty irrelevant. I'll do my best to keep my warnings consistent with others. Have a nice day :-) <span style="font-family: georgia, times; font-size:13px;">--  dhp 1080  (u&middot;t&middot;c)  00:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

ya EXTRA
Ur fuckin EXTRA tryna bryte up urself and delete and revert my edits what if i revert ur face cuz it seems like u need some revertin on that ugly shit bitch. Zoe stay away from my edits u little hoe. Thank you for your consideration!

Some misunderstanding
It was not my intention to violate. Due to ignorance on the rules, I deleted the warning as step for further stage. I am sorry extremely.

Soosaiya

Deletion of User Talk
I request you to restore my previous writing under : The Realm of Faith and Role of Self.

It was my misunderstanding that caused a violotion by my loading an article under

" A summary of Freud's Interpretation of Dreams". I have no intention as such.

As I did not find any warnings as " Dont delete this warning", this had happened I beleive.

I am sorry once again

Soosaiya

Reliability of No Shave November Sources
I believe that I have established No Shave November as a real event that does take place. I believe that the two college newspaper links are reliable sources and the third blog link is also reliable as there is known company behind it (opposed to some random, unknown person). Am I missing something? How do you make the determination if something is reliable or not? What would you consider reliable and satisfactory?

Fergbrain 09:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

No Shave November
If you could take another look at the No Shave November discussion board and give some feedback, I believe that you are the one who has left it up for permanent deletion. I'm not sure why but I also did not see the previous article. I have posted new information and I am also gathering more, I would appreciate the feed back, thanks.

Jeremy LegereJLEG 23:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio on "top"/"best" lists
Hi Zoe, thanks for your comment on the Comedian's Comedian afd. For my own knowledge, I was just wondering if there was a guideline or policy - either on Wikipedia or elsewhere, setting out the copyright violation issue when it comes to reprints of "top X"/"best of X" lists from magazines/tv shows etc. Should we blanket assume that all copies (including partial copies?) are copyvios? What about partial copies of formal surveys/rankings such as that found at THES? Thanks! Bwithh 00:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

oops...
Did I do a boo-boo? If I did, is our friend acting up? - Lucky 6.9 00:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. If he acts up, a couple of keystrokes is all it'll take to end it. - Lucky 6.9 00:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

AsteroidAnaconda can have a nice day AFAIC. Pure nonsense and nothing but. Thanks for the update. And to think...I actually logged on with the express purpose of writing a new article and updating a couple of others. Just my luck. :) - Lucky 6.9 00:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Oh, come now, Zoe. You made my night by stopping by and saying hello! - Lucky 6.9 00:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Bless you. One :) right back. - Lucky 6.9 00:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Tannim block
Hi Zoe. I see you blocked recently. I have a strong hunch that  is user Tannim and is editing again. Picking up from where he/she last left off. Thanks.--Zleitzen 16:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi there
I see an old nemesis is back, wreaking the same irrational havoc as always. Cheers, Dottore So 01:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Lee Van Corteza
Hello Zoe, I see you have been deleting an article named Lee Van Corteza twice now, with the comment non notible. First of all I'd like to hear a clarification on why you think he is not notbale and second of all, I'd like a clarification on why you just simply delete it twice without giving any note, or without giving it a go with a Afd which is quite fair in cases like this. I bet you even haven't read my comment posted on 11 November 2006 at Talk:Lee Van Corteza. I friendly ask you to undelete this article now and give me a clarification on why you deleted the article twice. SportsAddicted | discuss  09:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Still wondering whether you're going to answer this.... SportsAddicted | discuss  18:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem, I will do that. SportsAddicted | discuss  18:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Lee Van Corteza on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lee Van Corteza. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review.

Munk One
I've removed the   you put on Munk One. The way one should deal with a notability problem is to put a    template on the top of the page, and then if no one deals with it - proceed for deletion. Eli Falk 15:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think I need to be lectured to on how to properly do deletion procedures by someone who has been here for less than a month. User:Zoe|(talk) 17:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've been at Wikipedia for over a year, it's just that I've removed old messages from my talk page. Eli Falk 17:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Creating List
How do I use the "" to create a table on the bottom of a page that shows links to related articles?

DEADPIT Radio Wikipedia
I am not from DEADPIT Radio, I am a fan of their broadcast. Is there a specific reason why I'm not allowed to add a page for them? I see other radio broadcasts are on the page.

Thanks,

Jed.

How do i go about doing so
I was writing an article about Independent wrestler Mickey McCoy. You said i needed to have more proof of his acheivements how do i go about doing so? and how much notority do you need?

So you mean to tell me that any of the organizations that employ his services that have notable sites and are territories of larger companys cannot be used as references???

He was interviewed under another wrestling name by a CBS affliate would that count as a source?

He was also in an article in the PW Torch a neutral Wrestling Website would that count?

Here does this help? http://www.pwtorch.com/artman/publish/article_16695.shtml

I taped the interview but i dont know how to get it onto the internet i have the date of the show the show name the name of the affiliate and the name of the host would any of that help? The interview was about him being a wrestler.

They also have him on the forum of milwaukeewrestling.com would that count as a source?

If he is in another PW torch article would that count???

Thanks anyway i will keep trying to find another article or two? The PW Torch will work then right? I just need to find another source.

DEADPIT Radio
The show has been around since December 2005 so its been around for nearly a year. Not a Month. I will get some substantial links to proove their existance.

Jed

User:Preform may be a sockpuppet of User:Tannim
After reading your post at his talk page I have noticed a lot of similarities, in particular his constant uses of sources without never linking them: Preform and Tannim   Flanker 00:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You asked me to change my username.
You asked me, jaymin_329@hotmail.com to change my username. COuld you please tell me how to do so, as i do not know how. Thanks, Jaymin

Reference desk
I tried to talk, Zoe. I talked and I talked and I talked. And then I got advice on what to do; I guess that advice wasn't broad enough. I thought I was the admin on point in dealing with something that many, many users saw as a problem.

The problem, as I view it, is that certain users see themselves as owning the reference desk, and have redefined it to be a discussion board. Your comment means that I won't really be able to continue on the reference desk as I was... so how do you suggest we proceed? -- SCZenz 18:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure you have a full picture of all the effort I put into this first. I felt forced to be heavy-handed, because any attempt at discussion got argued into oblivion; my choices were to accept the way a few users had re-defined the ref desk, or to draw a line somewhere.  I'm not worried about you coming down hard on me; being an admin means I have to take it.  I'm worried that I no longer see a way to bring the reference desk on topic; divising new guidelines for the ref desk won't work, because there won't be a consensus for anything that doesn't enshrine the right to make off-topic jokes.  I'm left with the option of giving up, or going to the arbitration committee. -- SCZenz 18:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * What you call "talked into oblivion" was, in fact, a thorough discussion, showing precisely where your proposed deletions were a violation of Wikipedia policy and a bad idea, in general. Then, when the discussion didn't go your way, you decided to ignore us and do whatever you want.  That isn't an honest discussion, it's just you pretending to discuss things to cover yourself when you later do whatever you want, without a consensus of the users.  I'm glad that an Admin finally spoke up on the behalf of the users, but it's a shame that you don't respect the opinions of anybody but Admins in the first place. StuRat 23:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * If you want to do that, the results could be good; but you take the lead. I'm exhausted with this issue; I've said all I can say, and I have to admit that I'm not (at the moment) up for starting over from square one.  Fortunately, I wrote down my key points.  See User:SCZenz/Reference desk removals for what comments I think should be removed, why I think they should be removed, and why I think Wikipedia policy (in spirit, if not in very narrow reading) already permits what I was doing.  Maybe you can use it as the basis for discussion.  I'll probably join later. -- SCZenz 18:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Bear in mind, if you would, that the first four admins who reviewed my actions supported them. I'm bowing out because 5-to-1 isn't a good enough consensus for community blocks of well-intentioned users, but there is administrative consensus that something needs to be done. --SCZenz 18:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The tone is fine, although you've misspelled my username. ;) It's just that you're doing what I've done before.  Maybe since you publicly rebuked me, you'll be seen as an honest broker and can make progress.  But I honestly doubt it.  Things like a "right to free speech" and "no censorship" are enshrined in the culture of the reference desk, at least for a few habitual misusers, and I suspect they'll block any changes at all. -- SCZenz 18:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This situation doesn't need neutrality, Zoe. It needs people who will stand up and say that Wikipedia pages are for things, not playgrounds.  -- SCZenz 18:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I assume you're aware that Wikipedia doesn't host discussion forums, by policy, so I'll spare you the standard WP:NOT wikilink. So what is the reference desk? -- SCZenz 18:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * And is it also a place where newbies can go to get the random opinions of whoever's there? To be told, when the ask how to find a psychiatrist for a sick friend, that psychiatrists are evil?  To have serious questions interrupted with inside jokes?  I agree we're helping people find information, but you seem to be defending the rest of it too. -- SCZenz 18:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have other things to do. I'll look back eventually and see what progress you can make. You're an experienced user who knows what the purpose of Wikipedia is, but you don't seem to be arguing from it. I'm rather disappointed by this, because you've turned what five admins agreed was a simple matter of common sense policy enforcement into something with the appearence of a content dispute. If your discussions have no result, that won't be acceptable to me; what I think personally is relatively unimportant, but I think my view is in line with the majority of experienced users. But maybe there will be results, and this will all turn out for the best... good luck! -- SCZenz 18:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Location of this discussion
Might I suggest merging both halves of this discussion somewhere so everone can see it?--Light current 18:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This discussion is just between us, the discussion of the tone of the RD, I've posted to you and elsewhere. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * OK Sorry--Light current 18:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Sign
How does this look --Agεθ020 ( ΔT •  ФC ) 20:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Now. --Agεθ020 ( ΔT )

Bosque de Portugal
I just thought I would let you know why I tagged the article. The reason was that the author, João Felipe C.S, simply made about ten articles that all consist of one sentence: "article title" is one of the most famous places in the city of Curitiba, capital of the state of Paraná, Brazil. They are empty articles that don't really need to exist. The subjects, if notable, could easily begin in the Curitiba article and then branch out if necessary. I think the author is just spamming the encyclopedia with one word articles about his home town. <b style="color:green;">IrishGuy</b> <sup style="color:blue;">talk 21:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Bushcronium
Is there a way to find humorous entries related to a serious subject in Wikipedia? Mbhiii 22:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Bytebear's edits
Would it be acceptable to create pages in the template space like this: Each of these pages would be used on 4 different article pages. However they each would only contain data that would then need to be inserted into the different templates. Infobox LDS Temple or LDSTemple. Or would it be better to put such information in a different space - like the article talk space: (I know it should not go into the regular article space ever). Assuming that the technical difficulties of having a page which contains the data to be passed to a template and called from a 3rd page is technically possible.
 * Template:Infobox LDS Temple/Los Angeles
 * Template:Infobox LDS Temple/San Diego
 * Template:Infobox LDS Temple/Manti
 * etc.
 * Talk:Los Angeles Temple/data
 * Talk:San Diego Temple/data
 * Talk:Manti Utah Temple/data
 * etc.

thx in adv -- Trödel 23:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thx - I'll keep investigating within those parameters -- Trödel 23:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

70.8.140.115

 * Zoe, I think you're addressing the wrong users. There are no personal attacks nor editing of another users comments in this user's history. In the future, be more specific. --70.8.150.51 23:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection
I trust this is a temporary measure? Phil Sandifer 02:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

My user page
Hi Zoe, I was debating what I should do in regards to you removing a message from my user talk page. Perhaps (subst:vand) or if I should go higher up. I finally decided to go a little higher up because of the entire situation behind cplot's block. You can find your name on WP:RFI. It's nothing personal but given the circumstance, of what I consider to be a revengeful block by Mongo and his click, I will remain vigilant. I may also ask another administrator from the outside to look into to this. Thank you for your understanding and in the future, unless it is blant vandalism, which it wasn't in this case, please do not remove messages from my talk page. Thank you. --CyclePat 05:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the polite explanation. Please accept my sincere appologies and thank you again for the consice and fair explanation. --CyclePat 21:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Afrika paprika
Thanks for protecting my user page. Looks like I can't even retire in peace. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 22:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter
The November 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 23:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:JetLi.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:JetLi.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 11:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Zoe Tay
A sockpuppet account by the name of 'Anthony luv Ericia' has been created and has reverted all your changes to the Zoe Tay article. For your information please. OngBS 04:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Hillary Clinton Baby Eater
I just stated what is true. She believes in abortion. I demand a re-post of my article! -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattR658 (talk • contribs) 05:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Dalit Bisaya is NOT a school festival
Zoe,

You're fast this time ;). FYI, Dalit Bisaya is NOT a school festival. It is a festival hosted by the University of San Carlos and Kapunungang Bisaya sa Manila (an organization of Cebuano intellectuals based in the capital city of the Philippines.

