User talk:Corvus cornix/Archive 6

Headset Article Clean-Up

Hi there,

I really want to help clean-up this article as I think that it is really helpful for a lot of people out there who have misunderstandings or questions about headsets. Your suggestions on Wikifying, quality standards and citations seem a bit vague for me to get started. Do you think you can give some specific suggestions to where you see the biggest problem lies?? Thanks!!!

Ethanmarcus (talk) 02:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Ethan

Advertising angle

Dear Corvus Cornix,

Hi, thank you for your comment, I think that I may have included too much details about their product, hence I've deleted the section on "Innovations" completely. My intent is to introduce this alternative cost-effective solutions for office telephone headsets other than the other traditional brands. I've added the section on Ergonomics previously to educate the usage of headset. Do you think it's much more neutral now. BTW, thanks for the grammatical changes too!

Feel free to discuss.

Thanks. Saintpako (talk) 03:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)pako

Hi, It was a Betabot Malfunction

Hi,

The IRC Group Wikipedia Group did it as it was a bot function, Sceptre told me to simply report as vandalism as it was quicker.

Please join the discussion to discuss it with everybody if required. We also had an admin doing it to, placebo_effect.

The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 21:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The general wikipedia one.

irc://irc.freenode.net/%23wikipedia

They have told me what is going on...

The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 21:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I verify that I asked s/he to do it. Most of them were invalid tags, and I chose to revert as vandalism because of the amount of tagged images and the speed needed. Will ^(talk) 21:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The second a bot malfunctions, it becomes a vandalbot. Will ^(talk) 21:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Still, given the fact it made 750 edits in six minutes, that is spamming. It's allowed to spam image pages for specific reasons. Tagging used images as orphans is not one of them. While BC didn't intend to, it still did it. Will ^(talk) 21:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Maytableinc

I've changed the above from a delete to a speedy - don't know what you reckon, but I think it falls foul of db-bio. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 21:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Db-bio covers "web content" - would fit under that, I think, since it's a pretty non-notable youtube video. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 21:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it hit the spot - it's gone. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 21:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably just as well. There's also a User:Maytableinc, though they don't seem to have been involved in this article. Corvus cornix_talk 21:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Hi please be cautious re blocks as I am being defamed daily on your site and am subject of your sites' articles and you are not regulating this or many other BLP issues

opiumjones 23 00:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

ok thanks for the hint but this has had admins asking admins to get involved and it has been ignored in the last 24 hours.

so they are shirking their volunteer roles opiumjones 23 00:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Re Joujouka jajouka An informal mediation process

Please have a look at User:FayssalF/JK

opiumjones 23 00:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Fuck ashton Kutcher

It wasnt an attack, it was a poem by Dave Chappelle. I was adding it and then linking it to his page...

It actually is a notable poem, this is one of the two poems he wrote and recited on tv when he came back from africa. If theres a way of linking the poems to his page and not have to put them on wikipedia, I wouldnt mind doing that. But, this is a notable poem. Theres also a second poem. The Orators has its own page, a notable poem by a famous poet.Peoplez1k 04:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

K delete the page, Ill just add a redirect to the webpage that has the poems on them. If that is against the rules just put it in my discussion page and Ill take it off.Peoplez1k 04:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The poems are written on his official Forums. The forums belong to him.

User: *bj*

Even while Administrator intervention is being requested? ++Arx Fortis 04:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems very counter to common sense that a user would be allowed to remove warnings from their talk page while they were in the very act of vandalism. Regardless, in addition to your "advice" to me, why didn't you also discourage the user against obvious vandalism and harassment of me? I'm just wondering why you singled me out. ++Arx Fortis 04:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

While recent changes is a wonderful tool, your comments "I have no idea what your disagreement is. I don't know if or what the other person did. I'm not really interested." epitomize the issue at hand. You didn't consider the context which resulted in a somewhat knee-jerk reaction. Even under the most pedantic interpretation of WP:DRC, it is not intended as means for a vandal to hide their warnings so they can continue vandaling. Given the examples shown, there wasn't a snowball's chance in hell this guy was going to stop his vandalism until it was noted by an administrator and appropriate action taken...in this case a three-day ban. Regardless, I don't make it a habit of reverting talk pages. ++Arx Fortis 05:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether I was wrong or right, my point is, if you're trying to make a constructive contribution to Wikipedia, perhaps you should find out the context before applying a virtual template to a page. As WP:DTR says, "for most editors that have been around a while....telling them "did you know we had a rule against this" tends to be counterproductive in resolving the issue." ++Arx Fortis 05:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't attack you? Where did I do that??? ++Arx Fortis 05:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I know you have said that you have "nothing further to discuss" on this matter but I thought you might like to know that I raised this discussion on the Don't restore removed comments Talk Page, here. Apparently this is still just a proposed guideline and how it might apply to removed vandalism and block warnings is still to be determined. Thanks. Shawn in Montreal 22:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

"...and editors are not obliged to follow it." Cheers. ++Arx Fortis 23:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

User: Flashish

I removed the notability tag from the Chymax article as Chymax is a patented Pfizer product.

I was given permission...

I was given permission by the band themselves to use it. They said I could file it under "My Own Work". The band are friends of mine (Dr Manhattan (band)). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot provide for those. I was going to put it as the band's work, but, the website was going to delete it. Can't you help me out? I'm new. I haven't been on. They might even take the article about the band off the site yet the band is going to have a release on an important indie label (Vagrant Records). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

First, will you help me out to actually keep the image on?

And also, here is the rule:

  Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable). 

They have a release day set for their debut album. It is a self-titled album and is coming out March 11, 2008, so yes, I am quite sure the band meets the requirements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Will you explain to me why that is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh no, I swear, this is no garage band. I totally and completely understand the "garageband rule", but Dr Manhattan (band) is legitametly (sp?) signed by a record label that held Alkaline Trio for 3 or 4 albums. They also signed Saves the Day and The Get Up Kids. They are a legit band and are no longer a little garage band. Alkalinetrio78 23:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Isn't there any way that we can keep the article on here until the cd is released? Alkalinetrio78 23:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Nah, their single hasn't really been released yet. 2 song samplers have been released at their shows, but not like, on the charts. Wait, did you check them out? Alkalinetrio78 23:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Can't you just take the tag off? Haha, that would be my best guess.-Alkalinetrio78 00:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh come now, have I not defended my case effectively?-Alkalinetrio78 00:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Yo man? What's the deal? You deleted it.-Alkalinetrio78 01:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Freshslice

If you tell me the reason why Freshslice is in for speedy deletion, I'll try to fix it since I see nothing wrong with the article/stub. ~~Annoyomous24~~ 00:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Myanmar

According to ALL and EVERY wikipedia and sub-/partner- project page regarding 'edit warring', by it's various names and terms, I must partake in multiple changes of edits. No such "warring" has taking place as I did not make more than one REVERT or SUBVERT edit. I also did not cut and paste, I was simply blocked out before finishing the modification (changes made since I hit the edit tag). I've been here quite some time. You, or others ma block my account if you wish for removing a political bias and point-of-view, for updating a collection of articles to CURRENT INTERNATIONAL REALITY, but call it as it is and don't hide behind fantasy charges of actions I did not commit. As for copyright, I am a legal practitioner (records and licence verifiable), I am well aware of what copyright is and challenge you to prove that I violated any such legal regulation and that the intended finished set of edits (a re-direct) would have violated any legal law.