And even if it is a school festival, AFAIK, that is not in itself a criterion for speedy deletion so at least there should be debate on the importance. But then again, Dalit Bisaya is NOT a school festival. Please restore my edits. ;)

--Bentong Isles 06:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

paragraph in the school article?
I don't get what you mean. I think the 2nd paragraph explains prettily who are the people behind this event. That involves our current Chief Justice of the Philippines. --Bentong Isles 06:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * As you have the impression that this is a school activity. This might help you contextualize the event: Cebu Daily News article on Dalit Bisaya. --Bentong Isles 06:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

hi; 'attack pages', i dont quite understand... did i make an 'attack'? All I did was give a brief overview of the book, anything in particular I did wrong?

my apologies, i was redirected to write the article from Bryce Courtenays page, I assumed it would automatically appear as such, Ill edit it now :)

Zoe,

To tell you frankly, I feel insulted by your actions. And I've been with Wikipedia for almost two years now. What more if I was a newbie? In the first place, you are not basing your action on any of the criteria for speedy deletion. Secondly, I am debating, and I have debated for keeping the article. I have no more time for this now. You can undelete or not the article as you see fit.

As for notability: If you think that the article is not notable, you might want to consider who are these people who are organizing it. But then again, they might not be notable to you. Maayong hapon.

--Bentong Isles 06:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

done and done

Thanks
Thanks for this block. I backtracked and cleaned up after him. Doc  Tropics  07:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Nixer
I think indef is too harsh. I commented at his talk. Please give it another thought. --Irpen 07:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I never thought of 24 hours for repeated warrior. Couple of weeks is in order no doubt. --Irpen 07:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

All he has to do is to indicate that his edit was inappropriate, and swear not to do it again, and he can be unblocked. But he thinks the ridiculous Soviet propaganda he was reverting was appropriate. User:Zoe|(talk) 07:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with you and I actually told him the same. But in any case I disagree with indef here. --Irpen 07:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Indef. doesn't mean permanent. He can be unblocked in a minute.  It's all up to him.  User:Zoe|(talk) 07:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --Irpen 07:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way, you are close to violating the three-revert rule for the article. And, you appear to be misusing the rollback tool, using it to revert non-vandalism. --  tariq abjotu  15:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Your actions in Josef Stalin
I should say that your actions in Josef Stalin show your misundersdanding of Wikipedia policies. Blocking users for their point of view clearly violates the WP rules. Please do not support vandalism and mass revertions.--Nixer 12:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

warning?
Why did you warn a user that if he does not change his username he will be blocked? // Laughing Man 13:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Inappropriate to block people
Hi Zoe, I have just spotted a message on WP:AN/I regarding a block you instated on User:Nixer. You should not be blocking people for their edits on Joseph Stalin as you are involved heavily with the article - so have a conflict of interest]. Your block has now been undone by another admin. Please discuss your action on AN/I. Thanks, [[User:Localzuk|Localzuk(talk) 14:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree with this assesment of the situation and strongly support your actions Zoe. As you know, the indef block against Nixer was lifted. Wouldn't it be appropriate to begin a discussion about a permanent solution? Nixer's Block Log and ongoing disruptive activity seems to justify either an indef block or community ban. Let me know, I will support. Doc  Tropics  19:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Brewerfan.net
Why was brewerfan.net deleteD?

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about
you are close to violating the three-revert rule for the article. There is no three revert rule for reverting vandalism. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know there is no 3RR for reverting vandalism. I did not see it as reverting vandalism, but obviously I'm in the minority. You are free to disagree, but I believe people and administrators are not always going to agree on their analyses of situations since they are not mass-produced robots. Sadly, disagreeing with you does not constitute obviously having no idea what one is talking about. --  tariq abjotu  01:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see your edits as reverting vandalism though
I understand that 3RR doesn't apply to reverting vandalism, but in this case I do not see it as simple vandalism - some of the information being removed was sourced to various reliable sources - so wasn't really vandalism.-Localzuk(talk) 02:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Nixer
I was not in any dispute with Nixer. So far as I can remember, I have never had ANY dealings with Nixer. Nixer did a revert to a ridiculously-POV vandalization of another user whom I had just wanred for a 3RR violation, which meant that Nixer was meatpuppeting for the 3RR, and the 3RR applied to him as much as it did to the other user. Your unblock is unacceptable, and I plan on re-blocking immediately. Please don't unblock without discussing with the original blocker. Wheel warring is unacceptable. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You accusations of meatpuppetry and sockpuppetry border on cynicism. Try assuming good faith with other editors and please understand the difference between POV edits and overt vandalism. Such things are better discussed on the talk pages of the articles; to generate consensus. Your block was illegitimate and still is. I recommend that you unblock at this instant. User:Dmcdevit has confirmed that Nixer has not engaged in sockpuppetry. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  <font color="black" title="Admin actions">{L} 09:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Nixer's block
Hi, Zoe. I certainly support your evaluation of User:Jacob_Peters' edits to Joseph Stalin as strongly POV and nearly vandalistic (and I blocked him myself for the similar editing on Holodomor there he additionally started edit and move wars). On the other hand some of the information he added (like the sourced table with the numbers per deported people) probably should stay. The single revert by Nixer might be in a good faith and at maximum deserved a warning not a block. I know him long enough to be certain Nixer is a different person from Jacob or Zvesda, so sockpuppeting or 3rr violation is not applicable here. To make things even more controversial you could be seen as a party in the editorial conflict and so as somebody abusing the admin tools. I got an email from Nixer asking for the explanation of the block and do not know what to answer. Really it would be better if we let him free this time rather than him insisting on an admin conspiracy enforcing their POV. Alex Bakharev 09:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please, also see Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents for a prove that Nixer is not Jacob and his army of socks Alex Bakharev 10:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Repeated reversions of your edits to Zoe Tay
Please find similar unexplained reverts by user 'Anthony luv Ericia' to Zoe Tay within 24 hours after your last warning. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OngBS (talk • contribs).

must immediately unblock
You must unblock immediately  or I will request other admins to intervene shortly and report you for abusing your admin roles. This user has had nothing but extremely useful contribs to articles that really need it.

It not in the policy to block users for having an email address in the username.

Username:

"E-mail addresses: As of September 26, 2006, the MediaWiki software has been changed so the users may no longer register usernames with "@" in them. Previously, these usernames were discouraged. Preventing the usage of @ stops editors from receiving spam, reduces work for administrators and prevents hurt feelings due to being blocked, which may have led editors to simply leave in the past. Existing usernames with the sign are not blocked, but editors should be encouraged to change their names as the sign interferes with some MediaWiki functions."

Thank you. // Laughing Man 16:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * He has not even responded to my talk requests so I am assuming that he either does not how, or perhaps does not have a good understanding of the English language. In any event, your actions of blocking this user are against the username policy or blocking policy (please point out where it states otherwise if these two Wikipedia policy pages are inaccurate), and I do not understand why you are delaying to unblock this user with the genuine possibility of alienating an editor who has done many positive contributions (in articles where we need editors). It seems to me he just needs some guidance from another Wikipedian, not a block.  What justification do you have for indef blocking this user?  // Laughing Man 21:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have updated the headings on his talk page please change if you want, but I want to make it clear I had nothing to do with your block. // Laughing Man 04:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please review the comments on the administrators note board and please reconsider your refusal to unblock the user. // Laughing Man 15:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This administrator has also unfairly blocked account because it contained an email address. I responded directly to this admin and he did not respond. The block was permanent. This admin blocked the account BEFORE the policy was even changed, and only after posting a warning a week earlier. Please unblock shan_mcarthur@spamcop.net immediately and take more care before blocking editors in the future. It seems like this is not an isolated case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.72.70.37 (talk • contribs) 17:20, December 3, 2006 EST

I hope you are satisfied with the actions you have taken, as the articles that  has been contributing to have not had any activity since your ban. I hope this incident makes you remember to not bite the newcomers in the future. // Laughing Man 21:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Stalin
Thanks for your help on Stalin. That guy is continuing to post profanity-laced tirades on the Talk page, although he's thankfully stopped reverting. As a sign of good faith I've tried to restore the small portions of his original change that could be deemed salvageable, and tried to explain why most of his sources aren't acceptable. I think I'll create an RfC for this article to add more eyes. - Merzbow 21:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Bobby Hauck
An article on this head coach of the Montana Grizzlies football team was tagged for speedy deletion and deleted within a span of mere minutes. Considering that the article fixes a broken link to a Bobby Hauck page from the Joe Glenn page, Bobby Hauck is clearly a relevant person deserving an article on Wikipedia. Furthermore, this article was deleted, yet Zoe did not respond to my comments in the discussion on the page, nor offered a justification in the discussion page. This is an abuse of the speedy deletion policy. --Theblackgecko 00:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a description of a published book. It is factual information as much as anything else in this encycolpedia. If you think that it is an advertisment then edit it to an extent that it isn't an advertisment. Don't just delete it.

Eh?
You stuck an "unsourced" label on the Victorino Matus page. Why? Everything but the top sentence was footnoted, something which was impossible not to see. Please note the problem either on the discussion page or at least in the description box when you do that. I removed the unsourced notice.Noroton 01:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Common sense
There's nothing wrong with a single source (a) because that source is a respected publication, and (b) the information is basic biographical data which is in no way controversial. In your response you linked to the reliable sources page, which states (in the "nonscholarly sources" section):


 * Editorial oversight&mdash;A publication with a declared editorial policy will have greater reliability than one without, since the content is subject to verification. Self published sources such as personal web pages, personally published print runs and blogs have not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking and so have lower levels of reliability than published news media (e.g. The Economist) and other sources with editorial oversight, which is less reliable itself than professional or peer reviewed journal (e.g. Nature).

So "published news media" are generally reliable sources, as even that page makes clear. That page also states: "Common sense is required to determine what sources to use; this guideline cannot be applied robotically." Noroton 02:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Question for you:
Why was "The PWI Years" entry deleted and removed? Can't we at least see a history and have it locked?

Re: Victorino Matus
I think you misread that guideline article: It didn't say that the specific information needed to be printed elsewhere if self-published, it said that the writer needed to be a professional who had been published elsewhere in order to be a credible source. In any event, if you would just consult your common sense you would realize that basic biographical information that is in no way controversial and that is provided by an otherwise reliably accurate publication does not call for intense demands for verifiability. Even if it did, saying that the material is "unsourced" is completely inaccurate. Why are you taking this scrutiny of yours to the nth degree? Is there some reason to suspect inaccuracy or falsehood on the part of the Weekly Standard? Do you subject other articles to similar calls for more verification? Do you have something against Matus or The Weekly Standard? I'm mystified that you continue to make this objection, especially since hardly any page in Wikipedia would meet this kind of demand.Noroton 18:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets created to revert your edits to Zoe Tay
Suspected sockpuppets include FannW, Anthony luv Ericia, Observer888 etc - who have all been reverting your edits to the Zoe Tay article. Please take the necessary blocking action against them. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OngBS (talk • contribs) 17:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

Link removal
Hey there-

Sorry for the trouble, it must have been an accident out of ignorance (or haste).

-peace. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jediwright (talk • contribs) 04:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Comment wanted on User:light current's one week block
I, and User:Gandalf61, and others, feel that the action of User:Friday in blocking User:light current for a week was unwarranted and excessive:. We would appreciate your comments in this matter. StuRat 09:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I've left some replies at the relevant DRVs...
...but since the editing is heavy, I just wanted you to know that, when I'm referring to the speedies not being valid after an AfD, I'm referring directly to policy: "If the assertion is controversial or there has been a previous AfD, the article should be nominated for AfD instead." Working outside of policy is generally something I refrain from doing. --badlydrawnjeff talk 14:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism of Zoe Tay
Sockpuppet number 7 'Bella-la' has reverted all your edits to Zoe Tay again. Please let me know how to block the user. I am watching the page. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OngBS (talk • contribs) 15:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Decato - Preform - Magic Kirin - Tannim
Strong suspicions that this user - is banned user  who also used the banned account  and  which you blocked previously. Request for checkuser has been made. --Zleitzen 15:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: is a confirmed sockpuppet of Preform - Magic Kirin and Tannim .--Zleitzen 02:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested
Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

RD
The RD has slipped far, far away from the goals of the project. I encourage you to join in at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk and help us get it back on track. I know you have a solid understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia- we could use more like you. Friday (talk) 00:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Zoe Tay
could do with blocking, too. See my response on ANI. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 01:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Rules for deletion
Would you care to comment on my proposed Ref Desk Rules for Deletion: ? I would like to build a consensus on which rules should be followed. StuRat 07:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

iPhone article
Please explain exactly how it was an improper undelete? The article perfectly met WP:V and WP:N as I explained. It discussed the rumors and speculation as such, and provided extensive sources for all of it. The iPhone has certainly received a lot of press in many publications considered reliable sources, and so, as deleting admin, I determined it had met the required policies and guidelines in order to be undeleted. Then you come along and delete it without even a word to me or anyone else. Please explain what is going on. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjo e  08:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Even if the undeletion was improper, how was the speedy delete proper? Which of the criteria for speedy deletion did this meet? schi <sup style="color:orange;">talk  18:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. You said, "recreation of previously deleted articles", but #3 in the criteria for speedy deletion says, "Before deleting again, the admin should ensure that the material is substantially identical and not merely a new article on the same subject."  This was in fact an entirely new article on the same subject. schi <sup style="color:orange;">talk  19:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The previous consensus for deletion was referring to a different article. And how is it crystal ballism?  In the crystal ball section of WP:NOT, it says "Of course, we do and should have articles about notable artistic works, essays, or credible research that embody predictions."  That is entirely what the article was made of. schi <sup style="color:orange;">talk  19:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Zoe Tay
Dear Zoe, Walaha2006 is the latest sockpuppet to revert all edits made to Zoe Tay, and the outrageous thing is, he/she is applying for administrator status to circumvent the POV pushing. I've already made a report at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Zoe_Tay. Your help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! OngBS 16:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Days in film
I don't see what the problem is. The day of the year articles, e.g. December 7 are getting quite full. There is continual pressure to remove events that may well be notable to keep the lists short. Do you really want me to add a "films" heading to every day of the year? this is an indexing problem. There is no way to look up films by release date. I carefully combined the use of categories and lists to avoid an overly long list or an overly large category. This, my friend, is the wave of the future as people get tired of the size of the day of the year articles. Within a few years you will see "December 7 in science", "December 7 in politics", "December 7 in archeology" to get around this issue. Please reconsider your position. &mdash;Hanuman Das 18:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Schloss Esterházy
I recently created the page "Schloss Esterházy" And it has a whole bunch of markings telling me it's inadequate. I'm new to the whole Wikipedia scene, and as far as I could find in the help section, there's not much more I can do to bring the article up to standards. If you could give me some specific points as to what's wrong with it, I would greatly appreciate it! JohnAMo 20:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

thank you! I appreciate your help a lot. JohnAMo 04:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Rachael Ray Sucks on deletion review
I have requested a deletion review of your closing of the AfD for Rachael Ray Sucks. I would like to invite you to join the discussion, at Deletion review. A ecis  Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 21:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Zoe,

I responded to you on the Pelosi talk page, please let me know. thanks. Pco 00:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Protection
There's no more need to keep my user page protected, thank You. --PaxEquilibrium 20:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I unprotected it. NoSeptember  21:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

why
why did you delete it. It is real.

Clarification about the Institute for Strategic Clarity deletion
Zoe,

Please help me understand why you have deleted the Institute for Strategic Clarity Wikipedia entry. This is a 501(c)(3) research and education organization working in collaboration with leading institutions (i.e., Harvard, CARE, University of Arkansas, Countdown 2010, AccountAbility, GAN-Net) to understand and disseminate key lessons around how individual leaders and collectives make sense of and lead very complex organizations.

Your help in understanding this, and how to improve it, for suitability in Wikipedia would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jim

did someone take the bio down?

Inquiry about your response
Zoe,

I apologize for my lack of understanding. The Institute for Strategic Clarity has published a few books, many papers and given lots of presentations ISC Pubs. In addition, the Institute has a history of strategic research alliances with Harvard, MIT, University of Arkansas, University of Texas at Austin, GAN-Net, ITESM, George Washington University, and other leading schools, partially evidenced by its Board of Trustees and distinguished Advisory Committee.

Would inclusion of more of this information support the Wikipedia entry?

Sincerely,

Jim Jritchiedunham 03:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

You WrotePlease see Wikipedia:Notability. Has the organization been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself? Your sources have only been to the organization's site itself, and a Google search came up with less than 100 hits that were not to Wikipedia and its mirrors. If you can provide those reliable sources, I'll undelete. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Greater clarity
Zoe,

Since the things that were written by externally validated sources, such as academic journals and publishing companies, were written about the authors (members of the Institute) and their work (under the auspices of the Institute), but not directly about the Institute for Strategic Clarity, then the Institute does not merit a verifiable entry in Wikipedia. Is this understanding correct?

Jritchiedunham

Paternity Party
Hi, just wondering what I did wrong and why you deleted the entry?

Thanks, Alex

Wenocur article
I noticed that Alfred Legrand has removed the deletion proposal for the article R. S. Wenocur. I'm new to Wikipedia, but my understanding is that it shouldn't be replaced; instead, listing the article under Articles for Deletion is appropriate. Is that the case? (I know you are more experienced than I am and know something about this controversy.)

The first time this came up was in August, which led to deletion. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Roberta_Wenocur. Nothing substantive has changed since that decision. Alfred Legrand has added three reasons for notability to the article (in the latest revision), but in the discussion page I explain why one of them is simply false, and the other two don't amount to much (beyond that Wenocur does research).

Thanks for your help!

Fred T. Mathematician 07:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Request your help on the Ref Desk, please
Zoe,

As you may know, I've been working on developing a set of rules for the Ref Desk, with everyone who cares to participate in the process. Once we reach a consensus on a rule, we've been adding it to: Reference desk/guideline. This was originally called a "policy page", but one person changed it to a "guideline page". I let that slide. Next, they changed it from "guideline page" to essay, and now they are just deleting things from it and making non-consensus changes. Can you help resolve this situation, please ? The two people in question, making non-consensus changes to the page, are User:Radiant! and User:Hipocrite. StuRat 13:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Parthenon
Well, vaguely. Thanks. PatPgbarnes 18:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

stop deleting my page
I'm in the middle of creating a page (Ernest Hilbert). Please stop deleting it.

Hi. You said: [edit] Don't create empty pages Empty pages will be deleted. Put content into the article before you save it (content which passes WP:BIO) and your article won't get deleted. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I get that. But even the Criteria for Speedy Deletion says: "please note that some Wikipedians create articles in multiple saves, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its initial creation." You deleted my article three times within 5 seconds of my creating it. Can't you wait a few minutes and give me a chance to add the content? QuizzicalBee 19:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Protected (mine) User page
You can unblock it now. Thanks a lot!!! --PaxEquilibrium 19:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

PocKleanBot
Please stop your bot. The massive spamming of Talk pages is not acceptable. Require an opt-in, first, at least. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have asked an admin to block this for 15 minutes to address a few concerns. The bot is not 'spamming' since that means untargeted. The bot has rules to decide who to contact per article. Opt-in feature is being discussed. Thanks - PocklingtonDan 19:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Can I just ask out of genuine interest, what do people find so bad about the actions of the bot? I've devoted time voluntarily to try and help out clear the backlog of 18,000 articles needing cleanup by trying to bring together a list of editors with significant contributions per article to clean it up. Why do people apparently get riled up over this? - PocklingtonDan 19:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * For one thing, it clogs up the Recent Changes page. For another thing, it's a form of canvassing, which has been rejected in the past.  Was the bot approved to perform this action?  User:Zoe|(talk) 20:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * "Clogs up the recent changes page" ??? What on earth do you mean. Every edit makes an addition to a page's log, the bot clearly labels its edits, and makes no edits to main namespace, only article talk pages and user talk pages. - PocklingtonDan 20:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see on Bots where you got consensus to run this bot, and I don't see it listed at Registered bots. User:Zoe|(talk) 20:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This bot is in RFA and is being tested prior to approval. I still have no idea what your objection is to the bot. Is it just the fact that it was made by abot? Would you have the same objection if a human editor had left you a message saying an article you had worked on was flagged as needing cleanup?? - PocklingtonDan 20:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It's clogging up the Recent Changes page because each entry takes up space on that page. It's spamming because you are making tons of communication to people who are not interested. You have determined that they are interested. Plus you are running a bot which has not been approved, that's not allowed. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, lots of people were interested in receiving the edits. Lots of people thanked me, lots of people got on with cleaning up the articles in question. In fact a small minority (less than a dozen out of the hundreds (almost a thousand) contacted so far felt it necessary to leave vehement comments on my talk page (that's about 1%). The bt was not spamming, it was targeted at people with an interest int he article. I was not trying to sell you viagra, I was posting a helpful notice to your talk page. For some reason a small minority including yourself took disproportionate objection to that. Contrary to oyur statement, it is permitted to run a bot without a flag at a low edit rate before and during the RFA process to test proof of concept. Regardless, i have voluntarily withdrawn the bot. - PocklingtonDan 08:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

??
why did you delete the picture it is an impotant picture to the sports and recreation part of smiths falls

Food
Could please tell me what types of "slices of meats" are available & which section in Safeway to buy from, the deli? Please reply on the reference board. thnx --Judged 22:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