Rather than attack; you would find a more interested listening reaction by discussing. Your charges are unfounded and statements of claimed or intended criminal activity without proof and documented evidence, as well as court decision (copyright violation) to any party other than site management, the claimed infringer, or law-enforcement, is a good way to find yourself in serious legal trouble. Wikipedia has various copyright DISPUTE tags you could have notified me with. You are flat out WRONG in the statement that I have violated copyright. You have now committed an act of defamation in public record. Do NOT do that again, to myself or anyone else.

Take into account I'm not threatening you, I'm warning you; use your head! My intentions AS STATED ON MY USER PAGE are to remain politically neutral. The current Myanmar series of redirects (fact: there is no legally recognized entity in current existence know as or with the inclusion of Burma) are a spider's web mess. Half the wikipedia SITE's links go nowhere. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirect#Undesirable_edirects. How-about another fact of this situation; I was working from the bottom of the pile up; to correct EVERY redirect. That's something no one else has taken the time to do, including yourself.

One does not have to agree with a situation to admit it exists. I myself practice a branch-offshoot of Buddhist Philosophy. Personally knowing people who live there, and having visited Myanmar; I feel deeply for the people struggling in that country. My personal feelings did not hinder in my recognition of the legal reality that the country is not called Burma. When completed; the series of edits, would have be complete, USABLE, correct, and free from POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostinlodos (talk • contribs) 23:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Is R. Winston Morris still unnotable? Pensil 01:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

RickK

I was not part of the dispute RickK had. I was completely uninvolved. I was on a vacation back then. To but it bluntly I do not understand what you are getting at. -- Cat ^chi? 16:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You were inserting a copyvio into an article, and RickK kept reverting it. He got blocked for vandal fighting. Corvus cornix_talk 17:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I think RickK got blocked for revert-warring. I do not clearly recall the details on that particular case but IIRC he was having an interaction (revert war) with SPUI ([1] [2]) not me. He also seems to have wheel wared over SPUI's block. I was NOT the person blocking him and I was not revert/wheel waring either. While I did revert him once, that alone was not the reason for his block. He was only blocked for 24 hours which was pardoned several minutes later. I had taken the time and looked at the 3rr history as this particular case happened before we had 3rr archives. I have this link to the case which I was not a participant. In sum, I did not drive anyone away. My involvement with that particular case can be said to be minimal. -- Cat ^chi? 18:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It was your copyright violation that SPUI, who had problems with RickK anyway, kept re-inserting. Corvus cornix_talk 18:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

How are edits by someone else my responsibility? Please do not get this the wrong way but it appears you are blaming me for SPUI's edits. SPUI might have just as easily picked some other case and things would end up the same way. I did not invite SPUI. In fact I did not even know SPUI... In fact I never liked SPUI. -- Cat ^chi? 18:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Jack Pickford

Your right it had many edits needed. I did it at 5am originally thus probably the reason. I cleaned up the spelling errors and tried to make it more readable. Should be good now. --Thegingerone (talk) 00:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Chandrabhanu

I know you mean well, but that article was an absolute mess, it had nothing to do with WP:BIO of that king. I have the citations and I am developing a series of articles on Jaffna Kingdom related rulers. I am going to take a break now, not going to indulge in a revert war. If you do care do some search on the subject and try to clean that mess up. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Really

Where do you live? Hm? Where?--Cody6 (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Tactical Girls

I am a big fan of female action heroes and think the Tactical Girls free website[3] and calendar is as relevant as many of the others listed under "See Also". The Bikini Bandits entry is practically a fan site for them, with myspace listings. When it comes to girls with guns, there is not much out there and a lot of it is in extraordinarily poor taste.

As far as encyclopedias go, I thought the whole idea of wikipedia was to include subjects from current pop culture and other sources that might not be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica. I rewrote the listing with a more neutral tone in the hope that it would satisfy the wiki requirements.

After all, the whole Girls with Guns genre is about entertainment. However, if I were a Sociology Major interested in the relatively recent development of the female action hero, or portrayal of women as action heroes, I might want to discuss the entire spectrum, from the over the top Bikini Bandits to the obviously right wing and chauvinistic Stacked and Packed to Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider.

I believe this entry is relevant to a pop culture subject. Would it be more appropriate in the external links section? I want to do this right. Thanks,--Hbflp07 (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The subject is new enough that reliable sources discussing it do not yet exist. Therefore, would it not be appropriate to simply at least list it as an external link, related to the overall genre, as a way for a user to come to their own conclusions about its relevancy?--Hbflp07 (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

If I examine the Bikini Bandits entry, I do not see a reference from Ted Koppel from Nightline discussing them, their entry seems to be written by a fan of theirs also. It is information about pop culture entertainment. The Tactical Girls website, just like the Bikini Bandits films (films made and sold for profit . . .) exists and is relevant to to the genre of Girls with Guns. It it least deserves mention as an external link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hbflp07 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion to use Twinkle

Hi, I have a suggestion that you should use Twinkle which is a bot that helps speed up the process of tagging speedy deletion.

Enjoy! If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on my Talk Page

The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 19:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Response

Sorry, I didn't know that was the policy on those list pages. My bad. I'll create a new article and then re-add later. :) 70.146.67.72 (talk) 23:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Apologies

Thanks for reminding me about toning down my temper. With all drama surrounding wikipedia, both in press as well as inside, shame on me for being so easily inflamed by issues quite far from my heart. `'Míkka>t 01:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll just condense mine in here :-) I should have looked further back in the page histories to see that. You have my apologies. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 00:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Musee de beaux arts

I noticed that too. However, the article says that they are examples of them. There was only one source I could find that said the location of the painting (sources have been very hard to find) [4]. As for whether it exists, I believe it does from some other websites, but it's rather hard to find (perhaps I'm just hindered by my illiteracy in French). bibliomaniac15 03:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

copyright in lists

Corvus, I think you're wrong this time on Computer Gaming World list of the best games of all time. What is on WP is only an excerpt and would qualify as fair use. Please compare with [5] and probably remove from afd for a better place to discuss it. DGG (talk) 17:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It's a report of what games they listed. A reproduction of the actual extensive text of their report would be a violation. Take a look--the amount used just about 1% of the original. DGG (talk) 17:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Menudo

Those articles on Menudo are all sourced do not let that guy bully you. Letter from Menudo boys to the department of Justice

What precisely is your problem with me?

I find it hard to AGF when you immediately run to WP:ANI without even poking me on my talk page to ask what's up. Jtrainor (talk) 07:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Korphai AfD

Finally some editors have responded in detail in Talk:Korphai, listing the criteria from WP:MUSIC with corresponding references. Were you going to respond? --Ronz (talk) 02:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Phi technology

I did not protect it. In fact, I stubbed it. You shoulda seen what it was before. If you need support in deleting it, let me know. Danny (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Help desk

Rather or not your guess is correct, I think it would be best if you remove this comment, keep in mind many new editors that go there, thanks.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡^Talk 19:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Lir is a disruptive editor with a long history of disruption. New editors need to know this. Corvus cornix_talk 19:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Some editors are reminded to comment on content not the editor and to Assume good faith, when they see experience editors talking like that they may think, So why can't I do the same? but in different circumstances, That's all I was thinking, but if you wish to leave it I won't fight you on it.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡^Talk 19:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

AGF is not a suicide pact. Lir has lost any good faith he might have had, five years ago. Corvus cornix_talk 19:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

RIT Model RR Club Article Notablility

What am I missing for a certain level of notability in this article?