My sig
They mean nothing. However they were added on purpose. I noticed that some user prepend their signatures by an extra separator: -, --, or smth else, and decided that it is indeed convenient. Being sorta smartass, I tried several versions until selected on this one. This idea was not new to me either. In the early days of "internets", when e-mails were often lost and truncated, in a certain community we  developed a certain e-mail standard that would allow for semi-automatic (grep + vgrep :-) processing of e-mails, e.g., indicating that a token is a sig & identifying the end of message (to easily know that the tail was lost). My signature was


 * gnk

Don't ask :-) `'mikkanarxi 23:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, just wondering if there was some significance. :) User:Zoe|(talk) 23:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Menace II Society Part II
Stop deleting Menace II Society Part II. Sometimes the only way to get people to add to wikipedia is to throw up a template for them to edit. Alot of people will edit things and add sources and whatnot, but creating a page from scratch is time consuming. It also makes the Papoose article look really weird, because their are all 16 mixtapes listed +2 specials, and then a red link for this one. And what makes this all the more frustrating is having to argue with admins all the time on the merits of an article. Why cant wikipedia be a huge reference library? Thats what I love about it, if you need to know anything about anything you type it in, and if its not there you can ADD IT! Thats a huge step forward for such a popular website, and randomly deleting pages because they dont have enough content is such backward thinking it blows my mind. Its a encyclopedia anyone can edit, but only if they edit enough? How is an article supposed to grow? The only way any article gets to be good is because its been edited tens of thousands of times by tons of people, and it has to start somewhere, and thats with creating the article. So I'm remaking the article, and i will keep doing so. 00:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Incomprehensible? How? Its a tracklist and infobox what exactly is so hard to comprehend, not empty, and it looks like you have a serious power trip going on by looking at your talk page, you seem to like deleting articles. If you want to delete crap because it makes you feel good why dont you empty the sandbox, and stop stunting the growth of this website with your authority. Plus theres a bunch of album articles that are just tracklists and infoboxes, but tracklists and infoboxes are the most annoying part of creating an article, once thats done people are more inclined to contribute. 00:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You seem to like avoiding any valid point i've made and focusing my lack of praise for you. I don't want to win "points", I want to put forth a good argument regarding your power tripping and abuse of authority. My point was not keep the article because there are others like it, its keep the article because its a good start and can be added to. Could you please just lay off? I honestly dont know what else to say, but it makes the papoose article look really stupid and puts a nice fat gap between the 16 mixtapes that i spent hours cleaning up. 00:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom election questions
Your questions have been answered on the questions page. I hope that gives you the insight into my opinions that you're looking for. :)

Have a great day! <i style="color:#FF00FF;">~Kylu ( u | t ) </i> 00:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for posing those questions to the candidates. While the answers to that question shouldn't be the only determining factor, I think that those candidates who are unwilling to support this ridiculous de-sysoping are showing some independent thought and some backbone, which is what we need in the arbcom.  --rogerd 02:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh it's sense
Oh it's definitely sense. It's so much sense that it's like a 6th sense. I know, not many people have a 6th sense, but for those that do, they'll tell you that it's wonderful. Maybe if you search hard enough you might find some sense. It could happen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thelaststallion (talk • contribs). 23:32, 12 December 2006

Harvard-Yale games
Zoe - thanks for your message regarding Harvard-Yale games. Please feel free to rename the article. I'm relatively new, I don't know how - but I'm definitely agreeable. I hope a short name like "List of Harvard-Yale football games" will suffice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Poggio (talk • contribs). 01:04, 13 December 2006

Canvassing
Hi, Zoe. I read your comments about canvassing in regards to PockleanBot, and I was hoping you could give me some advice. I'm working on making WikiProject Hawaii an active project, and I want to contact the participants via their talk page because the project discussion page isn't exactly active or being watched. What's the best way to contact the WP members with a boilerplate message pertaining to the status of the project? Thanks. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 06:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

"Tomato Firmware" article
I realize that I violated the Wikipedia ToS (which I now understand far more clearly) by posting a users guide to Tomato Firmware on Wikipedia. I have moved the overall guide to Wikibooks. Please accept my apologies for the erroneous submission.

I also apologize for not taking quick action on deleting the non-encyclopedic content of the article. I noticed it had been marked just before I went on the road, and I just noticed it had been deleted.

Can I re-create just the first "Intro" section of the original article, which is very similar to the entry on DD-WRT (another similar firmware project), or can the article be resurrected so I can delete all but the "intro" section?

Thanks.

UPDATE: To your offer to restore it on my user page:  Thanks. Actually, I have the content backed up on Wikibooks, and I'm sure I can get at least a decent stub up in one go. I just wanted to make sure that a page similar to DD-WRT's encyclopedic page (with a description of the firmware, and a link back to the original site) was acceptable. Once bitten, twice shy, and all that.

I'll go ahead and re-publish, and just let me know if it is not acceptable, OK? Thanks.

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE: Looks like someone else beat me to it, and did a nice job on an encyclopedic entry. Apologies for bugging you. :)

MONGO case
Thanks for your comment. I haven't voted on the actual case yet, because I haven't had a chance to read through the evidence carefully, but I do plan to read through the case soon, and try to see exactly what should be done about it. Jayjg <small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk) 19:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

For the record:
This is unnecessary and appalling. I hope you ahve a little more to back up that little dig than just trying to take a swipe, as you've again become prone to do (such as with your recent DRV comments which showed a severe lack of basic CSD policy knowledge). Considering your digs toward me prior to our attempted truce before, I tried to assume good faith before, but I'm not sure if that should simply go out the window at this point - there's certainly enough evidence at this point that you're not interested in even bothering to remain civil and would insead continue to try to get your knocks in. If I'm right, then let me know, I'll be ready for it. If I'm wrong, I suggest you explain why. Otherwise, just open an RfC/RfAr on me and be done with it. --badlydrawnjeff talk 20:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't even pay attention to what articles you edit. I am only concerned with the repeated ill-feeling you have for so many people in your edits on discussion pages.  User:Zoe|(talk) 20:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have ill feeling for - maybe - a half dozen people here, total. It doesn't come lightly, and I do not appreciate you reading into it any other way than what my experiences with them have been.  Your speculation is baseless and entirely without any merit, and is designed only to disparage my opinions on that page.  Completely uncalled for. --badlydrawnjeff talk 20:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

John Fullerton
I didn't create a new John Fullerton page. Please stop pestering me now.--Johnfullerton 22:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have no idea what that links to as it has restricted access for administrators only. I created a John Fullerton page a while ago, after another administrator informed me that it would be better to leave it a while and then it would it fine to do so. I have no sockpuppet either. I think it's about time you dropped this months-old vandetta. I have been doing a lot of positive work on the Derry City FC page and a number of related pages. As a former player, I still don't see why he shouldn't have an article like the other former players.--Johnfullerton 22:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank You!
As a fellow wikipedian, I thank you very much for deleteing the Bio article that I tagged! I appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia and your actions do not go unnoticed!

Sincerely Carlo V. Sexron 22:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Carlo V. Sexron


 * No no no, Thank YOU!

I think we make a great team! I'll mark them up and you knock them down! I enjoy taking action and helping Wikipedia be a clean, reliable source of information without turning into some kid's Myspace Profile... Ugh... could you Imagine? WikiSpace???

Again, Thank you for your help and contributions!

Cheers! Carlo V. Sexron 22:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Carlo V. Sexron


 * Recent Changes

I patrol that section for Hours! I love "doing my part" in helping. I love the Idea of Wikipedia! It's great, and I'm glad to be working with someone who shares the same Ideas!

Take it Easy, and if it's Easy, take it twice! Carlo V. Sexron 22:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Carlo V. Sexron

List of (official) legislation websites
I'm perplexed as to why you are not allowing me to create a list of official legislation websites. I am a Legislation and Policy Officer with the NSW Department of Corrective Services, part of the Government of New South Wales, Australia. It's part of my task to know where I can find legislation from official sources. There are plenty of Wikipedia entries which are basically lists (eg. list of australian federal legislation), and those sites are probably maintained by users who do not have the knowledge that I have from my work.

Please let me finish the wikipedia article, for the sake of people around the world who might find it useful.

After i've added some data to the table, I intend to add further 'encyclopedic' style information. But i've got to start somewhere, you know?

Thankyou. Kind regards, user:Spunkyy, from Sydney, Australia. ps. I'm new to wikipedia (contributing that is; i've been using it ever since its inception).

Fixity of species
This is a new article. Unless you can find I legitimate reason for deletion and then reply to me within the next couple days, I will repost the article where it will stay.

The article is:
 * Notable - "fixity of species" gets 14,500 ghits. 648 google book hits...this was the primary belief in the western world prior to Darwin.
 * Encyclopedic - It is verifiable although it's no where near perfect.

Those are the primary reasons it was deleted, but now it's different.

See for yourself: User:Pbarnes/fixity_of_the_species

- Pbarnes 01:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Inasmuch as he has recreated the page 3 times since it was deleted (see []), do you think this is a candidate for protection (or maybe conversion to a protected redirect to creationism or something like that? Guettarda 17:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll leave it up to you then, and endorse whatever decision you come up with. Guettarda 17:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I kept recreating it in order to find out who was deleting it so I could talk to them. If they had notified me the first time this wouldn't be an issue. Pbarnes 18:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Some other discussion
I'm am really sorry if it seemed Fullarmour Studios is some sort of spam but it is not. The article that was being developed to act as a resource for company and it's comics. many people i know had been asking about it and i saw it mentioned on several message boards and magazines. before the article was deleted i was in the process of deliniating the storys the publishing line produces. the only reason it was posted in rough was because i thought once it was completed with all of it's links and relevant notes it would be reviewed by the administration. There was no spam meant when posting an article on a comic company. FullArmour Studios has never supported that tactic. If you can please, i was posting the main article and a few others were going to add to it once the main gist was supplied...they were going to fill in with what they new of about the comic books. So how do we rectify this...there needed to be a posting on this Comic books (even if it's just the comics) even though it's still underground.

Hoax articles?
What are you talking about?--HarpsBoy 06:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

fixity of species on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of fixity of species. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Pbarnes 18:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

Question
What's up with this edit? It doesn't seem like too unusual a complaint, irregardless of the status of the editor. — P ilotguy  (push to talk) 22:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh... I wasn't aware of that policy. But I guess you are right, it's starting to cross the line between trolling and stupidity now anyways. Thanks for clearing that up for me :). — P ilotguy  (push to talk) 00:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I am a reliable source
Grow up. I am an academic researcher. My sources are excellent, in that they come directly from the musicians. I am the source. All information is rearched by me. If you think that information can only be reliable, if it has been published elsewhere than on wikipedia, then you are insane. If that were true, then original advice a qualified lawyer provides on law would be regarded as no good, simply because he hasn't published his knowledge in a book somewhere other than wikipedia first. Wikipedia will never get anywhere if you continue to harass individuals, just because they know something that YOU do not.