If I look at Student Organizations listed on the Rochester Institute of Technology article, the only other one to have an article is WITR - with what seems to be little information other than some basic facts. Would it help to cite external references of the club? Such as this article D&C article I must admit there are not a overwhelming amount of external information about the club - but to the Students, Alumni and Community we are involved with we do try to make a difference.

Perhaps it is best that I remove the Rochester & Irondequiot Terminal article and merge it with this one. It had been created long ago by a different member of the club. I will not argue that it is confusing fiction & non-fiction and how it has survived this long I am somewhat amazed.

As for this one, I can re-write it to eliminate the usage of first person without issue. As this is my first exerpience contributing to Wikipedia please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boblenon (talk • contribs) 03:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Orland Park

First off, they were already inserted, and second off, who doesn't know who Andy Avalos is? I won't reinsert them but I thought you removed them for no reason. Sox23 03:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Its not that big a deal, I didn't even know they were redlinks- I just saw they were deleted and since the intro was deleted as well, I just reinserted the whole thing. Its fine. Sox23 03:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Robert C. Beck article and Blood electrification

MastCell has weighed in with a comment question to you about what Gov articles there are in support or even mention of Blood electrification.

If you could look at the article & talk page, perhaps you could be of assistance?

MastCell has also suggested deletion of my under development Robert C. Beck article that was AFD in June or so.

I am trimming the Dr. Bob Beck article now, and most of it is now gone.

If you have any suggestions for the Beck article, then feel free to reply here. Oldspammer (talk) 04:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I added extensive comments to your list of Gov references provided in the AFD debate. The comments should explain some of the political happenings of the AFD situation.

One fellow there has more or less discounted completely that the method of action of BE could possibly be that of electroporation (even a very weakened form of it). He accused me several times so far of being deceptive because of mentioning of electroporation in the article in the first place, and of using Pub-Med sourced information that he had opinioned as having only slightly to do with the BE article topic, but that you and I have associated with pathogen destruction in liquids--the dental scientist work with oral bacteria in-vitro and plaque in-vivo.

If you have more on this, please provide us your observations and input. Oldspammer (talk) 09:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

RFA part 2

I remembered asking if you wanted a RFA back in July and you declined, do you think you are ready now. Thanks Secret ^account 00:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD reconsider?

I think you are wrong about this one, best regards, Pete.Hurd (talk) 06:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:DICK

Look I mistyped a word, there's no need for you to parade it around in quotes like a scarlet letter. If you want to discuss this rationally, I will, but you'll have to stop with venom first. Corvus cornix_talk 22:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You want to discuss this [6] rationally so you start off by calling me a dick? The only venom here is coming from you Sir. I merely explained a cultural reference, which you didn't understand, found sources which you couldn't because you clearly don't know how to do a Google search properly [7] and agreed with everyone else that your nomination of John Clare's most famous poem for AfD was flawed. If I were in your situation I'd acknowledge the fact that I'd been mistaken, thank everyone for their input and withdraw the nomination gracefully. If that's being a 'dick' then so be it. Anything else I can help you with? I'll pop this conversation on your talk page, just in case you miss it or want to call me anything else. Nick mallory (talk) 23:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Nick that you should withdraw the nom as a sign of good faith and as a way to save face.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Robert M. Edsel Verified Sources

I understand that the three sites listed are run by Robert Edsel's organization and may not prove to be verified sources. Instead I would like to resubmit the White House website[8] and the National Archives website[9] for your review. --Armcandy101 (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

IMDb

Don't know if you saw my response, but it's on my userpage. Thanks. Bouncehoper (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: AFD

Corvus, you're correct, I didn't handle that correctly. I've just been getting irritated at seeing articles nominated minutes after creation. I struck the comment. Replied on the users talk page. I didn't agree that i disagree with the sentiments expressed, but the way they they were expresses was not the correct way. Hope it's acceptable. Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I added a new comment suggesting that the article be given a moment to grow. It's the last comment i'll make on the afd page. Hope it's in bounds. I'll live with consensus however it proceeds. Let me know if that one is some how out of process.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look, I'll be honest, I don't have a personal attachment to the article, But more a personal reaction to what I see as continued poor practice on AFD. Almost like it's a prize to be the first to nominate an article instead on carefully considering, does the inclusion of this article help or hurt WP.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Guess it's a bit of a catch 22. I see where you're coming from. I'm a bit of a longtime lurker short-time editor and AFD's probably the area i've spent the most time reading. I probably don't have a full understanding of what does into the work others put in. And I do know that some articles just don't belong. (I've commented delete on a few myself.) I just have a commiseration with someone who creates an article only to see it hit afd before they can take a sip of their drink.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

General (United States)

I'm making this article conform with the other ranks of the United States on Wiki. I made a History of United States Generals as a seperate history article which is linked to the main one. Neovu79 (talk) 00:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm not claiming this as my own work, I'm just trying to improve it to make it cleaner. Neovu79 (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

If it helps, I made a note in the History of United States Generals's discussion page crediting the orginal authors. Neovu79 (talk) 00:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD

Thank you for your advice. Billscottbob (talk) 00:51, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Please mind your own business

Hi there... Please do not accuse me of making "unconstructive" edits on my own user page again. Get your facts right next time. --118.92.22.70 (talk) 04:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

some help..

Sorry am new to this editing, deleted by accident while modifying the page.After adding the rationale i have to remove the tag? RyosukeDG (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:Jammulapalem

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know that. I'll keep that in mind for now on. --Kannie | talk 22:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:Speedy deletion

I think I'll defer to you to whether or not the article should be deleted. --Kannie | talk 23:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Ankle

Thanks for your concern. However, I'm in bed not because I'm ill, but because it's currently quarter to midnight where I am! J Milburn (talk) 23:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Same to you. Eight minutes to go :-) J Milburn (talk) 23:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes to {{Nn-warn}}

Hello, Corvus cornix ... I wonder if you have any comments on the changes I made to the warning template ... I added the same RED warning icon as the other Nn-warn-* templates, and I copied the language directly from WP:CSD#A7 ... I wish that Some Other Editor would fix {{Nn-welcome}} to use the same language as well. :-) ... Happy Editing! —72.75.72.63 (talk · contribs) 23:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Help!

Kazumi Tanaka is being put up for deletion! Help me save it from deletion!Kitty53 (talk) 02:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Template:Db-bio and Twinkle re: CSD A7

Hello, Corvus cornix ... Please respond to this thread ... Happy Editing! —The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Ezdrummer

Hi Corvus. I have added a link to Toontrack's official site, which I think covers sourcing, and a reference to Devin Townsend's usage of the program, which I think covers notability, so I deleted the tags. Please let me know if the article is all right now. Thanks. --Thinking Stone (talk) 01:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

please dont change

i noticed you've been making some changes on page about Dr. Darko Trifunovic. Please dont do that. If you suspect in validity of any information, go ahead and google. I also left the link next to his name at the beginnnig.

thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh3 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

He is well known

No problem, but why would you remove the page? Just because you don't like him, you should not remove his page. He is very well known person in the Balkans. AccountInquiry (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You need to do something about this user!

Darko Trifunovic is hiding under these usernames: Sh3 and AlexandarNYC. He created pages slandering people who criticized him in the media, and also he opened other spam pages under different username - all of them were deleted. Take a look http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:AlexandarNYC&action=history and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Sh3 . AccountInquiry (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Response to Corvus - thanks man for pointing me in the right direction! They should put you as an admin! AccountInquiry (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:

I know, but removing warnings is considered disruptive.IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

So IPs cannot remove warnings but Users who are vandalising don't have to keep them?IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

User talk:QU109999

Regarding the unblanking of the above user: I realised that just after I did it - whilst you were typing your message on my page, I was adding a comment on the talk page to just that effect. I only did the unblanking once, and I won't do it again. StephenBuxton (talk) 22:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. Usually I assume someone who blanks the incident board is someone who knows what they're doing exactly so that's why I went with the warning for him. I will definitely learn from this, thanks for the reinforcement. Nate · (chatter) 22:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

hey

to: AccountInquiry

Look I am not Darko Triufunovic, I am just trying to sustain this article and prevent the campaign which is going against the antiterrorist intelectuals. I left the coment on the talk page and some links so you are welcome to go and read whatever interests you. I am not hiding behind any nicknames, this is the only one I have. Stop patronizing me and following my every step. Do you even have life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh3 (talk • contribs) 10:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Wallis, Duchess of Windsor

Whoops, sorry! DBD 12:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Amer10

I noted your remark on his talk page about the number of his hoaxes and why should anyone accept any of his edits, etc. I considered blocking him permanently after yesterday's brouhaha, but thought that he would just come back under another account name and create more subtle hoaxes that are tough to detect. So, I've resolved to simply revert any of his edits until he gets tired of this and leaves us alone, and I guess you'll be helping with that judging by your comment... if you have a plan that you prefer, though, I'm all for it; just let me know. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'd indefinitely block him in a New York minute if I thought it would be the last of his shenanigans. But I think I'd rather have him using an account that I know about rather than one I don't... his hoax pages are VERY subtle. There's a pattern to the type of hoax he perpetrates and I will be keeping an eye open for the names he's tried to bring to false prominence in the past. Too bad he can't bring his skills to contributing rather than vandalizing. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think your plan of just reverting everything he contributes is a good one, and I'll join in with you whenever I'm on-line -- I've made a note to check everything he does every day from now on and just revert him on sight. Thanks for your cooperation and assistance, it is appreciated. <sigh> Again, what a pity he can't bring those skills to good use here. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StandWithUs

Nagle has drastically improved the sourcing for this article; do you want to check it out again and consider striking your nom? I don't blame you for taking the time to AfD it, but it looks like it's a keep.

--- tqbf 17:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Nake Women

Thanks. TW screw up most likely but I accept I should have checked. Thanks for catching this one. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robot (t.A.T.u. song)

 Done   jj137 ^♠ 19:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland

An editor has nominated List of Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Hey, someone just made me realize you aren't an admin— and IMO you are long overdue. I'd very much like to nom you, if you're insane enough to want the mop. Are you willing to be subjected to random abuse, whining and hard thankless work? — Coren ^(talk) 22:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright. I won't hide the fact that I'm a little disappointed because you would have been a great admin; but I can also understand why you might want to avoid all the trouble.  :-) Happy editing! — Coren ^(talk) 22:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Shame :(. Feel free to change your mind at any time. Happy New Year. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

reply

I've posted a sadly not-very-helpful reply at User_talk:Nunh-huh#Liane_de_Pougy - Nunh-huh 23:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Sprotret

Blocked! Thanks for the ANI report. :-) Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ohio Redirects

A bot is doing that for me:) Ohmpandya (Talk) 23:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

....and will be for the rest of the U.S. :) Ohmpandya (Talk) 23:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

No, its a bot, all I have to do is keep clicking start, start, start and it does it for the city listed. You type a code in "Append/Prepend text." You can thank that to jj137 ^♠ he told me. But it doesn't do it automatically no... just keep clicking start! =) Ohmpandya (Talk) 23:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I meant save...not start sorry! Ohmpandya (Talk) 23:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Have any suggestions? Ohmpandya (Talk) 00:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

If I had gotten a reply, I wouldn't be using AWB. I posted my name on the 31'st. I don't really expect a reply.Ohmpandya (Talk) 00:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Any others? Ohmpandya (Talk) 00:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, its not as much work as you think. I have a wireless mouse, so i take it and while doing my homework, its in my left hand clicking away. And theres a mirror close to me, thats shows if I have a new messege (AWB will stop if you have a new messege), so I stand up check the messege, reply if I have to and go back to doing homework, and clicking...at the same time. Ohmpandya (Talk) 00:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Done with Ohio:) Beginning Wisconsin:)Ohmpandya (Talk) 00:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

User:789ai121

Hi there: Something funny happened to my talk page and I traced it to the above-captioned user, who has a grand total of one edit -- to my talk page -- with the edit summary "Goodbye!!!". Just wanted to give you the heads-up to keep an eye on that account too which, considering what he tried to blank, may be another sock. Let's hope it's goodbye for real; apparently the user is not interested in contributing any real knowledge. Accounting4Taste:talk 00:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Man, you are FAST!! Vandals beware, quick-draw Corvus cornix is on the case!! Do you still make the beep-beep sound when you're being pursued by the coyote? Accounting4Taste:talk 00:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Recall

If you have an alternate mechanism, let me know of that idea. The converse is that refusal to be recall may be interpreted as refusal to be accountable. If your suggestion for an alternate method is better, I'll sign on to it.

This is your chance to be heard and make a difference. If you have a good idea, I'm ready to be convinced and then you will have doubled the size of your army for change! I might even make it part of my RFA. Archtransit (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

One-man campaign you wrote. Why not double the size of your air force or army to two? Brainstorm some ideas with me or others. Some of them will be goofy. Even if only one is sane, that could be the key to improving the situation. You may have a good idea but just haven't described it yet. Perhaps a list of "Actions Admins should usually not do"?

You have opposed other RFA for the same reason. Did any of them engage in a discussion with you? (No, I'm the only one) This could be your chance to improve the recall idea. Archtransit (talk) 22:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

You might to take a look at what User:Lar has been doing in this area. Seems like a reasonable compromise? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your concerns are but one edit suggests that you don't like the drama of a recall nor do you like the fact that a few vandals could force a recall. I assume that you support good behaviour by administrators and are opposed to bad behaviour. If this summary is accurate, we already have a beginning of a consensus. With a tiny bit of common ground, there is progress to be made! Let me know if you agree and we can proceed from there.