Do you have any opinion about my proposed remedy?
I'm trying to give the arbitrators a way of quantifying remedy, rather than making white and black decisions. BusterD 16:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your critique. I'd like to find some solution other than closing the discussion making some expedient solution, while reassuring MONGO's legitimate detractors he will endeavor to make his tone less harsh. I'm a big MONGO fan, and have defended his right to hurl lightning bolts when he makes such calls. Yet there seems to be a growing group of folks who've felt abused who are not ED trolls or socks. By offering some quantity for negotiation, perhaps even a short time period, we can put this process behind us without rending the community further. BusterD 17:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

superstu8/STU KUSHNER
I believe that this article deserves to be given a chance and should not be deleted. It was created for the purpose of bringing joy to many people, so that they may have a good laugh after a hard day of work, etc. In fact, if you read the article, then you just might learn something. Basically, what I am getting at is this article is one that is worthy of being kept on Wikipedia and read throughout the world. So please, even if you decide to delete this, I respectfully ask that you consider keeping my article. Thank you. -Stuart I. Kushner

Play page
I was putting an auto db-nonsense on this page and when it got saved there was no text. I didn't recreate it on purpose. I think we edit conflicted. Anyway you might want to delete it again. Sorry about that.--John Lake 05:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

PornoTube
Can I ask why you deleted PornoTube? Your edit summary in the deletion log shows "nn website," but the cached version of the page on Google shows a supporting citation indicating not only passing notability, but status as one of the most-visited sites on the Internet (based on Alexa). I was poking around to expand the content and found an editorial for a tech magazine calling it the "most important site on the Internet." That makes two external articles whose subject is this website, satisfying criterion #1 of WP:WEB.

At the very least, this article did not meet WP:CSD when you deleted it, because the external link showed an assertion of notability. I'm just kind of confused as to why you wouldn't at least take it to AfD so it would have a fair shot at surviving. Help me out? Dylan 06:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I guess it comes down to a judgment call, but the cached version shows the article making the following claim:
 * PornoTube is already one of the most visited adult sites in the world
 * with a supporting citation from an article from the widest-circulation newspaper in Latin America. I think that's clearly an article that "gives a claim that might be construed as making the subject notable" (WP:CSD). Just because prior versions weren't up to snuff doesn't mean that this one wasn't.


 * At any rate, I'm going to recreate the article (not using the deleted material copy-and-past, of course) with the requisite supporting citations. Regardless of WP:SNOW, I hope that in the future you give articles that might be at least be conceivably borderline their time of day in AfD. Dylan 06:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me, but what are you doing? You just re-speedied a PERFECTLY good, well-cited, not-even-conceivably-without-a-claim-to-notability non-"spam" (as you claimed in your edit summary) Wikipedia article. It was not recreation of deleted material, as I rewrote the entire thing myself -- and even if it had been, WP:CSD prohibits your speedying it under that pretense as all prior deletions were speedies and prods, which per G4 don't count towards the recreation speedy.

I discussed this issue with you and announced my intentions to recreate the article in good faith. I think it was clear from those efforts (and from the content of the article I created) that my intent was not to in some way perpetuate the PornoTube article as a means of "spamming" Wikipedia, but as establishing a legitimate, verifiable, notable, NPOV article that clearly meets WP:WEB. Your going behind my back (read: not discussing it with me even after I left you messages) to unilaterally speedy it again under the false pretense of "spam" (there was no inkling of spam or advertising in the last version of the article I edited) reeks of bad faith. Dylan 08:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Restore this now please

 * Sorry Zoe but I kindly request you revert your deletion of this; I dont believe in wheel warring but if you do not Im afraid I will. A 4 second search on the site found this and an Alexa rank of 205. You may not believe this to be notable, but regardless it is DEFINITELY not speediable. Also does not qualify as reposted material as it is a completely different version to that which was lastr deleted. Again, please restore immediately and take to AFD if you so desire  <font style="color:yellow;background:#000;"> Glen  08:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Zoe, this is being discussed at AN/I if you'd like to chime in :) —<b style="color:#333333;">bbatsell</b> ¿?  19:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And also AfD - Pornotube. --Kralizec! (talk) 23:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

User talk:64.31.99.95
Firstly, thanks for the block. Secondly, is there any chance that you could semi-protect the user talk page, as this user has showed no intention of using, but rather trolling it with generalised person attacks? Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 06:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Liam Boyle
Liam Boyle was a former politician and did attend St. Columb's College. Why has he been deleted?

Liam Boyle
Liam Boyle was a former politician and did attend St. Columb's College. Why has he been deleted? Ryannus 14:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi
I don't see how all my edits were vandilism! Please respond on my talk. WikiMan53 T/C edits 14:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

sitdompas

Adrian Simpson ReWrite ??
I am not sure why you requested a rewrite but i will accept it and i will make some changes, my apologies if i may have broken any wikipedia rules, i was only creating an article for people to find out about a new generation of animal lovers, after all we need people like Adrian Simpson and Claire Madden to show the new generation that animal protection can start at a young age and that you dont need to be famous or well educated to make a difference in animal conservation. Cheers and Kind Regards Katie Engle

The message
The message, Zoe, is obvious. Don't have an attack page on Encyclopedia Dramatica and also use buttons in a way that Encyclopedia Dramatica trolls can perform wikipediafu on. Angering contingencies of individuals who also want to use the encyclopedia to push their own fringe POV is also not advised. The job of an adminstrator is to find obvious vandalism and revert it, blocking the vandal. If you do anything else you are likley to cause a headache for our poor overworked Arbitration Comittee (It's haaaaaaaarrrd to write "Support, Close" once every two weeks), and they will make you go away. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 12:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Why did you del my article on Touch Tanks For Kids?
Dear Sir / Madam,

I would like to know why you deleted my article on Touch Tanks For Kids. Touch Tanks is a non-profit organization, just like the Sierra club or Treepeople listed in "List of environmental organizations." I have been learning, slowly, how to build an article for the last day and plan to expand the article today.

A simple Google search will show you the amount of press Touch Tanks For Kids has received and justifies its worthiness in Wikipedia.

I request that my article be reverted from deletion and I allowed to finish the article.

Thank you,

Charlton --Sc2racing 13:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

wow, you're a champ. keep up the good work

It was my plan to start a new article yesterday going into detail about what a touch tank is. I have been working on getting photos. http://www.touchtanksforkids.org/tanks/index.htm

Could you revert my article?

Thank you Charlton--Sc2racing 17:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Nergatery
I created that page so people (Like the dude who just asked who WoW was, on the Reference Desk) who weren't here for the original wouldn't be totally "out of the loop" and unable to find out what all was going on, considering that alot of these pages are now deleted. 68.39.174.238 23:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Without (yet) falling back on "It's not policy (yet (or not))":


 * "Vandalism is encouraged by offering such users exceptional notice. This is particularly true for prolific vandals, who are immortalised by Wikipedia pages, meticulously catalogued by category pages, dedicated specific templates, and who thereby become a notable part of wiki culture."


 * The entires on /NGry are single section, (usually) bland descriptions, uncategorized, untemplatized, out-of-the-way that describes something that's ALREADY wiki culture (And not all the T/MfDs will erase from the collective conscious). Frankly I doubt that many uzers even know that page exists, and probably no vandals. In any case this page does have a "practical purpose" of history and education. 68.39.174.238 00:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I wont be, but if the MfD goes as civilly as this has, I wont be too annoyed, even if they do delete it. Thanx. 68.39.174.238 00:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

deleting my article
Why are you deleting my article and classifying it as advertising? I am only writing a biography!!

Thanks
XYZ CrVo 01:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:NPA
Stop it. Seriously. You are out of line. --badlydrawnjeff talk 14:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Yet Another Mistaken A7
Chase Headley, you claim doesn't meet WP:BIO. We've had the discussion at the talk page, and it was clear that your position on the matter did not gain consensus to state as such at the guideline. Undelete this and send it to AfD if you still feel it needs to be deleted. Thanks. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Consenus in the past has been that being a minor league player with no major league experience is not notability, and is a clear speedy. User:Zoe|(talk) 16:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Not at all. You're incorrect on this, please read WP:BIO and reverse your deletion.  --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's at DRV. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Bad faith? No
Zoe, I was arguing against what looked like a re-interpretation of the CSD that wasn't in line with either the spirit or the letter of what the CSD actually says. I have no interest in quibbling over specific deletions, and I don't accuse you of acting in bad faith. You are apparently assigning to me the same actions/opinions as badlydrawnjeff because I agree with him on one issue... and that's neither accurate nor fair. -- SCZenz 18:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And you can stop now. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Four links is enough, Zoe. Please stop. -- SCZenz 18:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Seconded. As someone who has not been involved in the argument, you're overstating your case. Please stop. AnonEMouse (squeak) 19:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

There is such a thing as middle ground
''I am trying to show you what a Recent pages patroller puts up with. I am trying to show you what would happen if I have to list everything I delete to AfD. Everything would bog down. You have said that I can't be trusted to use my judgement. So I have to list everything that I would normally have deleted on AfD. If you are not going to take responsibility for your actions and go vote "Keep" on all of those AfD nominations, then let me do my job and get off my back. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)'' (From my talk page. -- SCZenz 19:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC))
 * I didn't say that you couldn't be trusted. I said, rather, that the community has agreed to leave deletion exclusively to the judgement of the admin on the spot only in cases spelled out in CAT:CSD; because of this, I disagreed specifically with your assertion that "failure to meet WP:BIO" is a speedy criterion.  I do not see how asking you to use your administrative powers in accordance with policy represents an insult, assumption of bad faith, or lack of confidence in you personally; it's the same thing I ask of every administrator.  You might want to note that I'm neither an inclusionist nor a process wonk&mdash;I'd say I'm a moderate on both issues.  You've somehow adopted the attitude that I either let you do whatever you want or I'm 100% against you, and I'd like you to reconsider that. -- SCZenz 19:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If the deletion for WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, etc. is the de facto situation, then I think you have two options you might consider:
 * Get a consensus to change policy to reflect this de facto situation, so everyone knows how things work.
 * Accept it gracefully when someone objects to a borderline deletion, and allow those to go to AfD without complaint if that's the consensus at DRV.
 * I'm not saying CAT:CSD is a straightjacket. If you'd deleted that minor league ballplayed and cited A7, saying it had no reasonable assertion of notability, I would have considered it pushing things a tiny bit but left it without comment (due, indeed, to WP:SNOW).  But if other editors choose to object, you should gracefully let their objections run their course.  Best to minimize drama, I think; being administrators means that we accept review (sometimes harsh review) of our actions, and sometimes (even when we're right) step aside and let others make the call.  In no way does that mean I'm asking you to stop your good work on new pages patrol! -- SCZenz 19:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Zoe, I'd like to suggest you settle down and have a nice cup of tea. If badlydrawnjeff is stalking you&mdash;something I haven't checked on, so I form no opinion&mdash;then ask an uninvolved admin to take appropriate action or file an RfC... but don't lash out at anyone who agrees with him on any issue.  I trust you, and I also know that you can accept constructive criticism when you make mistakes, which is why I've been giving it.  You're a far better Wikipedian than your comments today reflect; take a break, come back as your better self, and then do what needs to be done without the personal drama. -- SCZenz 19:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't sweat it
Remember what they say about deadlines.. WP:TIND. That page is aimed at article creation, but it can apply to deletion also. Friday (talk) 19:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

KEvin Satzinger is a sexy man whore AfD
That was a WP:POINT nomination, and you know that it was. You're well aware that you could have speedied the article without contention. If you have problems with specific editors (and, while I respect bdjeff, you certainly would not be the first person to have issues with him), use your usertalk pages to sort things out, or use mediation, or do whatever you have to do that doesn't needlessly disrupt WP. You're certainly a valued Wikipedian, but even admins should be able to keep their cool. -- Kicking222 19:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And as I stated- and as you just admitted- you were in clear violation of WP:POINT. The AfD itself isn't a big deal, so I don't want to make an issue out of it. I just think you're better than this. There are many avenues of dispute resolution, but disruption should never be one of them. -- Kicking222 19:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Then use mediation. Go to a neutral third party. Don't use counterintuitive measures to get your opinions across. Why am I grilling an admin on this? You definitely know what the right things to do are. -- Kicking222 19:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've taken the above comment to heart: Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-12-19_Zoe_and_badlydrawnjeff. If I've misstated anything, please feel free to correct it or add your own thoughts. --badlydrawnjeff talk 01:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Please take things slowly and coolly
Continue to process speedy deletions normally. Do not get into shouting matches with badlydrawnjeff or let his rather pointy comments spur you into making pointy actions. If he insists on challenging every single speedy deletion you make, ask him every time to cite policy clearly, and not interpretations. If he won't, then he's just being disruptive. If he does and shows a pattern of tracking all your admin actions, take him to RfC. Follow the pattern. Right now isn't a good time to be independant with the way ArbCom showed such wonderful judgement with MONGO. --<font face="Verdana"><font color="SteelBlue">Elar a <font color="SteelBlue">girl  Talk 19:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Tila
The first deleted link was a link to a porn site promo, and the other one links to a blog entry, both are against WP:RS. The categories are already at the bottom, I dunno why they were duplicated up there. --LBMixPro &lt;Sp<font color="#0c0">e ak<font color="#0cc">o n 17:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * They're there too. BTW, have you thought of archiving your talk page? It's getting very long --LBMixPro &lt;Sp<font color="#0c0">e ak<font color="#0cc">o n 23:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

PSS Article, Unsourced Statements
Zoe,

Thank you for the notification of unsourced statements. I am new to Wikipedia, and hope that you can aid me in my sourceing of statements. I have read the articles on sourceing, but have obviously failed to meet common standards. Please respond when you can. JVkamp 19:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your aid. I believe that I have properly referenced my source for the information in the article. JVkamp 22:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

John Fullerton accusations!
I have never even attempted to create a John Fullerton Article and I find these accusations highly out of order. If you study our articles, you will notice that the styles are very different. I know this because the user Johnfullerton has contributed greatly to the Derry City F.C. page and I have read some of his/her other edits. thank you Ryannus 20:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

AN/I on Starbindy
(Copy of note on AN/I)

Zoe, there exist User:A, User:B, User:C, User:D, ... and User:Z. If no other username can be chosen which includes any of these, we'll have a very limited set of editors. The above user has just been given an impossible task. Incidentally, based on three of those names, you should also (to be utterly consistent) block and change your username.... though to what you could change it, I can't guess. – SAJordan talkcontribs 08:16, 20 Dec 2006 (UTC).


 * Perhaps this list will make the point more clearly. How many variations of "Zoe" are there? Should all the other "Zoe"s be blocked because their IDs include yours? Should your ID be blocked because it includes "Zo" (#1 in the list), adding only the single letter "e" at the end? By the rule you enunciated, yes. – SAJordan talkcontribs 17:58, 20 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Dracula
Why do you want to merge Count Dracula (fictional character) with Dracula? 'Count Dracula' is one of several characters in the novel 'Dracula' most of whom have seperate wikipedia entries. The novel does not constitute Dracula's biography and (contrary to the impression you get from watching the films) he doesn't actually have many scenes in the novel: arguably the main focus of the novel is on Van Helsing. Colin4C 12:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Grand Slam Champion
Sorry, maybe that was a lack of experience in Wikipedia, I was following the things said in the protection policy page without realize that only administrators can do that. However, the reasons of why I think this article should be protected were exposed in the list of pages requested for protection. And about the 3RR, why don't warn the guy who has been vandalizing this page? Xbox6 21:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, what I was doing is trying to keep the accuracy of this article. If I was near to doing a 3RR, it was involuntary. Xbox6 21:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Im new and I am a person who works on the disney webcomic for gargoyles

www.ka-blamo.com/gargs

I was trying to create a page for it as it was popular at last years gathering of the gargoyles convention. Just wanted to know if i am able to add this to the wiki thing or not.

This comic is not published. The point of it is for fans on the net.

If I posted the articles about it from the gargoyles conventions, comic con and artists who work on the book would it be accepted?

mikah sykes deletion
Hi, For an hour I thought: wow, my first wiki-contribution.. and then it was deleted after all. I don't understand why, there was no message in my talk-box. I'm new here and I did add two articles before that were deleted - with explanation; now I added more references and external links.. I don't understand the reason for deletion. So please explain?

"What the crap are you talking about? I was just setting up an article about a porn star."

That particular line is not by me (7gongli7) !

Thanks
Thanks for picking up on the bad behavior from the 66.93.251.* range. JonHarder talk 02:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Plane Crash survivors
I am only creating articles on notable survivors. I got your message about the current events, and didn't recreate that page after reading your message, but as the majority of these survivors already have articles or are mentioned in articles on Wikipedia and all I am doing is compiling them. Thanks for your suggestions, but your "Please stop creating articles on every person who happened to have survived an airplane crash. Please read WP:BIO and make sure that these people are notable." message to me was a little on the rude side considering I only created one article that in retrospect was inappropriate. The other articles I created: Ben Cauley (should have already had an article here!), Martin Farkas (survivor of the worst air disaster in Slovak history, therefore notable), Jan Brown Lohr- a child safety advocate whose article had tons of outside references (including transcripts of her congressional testimony) but was mysteriously deleted (I guess being a Congressional witness and public advocate who has appeared on countless tv news programs isn't notable enough?), and Joseph Trombello who wrote a book about his ordeal plus was the last settled lawsuit for United Airlines Flight 232 (I've seen stubs that contain less information) yet this page was removed as well. And why was Spencer Bailey removed from my list of United Airlines Flight 232 survivors? He has his own article on Wikipedia, along with a famous photo, but for some reason has been removed from my list? Can you explain why? I didn't create his article, so some one else found him to be "notable". As for the rest of it, I was only listing airplane crash survivors and not creating new articles for them because I read your warning about Brent Caldwell but these articles on the list were summarily removed also? I am finding this frustrating because aside from the Brent Caldwell page that you deleted I feel that all the other pages I wrote have merit and are just as legitimate as many of the articles and stubs I find on Wikipedia all the time. I am trying to contribute to the community and stay within the rules but I'm finding that it was much easier just to be an anonymous user on the board as there is apparently no conspicuous tracking of edits.

Zoe- I included the references as links in the articles. If you restore the articles I can formally add the references at the bottom of the page and you will have your multiple non-trivial references required to satisfy the notability requirements for Wikipedia.

Thanks, Zoe, fair enough. I will work on them throughout the day today, as I do some work. :)

WP:FILMS Newsletter
The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 01:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Kalpesh Sharma
May be possible that http://www.himtimes.com/full_news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1166359894&archive may not be notable source according to your views. But I request you to recheck

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Kalpesh_Sharma

because only internet sources cannot be said to be notable. I have given the source http://www.esnips.com/web/shriganesh33sbusinessfiles which is a website where a lot of scanned articles from highly reputed and reliable sources of print and electronic media are available. Kindly please have a look at it. Thnx a lot.


 * Kalpesh Sharma

59.95.217.237 14:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

203.109.209.49
Hi there! I unblocked the IP, since Konstable is not blocked or banned -- he's just not around, and was voluntarily desysoped (which the ArbCom has sinced termed as resigning due to controversy). ★ MESSED ROCKER ★  02:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Read now
Bloody hell! You'd think you would look at the facts before blocking someone. Should I start an arbitration against you for op abuse?--203.109.209.49 02:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have said 4 times that I am not banned! And then Thatcher confirmed it.  I gather that is where you found my IP for blocking right?  That is a hell of a mis-read.--203.109.209.49 02:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

What fun.
I cannot believe this. This guy was a troll, JossBuckleSwami is in a lather and I am the one in trouble. I'll save you all the trouble: If this doesn't drop, I quit. I have spent far too much time, effort and toil here to take this kind of abuse. - Lucky 6.9 02:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I've never gotten a barnstar and a threat of desysopping both in the same day.  Would you please drop by JossBuckleSwami's talk page and let him know what's up?  This has gone too far. - Lucky 6.9 02:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I've never had to face this before. I'm glad to hear that it's just that simple, but what do I need to do? Do I have to undelete that idiotic mediation request first? - Lucky 6.9 02:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Stream International speedy deletion
Hey there... I don't think the page qualified for a CSD deletion, even though I don't think it would survive an AFD. I think a clean kill at AFD would be preferable in this instance. I can put in the caveat that I am an employee there, and will refrain from comment on the AFD, but I think the speedy deletion wasn't quite right.

Happy holidays. Torinir ( Ding my phone  My support calls   E-Support Options  ) 03:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Heck no! I hate this place like the plague. I doubt I could create a truly NPOV version of the article (much like some of the anon employees were doing throughout the article's history.) Torinir ( Ding my phone  My support calls   E-Support Options  ) 03:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

What Exactly Should I do? *Is Confused.*
Thank you for the notice. I don't think I have a complete picture of what's going on, or if I'm being viewed as a co-conspirorator. It seems issues are being drawn up and no one seems to know if I'm involved or not. Even I don't know if I'm involved or not. I was simply trying to help Lucky 6.9. I tried not to overdo it, and left civil questions/comments untouched. I'm not sure how thorough the talk page's history has been viewed, but several of my recent edits on that talk page was me using subst:unsigned on those who didn't sign. I've explained myself (or at least attempted to) on the page you showed me, but before this goes on, I just want to know if what I'm doing is unacceptable. The is on my user page for a reason. If I should stop, have someone let me know and I'll stop. -WarthogDemon 03:37, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, what do you suggest I do then? Sit this out or explain my case or (seriously) report myself to checkuser? : / -WarthogDemon 02:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for telling me. I simply offered to help Lucky out.  (I've even asked him, if you want the link to the archived message.)  If WP thinks that I shouldn't be doing this though, I'll stop immediately.  Someone need only tell me on my talk page.  Thanks again. :) -WarthogDemon 02:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Zoe, "have you got the time"... ?
In the spirit of collegiality and stress reduction, may I alert you (in case you're not following that page) to what I just added there, apropos...! ''-- Cheers, Deborahjay, who took the time -- 05:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC) -- to write there, and here! :-D''

Non-Latin Username Blocks
There is some dispute as to whether these blocks are supported. There are many active editors who do just fine contributing with non-latin names. Per the discussion here, there seems be support for reccomending for to people creating a username at en.WP to not use non-latin characters. But does not appear to be consensus for blocking people on sight who already have a non-latin account at another Wikimedia wiki. Will you please start taking these non-latin username through Requests for comment/User names in order to better gather opions on the mattter? Thank you for your atttention to this matter.--<font color="#f4a460 ">Birgitte§β ʈ  <font color="#778899">Talk  17:06, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Reference desk removals
What policy are you basing this on? Isn't this a wiki? -- SCZenz 02:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I take it back, I think I read too much into what you said. Now that I think about it, it looks more like you were asking him not to remove comments, not telling him he couldn't.  Sorry about that! -- SCZenz 02:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not stalking you. I'm paying attention to the reference desk issue, and comments on talk pages of the participants (like Ten).  Please... I didn't mean to make this personal.  Again, sorry. -- SCZenz 02:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding the issue, though, I know of no blanket prohibition against removing comments not relevant to a page; removing comments is not the same as editing them. See for example Talk page guidelines, which says that irrelevant comments are subject to removal.  The specific rules for the ref desk are still under negotiation. -- SCZenz 02:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What evidence do you have for that assertion? Making an effort to improve a project page is not vandalism. -- SCZenz 02:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Now we're getting somewhere. If the removals weren't valid, and the action was deliberate disruption, that would be vandalism.  But Ten believed the removals were valid, and was trying to improve the page. -- SCZenz 02:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * So maybe he went to far this time. Discussing whether he handled the situation appropriately in this case (and note that he did ask for review) is perfectly reasonable.  It's only blanket prohibitions against removing any comments, and accusations of vandalism, that I think are a bit too brief and black-and-white for such a complex situation.  Anyway, I'm off to dinner.  Happy editing! -- SCZenz 02:50, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Zoe, i was catching up on all the RD drama from yesterday and saw this comment of yours on ANI. Please do not encourage certain editors in the belief that they are being attacked or persecuted&mdash;that is not the case at all and reinforcing such is not helpful. There has been a great volume of discussion recently on how the reference desk should work and what comments are appropriate, to which a number of editors, SCZenz included, have added their considered opinions. For the most part i have seen nothing but patience in their willingness to discuss and restraint in their actions.