One possibility is to have dual systems for recall. Some products are UL listed (see Underwriters Laboratories ), while others have the Instituto Argentino de Normalización y Certificación (IRAM) seal. Look at your computer. It may have both. Again, the idea is just brainstorming. Archtransit (talk) 00:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

When one brainstorms, some ideas turn out to be not good ideas. However, not being shy in mentioning ideas sometimes brings out a good idea. Brainstorming for an alternative to AOR, I thought of some ideas.

How about agreeing to censure for bad behaviour? The criteria for receiving a censure could be similar to recall (or it could be different).

Another idea is having a AOR with standard conditions. A working name could be AOR(Cornix convention). If several people work with you to agree on conditions, some admin may agree to be bound by them. If perhaps 20 admin could agree to them, then that may be a critical mass to establish a AOR(CC), much as there is UL listing and/or IRAM seals on some electronics.

Yet another idea is to write a list of behaviors that admin must follow if they agree to join. A working name could be Cornix rules (2008 version). Having a named set of rules is not egotistical. See Robert's Rules of Order. The name could also be changed.

Your concerns over drama of recall may fall to deaf ears if simply limited to oppose votes in RFAs. What do you think are ways to reduce drama but have some accountibility among admins? Archtransit (talk) 21:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Standards? Which one are you talking about. Standards for a recall alternative? Or standards for behaviour?

If it is standards for behaviour, it's easy to start out brainstorming (note: these are brainstorming ideas, some will be wacky). Blocking in an article where the admin is also editing content; admin presenting false information to RFC/ANI/ArbCom; gross incivility; admin is convicted of murder; admin repeatedly violated BLP despite warning. Archtransit (talk) 21:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

What you said is a start. Wording it in fancy language is not necessary, especially in a draft. Keep these ideas coming. In CAT:AOR there are as many standards as admins. Why not develop Cornix standards? These could be renamed later or just called Cornix standards. It would be a bonus for RFA candidates to say "I'll sign up for AOR and use the AOR Cornix stnadards, not just the drama prone AOR" Archtransit (talk) 21:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

One of your concerns mentioned was an administrator being targeted for recall by vandals. How about giving some sort of immunity from recall to administrators acting against vandalism? The details can be worked out, but is this a viable idea to address your concern? Archtransit (talk) 17:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you considered changing your approach to RFA? Placing an oppose on all candidates who agree to recall probably won't change anything. It's like Kurt Weber's oppose comments for self-nomination RFA's. One idea which wouldn't benefit my RFA much (1 vote - yours) but could help you is to modify you oppose to a support in my RFA (assuming you support me and aren't anti-aircraft article writing editors). You could clearly say that you approve of RFA candidates who discuss the drama problem and work with you to improve the situation. Just a thought. Also, any of the brainstorming ideas above (immunity, list of bad behaviours for admins, standards, etc.) catch your imagination? Archtransit (talk) 16:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Let me know when you have some ideas. I'm not going to nag you. Archtransit (talk) 22:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

26th Regiment Royal Artillery Association

Hi. I have deleted the above article that you have tagged for speedy deletion. An uninvolved editor has made some observations about the deletion on my talk page that may be of interest to you. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 00:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: IP block

I decided not to block since it's a shared IP. If it wasn't shared, I probably would have blocked. bibliomaniac15 00:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

{{Warn-article}} and {{Warn-editor}}

Hello again, Corvus cornix ... DGG (talk · contribs) made some suggestions at Template talk:Warn-article that I incorporated into it, as well as some tweaks to Template:Warn-editor ... your comments on both talk pages would be appreciated, or else just a "stay the course" reply on my talk page. :-) Happy Editing! —72.75.72.63 (talk · contribs) 01:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi ... please see Ironman Live (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as an example of Warn-web in practice ... I noticed activity from my watchlist, so I finally tagged it for deletion over six months after initially flagging it and altering the author, WalterPCraig (talk · contribs) ... that was on 14 June 2007, and they haven't been back since.

My {{Prod}} was seconded within 90 minutes, and since I know that Some Other Editor also has it on their radar, I can once again just MOVE ON. :-) —72.75.72.63 (talk) 12:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

2nd opinion as a WP:NPP, please

G'day, Corvus cornix!

I know that it violates WP:AUTO, but I'm trying to get a better handle on WP:BIO criteria, so I'm using myself as an example … I would appreciate it if you would take a look at this sandbox and comment on its talk page as if you had encountered it on New pages patrol in article space instead of user space … in particular, I'm interested in your opinion of whether the reliable sources cross the line of primary sources. Thnx! —Dennette (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

My bad, I thought it said 5 years after he wrote it, not after he died. I'm sorry for messing it up.

Corvus cornix wrote:

"Please don't remove sourced material, as you did at Napoleon complex, without prior discussion on the article's Talk page. Corvus cornixtalk 06:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)"

I've removed the material precisely because it was unsourced. An unverifiable source hardly count as a source. I'm going to re-remove the material. If anyone re-adds it I'm not gonna bother again since I've no intention to start an edit war.

Jon Awbrey socks

See my contribs from earlier today. You'll be pleasantly surprised. Raul654 (talk) 22:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Zirnevis

Yes, I did delete it; the article creator recreated it a week later. I just deleted it again as a G4. --Coredesat 01:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vera.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vera.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: BJBot

That is what I had it doing orginally but I changed it in the rewrite, I'll change it back, thanks. BJ^Talk 20:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your update

The RFA stands at 50-1-0. Your changing the vote won't matter mathematically. However, changing your vote could change your image among some people from a troublemaker to a person with ideas. (Note: I am not calling you a troublemaker). Your changing your vote or just crossing out the oppose could be accompanied by an explanation that a discussion is ongoing and the RFA candidate is open about discussing what's the best way to address the drama issue and possibility that vandals could initiate a recall. I'm writing to you because this could help you and what concerns you. Withdrawing your oppose is a nice gesture but won't affect the RFA results one way or another so it doesn't benefit me much. Archtransit (talk) 20:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Did you win any money on Jeopardy? Archtransit (talk) 20:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

You're welcome. :) No, you don't need to change anything in your preferences. Acalamari 19:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I had a similar situation when I was made an admin. One minute, the buttons aren't there, then, the next page loads, and wow! Buttons! :) I've seen you around many times, as well as interacted with you, and know you are a user I can trust with rollback; therefore, I was happy to grant your request. Good luck. Acalamari 19:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello and thanks for taking the vandalism off of my talk page. I guess the guy didn't like me reverting him much :) DesertAngel 05:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Daniel Martin (Scholar) Article Deletion

Dear Corvus,

Let me preface this by saying I have no intention of writing an article about myself, I'll let someone else do that someday (if ever). I only want to suggest that we take a good look at what we mean when we say "IMPORTANT and "SIGNIFICANT".

I must adamantly make a case for the Daniel Martin (Scholar) article - not on my personal behalf, but on the behalf of anyone who has made acceptional academic achievements and has, as a result been recognized with a highly prestigous national award. The Jack Kent Cooke Foundation Scholarship, received by Daniel (myself) as a result of years of hard work and community leadership, is the most selective, lucrative transfer scholarship in the Western Hemisphere.

I believe it's a very poor reflection on our society when a junk filmmaker can crap out a movie about two guys getting stuck in the desert with a beautiful lesbian (see Never on Tuesday and get acknowledged on Wikipedia just because it was released by a studio - or another can be born into a wealthy family like my friend Brad Wyman (with all due respect), yet never achieve anything productive save 1 hit film about a mass murderer - see Monster. This reflects the same skewed value system that awards a top teacher with $30,000 a year while Julia Roberts can pump out a flop for $20 Million.

While I do understand that not just ANYONE can have a wikipedia article about them and their achievements, I do believe those who've been recognized with extraordinary awards by extraordinary people - see Jack Kent Cooke - should be recognized truthfully with the appropriate citations and proof. Jack Kent Cooke once said his legacy would be his scholars - and as the legacy of Mr. Cooke, I believe myself and other scholars should stand as societal role models and be recognized in the academic community for our achievements. I still believe, despite the cynical attitude of some, that Wikipedia is a real part of the academic and knowledge community.

Who are you to say that my achievement in not "IMPORTANT" or "SIGNIFICANT", yet Adam Rifkin's Never on Tuesday get's it's own entry - and for what???

I think this scholarship - and what it stands for - is pretty damn significant - and so did a multi-multi millionaire entrepreneur like Mr. Cooke, who owned the Redskins and the Lakers and the Chrysler Building, and so did the selection committee of dozens of top professors, politicians and nobel laureates who picked me and 24 other students out of over 25,000 potential candidates.

So I urge you, in your role as an admin, to permit and guide an article about a Jack Kent Cooke Scholar - not for me or the sake of individual ego, I'll leave off the writing of my own article and do one on a fellow scholar - but for the sake of honoring extraordinary *recognized* achievements that I hope can one day inspire people to be strong in character, discipline and hope - things that define a Jack Kent Cooke Scholar. We deserve to stand next to the Adam Rifkins and Brad Wymans of the world, and I believe we can.

There's a real world out there, with real heroes. Let's lift them up too.

Thank you, Daniel Martin

If you would like more information about the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation, feel free to visit the Foundation website.

Corvus, this was posted also on WT:Notability (people), and I commented there, saying that while I think this could have passed speedy, there would be no chance at all for an article on someone winning an undergraduate scholarhip with no additional information being considered notable at Wikipedia. DGG (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

O yes, i looked at some of the films mentioned, and I think a good case could be made that a least a few of them arent notable. DGG (talk) 20:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)--the ones by Brad Wyman he mentions above as insignificant [10]-which they are. I will be nominating them for AfDs if you dont beat me to it. DGG (talk) 06:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

important/significant

ok. I'll fix some of the spelling errors in this post and send it on to BIO. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eleutherosmartin (talk • contribs) 04:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

>=(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY DID YOU DELETE MY PAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????!!!!!!! I worked 4 a WEEK writing it!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Czechwgirl (talk • contribs) 04:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

*sigh*

ur not sorry, and btw, dont treat me like a kid 'cus i'm 12, please. my article provided additional information on Czar Nicholas II. The previousely existing article didnt cover all topics i wished the reader to understand.

*sigh*

ur not sorry, and btw, dont treat me like a kid 'cus i'm 12, please. my article provided additional information on Czar Nicholas II. The previousely existing article didnt cover all topics i wished the reader to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Czechwgirl (talk • contribs) 04:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

wtvr

doesnt matter now....

OK, do i have to say it again!!!!????!!!! my article was more informative, and included information not included in the other articles...exuse me, articLE. if there cant be more information on a subject POSTED on wikipedea, what's the point? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Czechwgirl (talk • contribs) 04:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

no...

no... i created my OWN article on wikipedia, and the only thing i used the other article for was a pic that i DIDNT include...

• cough, cough* who are you and why did you get alerted so quickly anyways??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Czechwgirl (talk • contribs) 05:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

*dotdotdot*

i would LOVE to continue our LOVELY conversation, but i have to go to bed. btw, czech out freewebs.com/czechwgirl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Czechwgirl (talk • contribs) 05:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Heck no.

I thought the auto-signer would have...auto-signed it. I've tidied it up. HalfShadow (talk) 05:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes you just gotta say '...'. S'better than a roll-eye smiley. Which we don't have anyway. HalfShadow (talk) 05:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

ANI

I have responded on ANI. It might have been courteous, though, to allow me time to respond to your initial query before taking it to ANI. I'm finding you diffs to justify my actions, which, as I explained on ANI are based on discussions that took place in the last couple months about that situation. My understanding was that we weren't blocking marginally inappropriate names with zero contributions. That's why the bots started telling us if there were contributions. - Philippe | Talk 07:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD Debate

Can you please take another look at this AfD debate as it has been fleshed out a lot since your Delete vote and certainly satisfies a number of the WP:BAND criteria. Many hours have been wasted on this already which could have been spent on improving this resource. Michaeljohnsfans (talk) 10:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Revert of content blanking

I'm in a bit of an odd situation with the Svenonius article: Svenonius himself contacted me and made it clear that he was uncomfortable with the personal information being up there. The last thing I want to do is making someone I'm writing about uncomfortable, so I took the information out, despite it's encyclopedic worth. Hopefully you can understand the position I'm in. I'll avoid reverting your revert until further notice. Thanks. Drewcifer (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:COIN would indeed be a good place to bring this situation, if I was interested in fighting it. Honestly, the last thing in the world I want to do here on Wikipedia is make anyone uncomfortable, and putting myself in his shoes I can completely empathize. Regardless of what "policy" says, sometimes you've gotta take a step back, you know? Me and Mr. Svenonius have come to a reasonable agreement, so I would really hate for this to somehow turn into a Me vs You kind of thing or even a "Let's leave it up to policy, regardless of what feelings are involved" kinda of thing. Drewcifer (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I realize what bringing the article to COIN would involve, but I don't want to "step away." I had an active hand in invading someone's privacy (if only perceived), and I would like to have an active hand in setting things right. Try and put yourself in my shoes. I've been around Wikipedia long enough (and I assume you have as well) to know what would result in brining the issue up to COIN: Mr. Svenonius has an obvious conflict of interest, his account should be watched, and his article should keep any encyclopedic, well-sourced content that it may have, regardless of his feelings. I would rather avoid that whole mess altogether and just take the content out myself. Honestly, given what he is notable for (as a musician), I don't think anyone is going to miss it. Drewcifer (talk) 01:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for being so understanding. Drewcifer (talk) 02:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

On-beat dance roller skating

I removed the nonsense tag from On-beat dance roller skating because it isn't really nonsense, but I did put an afd tag on it for discussion. Corvus cornix_talk 01:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, I wasn't really sure what to do with it. Thanks! Somno (talk) 01:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Joakim Noah

"Sorry....though I did feel it a reasonable comment to be made, particularly in light of the incident that was being referenced" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.176.160 (talk) 02:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I have readded my statement and added a citation to an article by NYT best-selling author and Yahoo Sports NBA columnist Adrian Wojnarowski. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mantupeht (talk • contribs) 03:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

In Your Bright Ray: speedy deletion? Precisely what kind of dickhead are you?