If you do not wish to become a part of that discussion&mdash;if you want to simply make a few calls from the cheap seats&mdash;please, do not go so far as to encourage editors in behaviour which clearly goes beyond that which is acceptable.EricR 14:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with EricR above. The last thing we need is more people encouraging the belief that there's some big, noble, admins-versus-ref-desk war going on.  There's really little need for fighting at all in this case- common sense will give us everything we need.  Friday (talk) 17:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me
A link to Wikipedia Watch or Alexa isn't exactly a reliable source. It's likened to a press release. Press releases are not reliable third party sources. Hence my removal was well within policy. -- Just another editor 22:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Replied on talk page -- Just another editor 22:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Brandt
Looks like Brandt himself to me, SqueakBox 23:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Nah, I'm not 68.89.136.86. Yes, I'm a sock account. No, I'm not Brandt. Jimmy knows who I am let's leave it at that.  I rather not give Brandt any more reason to go crazy on my hivemind profile.  Besides, this sock is hardly being used for POV pusing moreso a policy issue and I haven't played reverting games. -- Just another editor 23:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

All I know is he hasnt claimed to leave san Antonio in many years and that's where the ip address came from. It is a big city so it might not be him, I guess you'll have to judge that for yourself but given the nature of the edits and the location I would consider it likely. We'll see if he adds you to his hit list after today, I have been on it for many months, where he falsely accuses me of being an admin, SqueakBox 00:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Danny, who is trustworthy I am sure you will agree, says he is not Brandt. Have a nice Christmas, SqueakBox 02:21, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Shriekfest
Here are some links where Shriekfest is covered extensively (or in one case, the founder is part of a round table interview about horror festivals). Moviebytes.com lists its significance among film festivals as 4 out of 5.


 * http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/041025a.php
 * http://www.hollywoodlitsales.com/cf/contest/contestdetail.cfm?id=238
 * http://www.moviemaker.com/hop/editorial.php?id=338
 * http://www.pretty-scary.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Calendar&file=index&type=view&eid=5
 * http://www.moviebytes.com/ContestDetail.cfm?contestnumber=631
 * http://newsblaze.com/story/20060901221037howa.nb/topstory.htm

There are probably more, but I don't have the time to go through 47 pages of google results. These came from the first ten pages of results. Do what you will.

Christian Terrorism
Zoe (which is a very pretty Greek name if I do say so myself), if you are going to revert the Christian Terrorism article, do you mind jumbping in on the discussion?--MarcusAnniusCatiliusSeverus 23:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Not Brandt
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that User:Just another editor has made himself known to me. It is not Brandt. Danny 02:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy Christmas
Hey Zoe, I hope you and your family have a very happy and safe Christmas and New Year. Thank you for the help you've given me personally as well as all the hard work you do in general: working on the unblock list, cleaning up, helping newbies, dealing with trolls, vandals and um...some of the "interesting" people on this very page. :) All the best for a fantastic New Year, Sarah  04:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
<div style="align: center; width: 75%; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px black; background-color: ForestGreen;"> '''
 * Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays ! | <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:black;">A</b> ndonic <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:Black; font-size:small;">O</b> <i style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:Tan;">Talk</i> 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

. 

Thank you, and you're welcome. :-) By the way, you need to archive your talk page; it's way too long! :-O | <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:black;">A</b> ndonic <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:Black; font-size:small;">O</b> <i style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:Tan;">Talk</i> 20:56, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, ok. That's a relief ;-) | <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:black;">A</b> ndonic <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:Black; font-size:small;">O</b> <i style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:Tan;">Talk</i> 20:59, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Redacting on RD
Zoe, I just saw your message -- and it's unclear to me whether you're relating to the circumstances: I didn't just "remove other people's comments" as you wrote on my Talk page. I was redacting (?) a query removed for trolling -- did you see that on the RD discussion page since yesterday? Everything I did was in solicited consultation with editors there. So why the blanket "don't" from you? I'd appreciate if you'll read the background discussion, then let me know if that makes a difference. I'm trying to be conscientious while I'm learning the editing ropes. -- Thanks, Deborahjay 19:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

You asked "my criteria" for deleting certain comments and leaving others. Very well, here you go: According to the action taken and discussed by Anchoress -- which seems to have won approbation from fellow RD editors -- the query was markedly the work of a troll. The remark I've just added explains my motivation for restoring only part of the comments, namely to provide significant AIDS counter-misinformation where it might do some good. WHAT I DIDN'T DO is keep any of the comments (including yours, if you can please see this objectively) that focused on the "what are you doing with the monkeys" business!

My selective deletion was for the sake of preserving something useful from that query by deflecting rather than engaging the trolls, and it seems Anchoress has, in her extensive and helpful response, given me the courtesy of trusting my judgment, rather than saying "don't" (not once, and not twice like you have). If in doing so (on my Talk page and also on the RD discussion page) you're authoritatively quoting some incontrovertible rule, how about giving me the link so I can read it for myself and question further if I don't understand (or agree with) it? -- Deborahjay 20:03, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: You're invited to read further in regard to your statement of grievance. I'll also take this opportunity to wish you a Happy New Year, in which I hope to see you help rather than harm other editors, or not to see you at all. -- Sincerely, Deborahjay 11:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Rokos
Hi Zoe, and MXMas -

You tagged this page as nonsense - seemed to me to be a badly-formed request for editing (though I'm not sure how I'd have tagged it myself). Even though the request for renaming was not the politest in the world, I went ahead and did so - God knows =I= don't speak Polish. D<font style="color:green">enni <font style="color:green"> talk 20:41, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

cool
oh man you are a bad ass

James Brown Is Dead
Hi Zoe, I had created this redirect for the song. You deleted it: 25 décembre 2006 à 12:32 Zoe (Discuter | contributions) a effacé « James Brown Is Dead » (content was: '#REDIRECT L.A. Style' (and the only contributor was 'Cleduc')) It seems you might be a little trigger-happy today. Did you attempt to understand the redirect or what it was attempting to accomplish? I don't believe you followed proper procedure, either. (Note: it has since been recreated by someone else. Plus, I guess you missed James Brown is Dead.)  Cleduc 01:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind response. Cheers, Cleduc 03:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Ken "Pope" Parry deletion
Why have you deleted the page on Ken "Pope" Parry? The last person that deleted it said that there was no references. This time I put up references and within a few hours it was deleted. No one has had time to enter information into it because it keeps being deleted.

Please next time use the "disccussion" page instead of just deleting it. Give us some warning!

By the way, he is one of the best known scouters in the midwest.

--Paul McDonald 03:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I deleted this again after it was re-posted. Author has taken it to DRV, but without notifying the deleting admin (or admins in this case) per step 3 of the instructions. As I mentioned your name as one of the deleting admins, I thought I should let you know. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 16:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Ken "Pope" Parry on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ken "Pope" Parry. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Paul McDonald 16:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:
Could I kindly ask you to explain what made you attack my contributions? I am shocked that instead of a big thank-you, you are jumping the gun. Why? WikiprojectOWU 17:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I am not sure I understand. Please explain. It might help to take a look at my contributions and postive acknowledgements. I would like an apology. WikiprojectOWU 17:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you were looking for guidance but in some ways the way you looked for it was considered by some very disrespectful. Why did you bring it up on the Incidents board without even looking at my contributions beforehand? WikiprojectOWU 17:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I would like to give you a heads-up that I will consult with administrators on how to proceed. I am not at all flattered by your comments. It will be pretty easy to see that I have contributed to more than only one article and very positively so. WikiprojectOWU 17:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

sory

explaination need for deleting article Q's Chinese Restaurant
Please explain to me why your deletion is valid when Outback Steakhouse is also listed?

Thank you for your reply
notablily requirement is noted. Thank you.

Don't Vandalize
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. User pages aren't to be vandalized. Don't do it. -- JohnBambenek 22:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I signed up as Platforms Magazine because I'm not a proper wiki man, just wanted to add that in. I'm a friend of Tamzin Merchant and the editors of Platforms Magazine and felt it was a shame that this popular magazine has no wikipedia entry.

I tried again under my real name as I thought it might be dismissed due to the misunderstnading of conflicting interests.

I read your reasons but I am not quite sure why this should not have it's own entry.

Jasongero Harrison

Pat Buchanan
im not. Just cleaning up like the tag asks. The article reads like wikipat and not wikiarticle. Just doing what I'm told.

Pat Buchanan
I could you use more edit summaries Thanks--knowpedia23:48, 26 December 2006

Re: badlydrawnjeff
Zoe wrote:
 * Administrators%27_noticeboard - You're not the only one he likes to attack and stalk. See Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-19 Zoe and badlydrawnjeff.  User:Zoe|(talk) 23:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I think "attack and stalk" is a little strong. And I'm certainly not going to be drawn into a dispute with which I am not currently involved. Thanks – Gurch 00:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion
Why have you removed my tourettes guy article

was it because it was to short?

RECREATED?
I had no idea that it had been made before, i'm sorry, why can't danny have an article though?

Ganging up
Hey, don't worry, i don't think that at all, you actualy seem very fair, please answer my danny question though

message
Other then this is there a way of messaging you?

danny question
I don't see the e-mail thing

but the question was why he can't have an article, i'd like to see you walk a mile in his shit [a quote from his site]

Re: Congratulations
Thanks! I'll do my best. :-) Kirill Lokshin 17:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Ekkirala Krishnamacharya [Master E.K.]
Please remember this is a genuine article. I guess naming the article as Ekkirala Krishnamacharya will help. Links to demonstrate notability of Master E.K.

http://www.patanjali.ch/pys_2.html

http://www.hinduonnet.com/mp/2002/09/09/stories/2002090901090200.htm

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/quotes271_300.htm

http://www.mihira.com/wisdommasters/mstrek.htm

http://www.hindu.com/br/2004/08/10/stories/2004081000131402.htm

http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books-de&field-author=Krishnamacharya,%20Ekkirala/

http://www.kulapati.de/autoren.html

hello
screw you i can create elijah dukes if i want, there is many people on wikipdia that have not been in the majors.

why are you deleting it just leave it who cares if hes not in the majors yet he is a prospect that will be in the majors soon.

Zoe
You deleted me for copyright violation, when I am the copyright owner

John Bambenek copyvio question
Sometimes you can use the Waybackmachine at http://archive.org, although in this case it doesn't come up with anything. Also, there is a deleted edit history going back to 2005 at John Bambenek (the current content was moved from John C. A. Bambenek) while Bambenek's website has a (c) 2006 tag. Not to mention that there are strong pointers of WP:AUTO, in which case Bambenek would've released his contributions per GFDL anyway. I tried to get a bulletpoint "Wikipedia is not a resume dump" added to WP:NOT but I got shot down on it. Maybe we should bring it up again, as it could cut down those turgid discussions like on the Bambenek article. ~ trialsanderrors 20:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

New Page: Alphee Lavoie
I just tried my first wikipedia page on American Astrologer and received this:

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Deb0824"

I was not experimenting, I was adding an article. I tried Sandbox, but don't really need it I don't think. The article I finished looks good to me.