If you'd bothered to check the timing, you tagged the In Your Bright Ray page exactly two minutes after I created it. I saved the infobox before moving on to the next stage top ensure it wasn't lost and yoou, like a moron, leap on to it and say it should be deleted because it's empty. Give me another five minutes -- or three if you don't have the patience -- and I'll continue building it. Leave me alone. Grimhim (talk) 03:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

And now, while I address your stupidity, the article has been deleted. Can you reinstate ther frigging thing and let me continue please?Grimhim (talk) 03:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan filmography

Haha that was quick! Because the Ronald Reagan article (a featured article) is already too long to include his many films and television work, it is an *unfinished* sub-article containing his screen work which will be linked from the main article. I will add more wikilinks and clean it up more tomorrow. --Happyme22 (talk) 05:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for asking. --Happyme22 (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It is actually meant to be a list, similar to the Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography article. I'm going to put it all in a table format tonight and possibly add a little on Reagan's film career in the upcoming days. You'll have to excuse my tardiness for I've been busy. Happyme22 (talk) 03:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Please check out the article now. I'd say it's plenty cleaned up! --Happyme22 (talk) 04:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Jordan Barker

Point taken. I thought there was more to this movie he directed in 2004 than it seems like there is. I'm going to poke around for another minute. Thanks! Darkspots (talk) 23:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, while Wikipedia may not be a crystal ball, perhaps you have one. Darkspots (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've done as much damage as I can do to Mr. Barker's bio. It's all yours. Perhaps you'll be pleasantly surprised. Darkspots (talk) 00:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I threw in a gratuitous mention of the Emmy nomination. Nothing to do with him, really, but it makes the sentence flow a little better. Cheers, Darkspots (talk) 00:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Brad Renfro

I must have reverted the page right after you changed it. I looking at the history page at the time so, of course, I didn't see what you added. I was attempting to get the sources back, not edit what you added. Pinkadelica (talk) 00:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the things you added to the page did not constitute vandalism. Even so, there's no need to cite his date of death at every mention of his date of death. It really isn't a common feature amongst articles on other deceased actors/individuals. At the very least, your intentions - citing where the information came from - were good.Ultatri (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

THE NOLANS

Regarding coi on this article , its more sabotage/vandalism rather than coi. the enties under the sections 6, 7, and 8 concerning the TV GOLDEN YEARS, JAPAN YEARS LINE UP, AND THE NOLANS BEST HITS COLECTION, were deliberatly removed and continually removed after being reinserted. The users responsible were not merely wishing to add their views, rather to vandalise work done by others.--Gazer97 (talk) 01:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Sandy Jardine

Thank you for your help in this matter! You are vital to the success of Wikipedia-fast and efficient and having good judgement.Thank you once again for your help. blessed be ! User250.x —Preceding unsigned comment added by User250 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

AN/I Thread

Best to read the whole section... Nowhere did I suggest blocking someone who made death threats was pointless. ^Avruchtalk 00:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I said 'Blocks are preventative, not punishment' and he said 'Even for death threats?' and I said 'what would be the point of any punishment we can deliver?' and I stand by that question. The dude is blocked for a long period of time, and the IP is as well. The reason blocks aren't punitive is because there is no point - its a pretty weak form of punishment, wouldn't you say? I didn't argue that it shouldn't be reported to Mike Godwin, or that he shouldn't be blocked. Just that punishment per se is pointless. You may not agree, but you should at least consider that I wouldn't argue that blocking someone who made death threats is pointless in and of itself. Next time, before you express disbelief, anyway - particularly if you are going to include it in the irreversible edit summary that everyone sees on a watchlist. ^Avruchtalk 00:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Austin State Creek Recreation Area

UserRickK seems to have got fed up and left Wikipedia back in 2005, so it was brainless of me to leave a message on his talk page -- my bad. On the other hand, I notice that the footer on the parks.ca.gov page says "Copyright © 2007 State of California" so I wonder why UserRickK thought it was in the public domain. Do you think it is? Stepheng3 (talk) 04:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

From what I've heard, works created by agencies of the U.S. Federal Government are public domain, but content produced by U.S. states can be copyrighted. I'm not a lawyer, though, so do your own due diligence.

Since UserRickK was clear on the talk page about where s/he got the material, I should've called it infringement, not plagiarism. But since I've reworded the article (and UserRickK is obviously not coming back) this seems like water under the bridge. Stepheng3 (talk) 05:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

AFD

I didn't erase anyones vote, I just fixed it so the refs were still there without screwing with the main AFD page. Get your facts straight next time. TJ Spyke 05:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Pretty Ugly

I want to sort this out, Cultural Vibe isn't very notable, even if featuring on a game which is played/has been played/will be played by millions of people isn't notable, but Pretty Ugly has been involved with quite a number of notable, high profile rappers. yes, he is yet to release his first album, and he has only released one single, but he has featured on compilation albums along with the likes of Naughty By Nature, Missy Elliot etc. He has also been on GTA, which in itself gives him alot of limelight. Please respond as quickly as you can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelasaurus (talk • contribs) 06:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Getting past

You've gotten past the writing and understood the justifications? My hat is off to you, sir. Antelan ^talk 06:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

RCU

I thought I had the right to blank the page because I made the request in the first place. Mike Bate (talk) 02:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll fix it so all the archives are OK. Mike Bate (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hardcor

Yeah, after I tagged it, the author went off on my on the talk page for CSDing it. Good times. Gromlakh (talk) 01:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Fugduhhh

i like editing stuff, y cant i? you guys suck!

Fugduhh

no, im not vandalizing, im editing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fugduhhh (talk • contribs) 02:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fugduhhh

ok im sorry :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fugduhhh (talk • contribs) 02:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

General Welfare Clause / Taxing and Spending Clause

I saw your comment at Wikipedia:ANI#History merge needed indicating your interest in this issue and think that you might want to comment at Talk:Taxing and Spending Clause#Requested move. MilesAgain (talk) 14:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

College Secret Societies page

Hello, I would like to add the secret socieity called the "Shifters" at Wittenberg University. Links with information about them can be found here. Please let me know if these following sources are enough, I believe them to be. If you agree I will add them to the page. Thanks [11] [12] [http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread279102/pg1 [13]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncertainmcgee (talk • contribs) 16:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Phaiax

Ancient Greek and Roman things are my forte. You patrolling short pages these days? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Actually, I was trying to be humorous, perhaps too obscurely. It's just that I don't see User:Smith Jones as a naturally skilled negotiator, and I was unaware that the user had already been blocked. Apologies if I didn't make myself clear. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 00:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Stoprev

I'm concerned about this speedy tag - can you explain how you think it's advertising? Looks like a user page to me (OK, I admit, the link should come out, but I think other than that it's user info). - Philippe | Talk 04:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I don't see it as advertising. I think he's just giving info about himself, which is appropriate in user space. I deleted Trevor Brady, but I'm allowing the user space. - Philippe | Talk 04:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio I'll buy. Deleting it now. - Philippe | Talk 04:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion

Could you take a quick look at my comment at the bottom of WP:BN and let me know what you think? There don't seem to be any 'crats about. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 05:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but the 'crats themselves have reached consensus that it should remain stricken. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 05:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I would agree that RTV involves the right to a new identity, but I don't think it allows you to use both accounts in parallel in edit disputes or to rake up old scores connected with the old account. That's the problem, however, a 'crat is now looking into this. Thanks. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 05:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