Please undelete it.

THANKS Debbie Corkindale

Alphee lavoie
Please be clearer next time, then, to make everyone life's easier.

I will correct "Canadian" to "Toronto" (that was info from his wife).

I wrote his web pages, so it's not plagiarism. I just spent 3 days reworking info from his 2 bios on his website to make it more concise and clearer. How about if I put a source on the page?

THX Debbie

Wii abuse message
He has re-added the dolts again.. I have removed, further action will need to be taken against this user as he keeps reverting and i find his comments rather offensive.

He has once again readded the abusive comments, please block this user as he has already been given a final warnning.

User:Vlh
Just letting you know that the week-long block that you gave this editor just expired a few hours ago and he continued the same pattern of editing that got him blocked soon after he was unblocked. semper fi — Moe  08:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Your congrats and sympathies
Hi Zoe, Thanks for your congrats (and sympathies :-) Take care, --FloNight 14:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Jim Feist== ==

Hi Zoe, apologies for that. It was a genuine mistake, I screwed up with the formatting of the reply and I overwrote your comments.

btard 18:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: Talk:Jim Feist
I did not edit the comments to alter the appearance of them. If you check the history you will see that Fan-1967 and yourself left comments, I screwed it up and tried to add them again, I knew as soon as I hit save that I messed it up.

btard 18:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: Talk:Jim Feist
I appreciate your position and I understand how it looked. I've definitely learned a little more about rolling back and undo'ing versions so, it's a lesson learned the hard way and I respect your intervention.

btard 18:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Attack page
Thanks for deleting it, Zoe. It probably is Ottawaman. Can you please salt it for me?? Thanks, --SunStar Nettalk 20:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that! --SunStar Nettalk 21:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

hey
''Hi Zoe, thanks for the help. "Natalia Boa Vista" is my first article. Do you think it's good? I just entered today so it would be really good if I could use a friend. Did my article really work? Did you just type in Natalia Boa Vista and it popped up? Nice talking to you, I'll message you later! I hope we can be friends.

-ShadowSakura321''

Pictures
Um, how do you insert a picture into an article and then add that little box with the captions?

Sry for bothering u.

SS321. (Shadowsakura321)

Cjr121
I think someone's losing it. Fan-1967 22:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Your reversion of New World Man's edits on July 23?
Hey Zoe, I noticed you reverted User:New World Man's edits on July 23 here. I didn't notice anything wrong with his edits - actually I think they improved the page, as several of us working on the Wikicalendar regularly try to clean up excess biographical information and fill in missing information like nationalities. I hope you would not mind if I more closely examined his edits and reverted back to his version or reinstated some of his edits if need be. Thanks for your attention. Fabricationary 00:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Is there a (political?) issue about changing British to English that I don't know of? I've seen other editors doing that on the Wikicalendar pages recently, and following their lead, I have occasionally done that myself when cleaning the pages up to try to attain uniformity. I will change English to British if need be in future clean-ups if British is preferred. Thanks again, Fabricationary 00:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Daniel Smith (printmaking artist)
Hi Zoe

I understand you deleted this article under the category of "advertising" and I seek your advise on modification to this article so that this artist, who at one time enjoyed national recognition, might be represented.

Although he is known for his contributions to the formulation of artists' printmaking inks, it is incidental to his work as an artist. Would removal or rewrite of references to innovations in printmaking ink (and other products) render this entry appropriate?

Thanks Dankeseloff

Vlh CheckUser
You may be interested in the CheckUser I started on User:Vlh started at Requests for checkuser/Case/Vlh. Feel free to include anything I missed. semper fi — Moe  00:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Move function?
Where can I find the "move function" to move an article to a more accurate heading?

"Christopher Gardner" is more accurately the son of "Chris Gardner."

I'm not trying to vandalize anything, really. I'm just new here.

I've only been here for one day.
Okay... Four-day policy for moving things. Right. Fine.

What else can I or can I not do? I figure it's best to ask rather than waste my time and annoy everyone into thinking that I have nothing better to do with my life than to try to vandalize Wikipedia.

Stream International
Just wondering why that got deleted. I don't remember any warning posted. Alyeska 06:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

What qualified the page as spam? Yes, some people were spamming it (though that is an indication of the disatistifaction of the people who work there), but what made the article spam? The company is real. I can understand removing it for being non-notable, but just arbitrarily calling it spam and then up and deleting it with zero comment from anyone else caught me by surprise. Alyeska 23:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Alyeska 23:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Size
Just dropping you a message that you badly need to archive your talk page :) It took me 10 minutes ("slight" exaggeration) to load it!

Cheers and regards, Anthon y  cfc  ( talk  •  email  •  tools ) 12:08, Friday December 29 2006 (UTC)

Pictures
I got the pic onto Wikipeadia, I don't know how to insert it into my file though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowsakura321 (talk • contribs)

omg
omg, i don't know how the heck i do this thing. can you do it if you ever get a chance? sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Adding a Page / copyright issues
I tried adding a very scaled down version of page "Alphee Lavoie" that I completely wrote myself (nothing borrowed from other bios of his). I will work on copyright permissions, etc., as a second step, in order to complete the article. The shorter areticle did not get added and I don't think I have access to it any longer in wp. I do have a copy of it. How can I get it approved without adding it, having it deleted, etc? I never heard back on that one. I will try it one more time and see what happens. If it's okay, no need to answer, else ... please let me know what I did wrong this time.

THANKS Debbie

Professional Skills
Please put the article on "Professional Skills" back up, it is being heavily revised and expanded to meet Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you in advance.

PS: Just got your PM, I will bring up this issue again when I have a list of interviews, articles, etc. on our clan.

PSS: Just got your second PM. I'll do as you suggest. Thank you for your time. .

omg.
ok.

the pic is from www.crimelab.nl

image may be scaled down and subject to copyright.

WHAT
WHAT THE HECK DID YOU JUST SAY TO ME???????????????????????

well, explain slowly

ok, first do i download the pic that i have right know?

sry
ok, i gotta go. i am reallly soooooooooooooooooooorrrrrrrry, you must hate me for being such an idiot! i am on as always tomorrow.

was it u?
hey,

were you the one who added that box of contents on to my article? were you the one who was editing it when i was as well?

Non Sense Is
a form of opinion not a constant.

Fairey Marine
Hi Zoe,

Would it be possible to reinstate the article I have just created on Fairey Marine as the company no longer trades. If it is the links added that provoked the deletion, I would be happy to leave these off.

I can assure you that it was not my intention to advertise any companies.

There is plenty of third party verification of who Fortune Hi-tech marketing, Paul Orberson, Brock Keen, Todd Rowland and the rest of the information is. I am updating information so people can get valid non-bias information on who this company and its contributers are. If you can please replace that information you deleted it would be appreciated.

Alex Kingston-

FORTUNE HI-TECH MARKETING
Here are some links to outside information on that company you deleted: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/3/prweb36101.php, Dun & Brad Street Report, http://www.youngwealthmarketing.com/DandBreport.pdf, a digital copy of the millionaire blueprints magazine featuring Paul Orberson and Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing and here is a link to the Better Business Bureau report on Fortune Hi-Tech, http://www.lexington.bbb.org/commonreport.html?compid=14004419

Millionaire Blueprints magazine
Yes I realize this is a link to the article through another page but this should do in helping you understand that both Paul Orberson and Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing are viable pieces that are worthy of listing. Here is the link to the PDF file, http://www.teamsolomarketing.com/PaulOrbersonStoryMillionaireBlueprint.pdf, and also a link to the magazine's home page http://www.millionaireblueprints.com/. Paul Orberson was also mention in Forbes Magazine in this article http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1997/0324/5906063a.html, and his story was part of a book called the Excel Phenomenon http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/r/robinson-excel.html.

Paul is the is the founder of Fortune Hi-tech and information about him, his company and those who are helping make it successful is important

Paul Orberson
Yes he is notable, Paul, his past and present is having an notable impact on many many people. Read up about him and what he has done and I'll expect a reply back tomorrow. Enjoy your night.

Soul Control
Soul Control is a famous breakdancing group. I see no point in deleting the article.

thnx
thanks sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooomuch Zoe! I got the tag off and did everything you said. now how do i download this pic to my article?

Bluecord's comment removal
Hi there,

I'd be grateful if you could have a word with Bluecord regarding his attempted removal of comments on his talk page.

These comments (which I and others placed) were all legitimate complaints regarding Bluecord's conduct. They were removed without being replied to, let alone any attempt being made to resolve the issues raised.

As far as I am aware, such abuse of a user's own talk page to hide his/her own behaviour is generally considered vandalism, and not acceptable according to the guidelines. Obviously, as an admin, your word carries more weight than mine, and I'd appreciate it if you could back me up on this (unless you believe my position on the blanking is incorrect). Thanks! Fourohfour 14:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Nixer - sockpuppets
Hi! I noticed you were recently involved in a situation with User:Nixer. You may not know this but he has been active on the Axis Powers article as well. Today, after having reverted edits to the structure of the article we refered him to the talk page to discuss the changes first. At this point he was using another account. The way I found out was due to this very strange changing of his signature. I would like to know a) what should we do? Wait and see if he attempts to violate 3RR or b) report him.

I know that socks aren't disallowed and he hasn't abused this one (as far as I know of) but given his history I prefer to seek advice early.

Also, looking through the edit history of the two accounts it seems apparent that his is using them to edit on the same articles and talk pages, including Joseph Stalin and other World War 2 related articles.

Thanks in advance, MartinDK 20:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio
Hello. Concerning your contribution,, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Balloonguy 22:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Zoe, I see you reverted the copyvio. I'm fine with that as I doubt you would violate copyright and also based upon what is on the talk page, but your comment says "...and it certainly isn't a copy of the page pointed to". In fact, the page indicated does have the same text on it. Search for "Divine Lady" in your web browser and you'll find it about half way down that page. You might want to consider sending them a GFDL violation letter as you were the original contributor and they do not show it as GFDL. -- JLaTondre 03:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

SummerThunder
I believe that SummerThunder is using sockpuppets, see here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/75.3.224.224

-- ran (talk) 05:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, and the above IP suddenly turns around and starts editing Dominica. I suppose these dynamic IPs are indeed tricky to deal with... -- ran (talk) 06:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Fourohfour and deletion
I appologize for the mix up. I would like to be able to remove those items that I did not place there if that is ok. That is the reason I removed them in the first place, being due to the fact that I did not place them there in the first place. If it ok I would like to erase but will wait for an ok before I do it. I would hate to be block for something I did not place. Thanks.

Ok, cool with me as soon as I figure how to do it.

Everyking misadventures
This isn't intended to put down Everyking, but for some strange reason your ANI warning reminded me of a story. Would you like to hear it? I'll take the lack of precognition as a yes. For a while, Everyking and myself were frequently vandal-rollbacking many of the same articles (undoubtedly due to our similar watchlists), but it almost seemed as if I was the one who was doing all the blocking. So one time, I decided I'm just gonna outrollback him until he's forced to issue a block. But it just kept going! The story concludes with myself pitifuly giving in (and pouting). So that was pretty funny, although you probably had to be there. Sorry for the length of this! El_C 06:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Juke Kartel article
Sure will, sorry about the misunderstanding. I get lazy sometimes. I'll put comments in what I do when I edit things from now on. SilverNightFire 08:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)