AN post

I'm with you in principle, as I am constantly and viciously attacked and stalked on that site. However, in this instance my purpose was to show the behavior of an editor we are thinking of importing from Wikipedia Review. Other editors in that same thread posted quotes from this same editor from the same crap site. I do think that is a good idea and that a special dispensation needs to be made from the general rule against important feces from said website. --Mantanmoreland (talk) 05:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

That's an idea. I posted in the thread that I have a copy of the material and can email to anyone interested. --Mantanmoreland (talk) 05:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Dexter Lehtinen

There are plenty of references in the artcle.. References do not have to have links. If you like get another administrator to refree.Callelinea (talk) 05:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Do a goole news search on him. Callelinea (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• I have provided valid references.Callelinea (talk) 05:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• Please read Wikipedia:Citing sources such as: "Citations for newspaper articles typically include the title of the article in quotes, the byline (author's name), the name of the newspaper in italics, date of publication, page number(s)..." Callelinea (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• I retrived them all today from goole news. Callelinea (talk) 06:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• If you had probably waited another hour they would of been all in there.. But since you are always looking out for me, you have no patience.. First you AFD my articles for not having enough references and then you wanna erase them all because I have too many. Why don't you go and create some articles.Callelinea (talk) 06:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• Anyway as you can see I do not have to provide links for my references. So I was correct.Callelinea (talk) 06:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Callelinea has re-added his bogus references to Dexter Lehtinen. Corvus cornix_talk 07:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Now that they're in-line, we can match news pieces to article claims. If you still think they're bogus (i.e. that they don't support the claims in the article) the onus is really not on Callelinea to show that they're not, but on a concerned editor who has access to the relevant newspapers. Of course that's why we prefer online sources, using {{cite web}}. Prefer but not require. Remember to assume good faith. Dethme0w (talk) 07:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

New York City Transit Police

I am having a slight problem understanding your complaint regarding the names of the 13 officers that died in the line of duty. They are not the subject of biographies. It is not a complete list of every officer that ever worked for the NYCTPD, just 13. It does not seem to violate the spirit of WP:BIO. You also could have discussed the subject on the discussion page or my talk page before removing my content. SGT141 (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

That was the point I made above. There have been thousands of officers in the NYCTPD. I listed 13. That isn't "every teacher at a school, every policeman working in the NYPD". Would you please explain where there is some rule that states you cannot mention someone in an article unless they qualify for a stand alone article? SGT141 (talk) 06:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Skizoo

There is nothing in the article which references any of the notability claims you make in your edit summary. Therefore, the article, on its face, is a speedy deletion candidate. If you want to add those refs, then please do so, otherwise, it should be deleted. Corvus cornix_talk 06:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The article is unlikely to be speedied, because it does assert notability by its claim (which a quick googling verified) that the band is signed to a major label (EMI). See the info box in the article. If I were an admin, I'd decline the speedy. I do agree that the creator of the article needs to enunciate the band's notability better and I was just thinking up a non-bitey way to get that message across when you placed the above. Dethme0w (talk) 06:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I have tagged the article {{unsourced}} because you're right about one thing - it needs references. Dethme0w (talk) 06:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you two, but it takes a few minutes at least to cite the references, which soonly will be added to the article. Rockk3r (talk) 07:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey Corvus are you an admin?? I said i'd put the references and sources but you didn't care about that, you just deleted the article. Skizoo it's an important band in Spain and it's gaining a lot of fans with every work they release. They are signed to EMI (Thats very important). Even Dethme0w told you about their importance and he put the {{unsourced}} on the article, but didn't just deleted it. If you could please help me create that page and fix it the right way instead of deleting it I would aprecciate it. Rockk3r (talk) 12:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

And who is Pegasus????? Is he a user or admin? Rockk3r (talk) 4:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I meant no insult

I am so sorry I offended you. Sadly, "copyright paranoia" is what the term has come to be called, and I in no way meant it to reflect on you. In fact, the reason I didn't indent my reply to Carnildo is that I didn't want to offend him or her.

I, for one, am fed up with some of the extreme terms in wiki culture, like "don't be a dick," "edit war," etc. Please forgive my not making it more clear that my comment was not about you, but in reference to the fact that states have never tried to assert copyright. MB83 (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:Reino Helismaa in the article Siege of Leningrad

Hi, Corvus cornix,

Sourced edits were deleted several times by User:Reino Helismaa, who disregarded the references, and also disregarded the inuse template. Same actions by the same user in this article were reversed by admins in the past, albeit the user does not stop. The user asked me to use Russian in communication with him, because the User:Reino Helismaa does not understand English (see the user page). Warnings to stop using Russian in English Wikipedia were ignored by this user.

Another edits with substantial Russian text in the English article were made by User:Mrg3105. This user also deleted well sourced material from the article Siege of Leningrad in the recent weeks. The latest disruptive activity by this user was today; the user disregarded my work and inuse template, and added numerous edits with Russian text and links to article that do not exist in Wikipedia. The user does not show any respect to work in progress.

Such disruptive activity by this two users did not help to contribute to the main article in a more productive way. Much of my time was wasted on undoing the damage done to the article. User:Mrg3105 posted numerous conflicting and aggressive messages addressed to me, including such terms as "insane" in quite a counterproductive manner.

Thank you for your previous efforts to improve this environment and to make it conducive for productive editing, to make Wikipedia better.

Regards, Steveshelokhonov 00:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, again,

Thank you for your kind reply. Steveshelokhonov 00:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

29 years.

It's the new indef (maximum allowed block time). ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 00:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Got bored of it. :P Maybe by middle age the vandals will become good editors... maybe. · AndonicO ^Hail! 00:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Unless the vandal is already middle aged... *shudders* · AndonicO ^Hail! 01:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

KColorEdit

KColorEdit is a part of extragear package software, although extragear don't have the same schedule release of KDE package it a important piece of the KDE project. This little application is a utility to create and edit palettes (it works with KDE palettes and GNOME too), there's not a similar software in KDE, so many people use it with GIMP and other utility like Krita to edit and create their own images, I think this application could be help this people, that's why I had to work on this article.

Also, Could you notify me about another KDE tool that can manage this kind of topics KDE and Colors?

Please don't underestimate this tool, all the software have their own complexity and function, not because isn't a famous name means that isn't a help.

Best regards

Orgyforever (talk) 07:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think that merge KColorEdit with KDE is a good idea becouse this applications belongs to extragear and ... please take the work of read the wiki of KColorEdit for more information. And please don't underestimate this application, the fact that isn't a famous software doesn't mean that don't have a utility, this application helps people that to create their owns palettes and used in applications like Krita or Gimp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noki123 (talk • contribs) 09:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Dancrade vs Samedov Image

Hello,

Thanks for the warning, but i am the geniune author of that picture, indeed. You can check the main article K-1 Turkey and can see that i had taken numerous pictures about the event.

I work for a multi national sport tv channel and i was there to follow the press conference. I am not very capable on Wikipedia Regulation. I just try to amend the articles i interest as much as i can.

Then could you please tell me what i have to do to ensure the existance of my picture, please?

Best Regards...

--Umi1903 (talk) 10:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, you are welcome and hope to keep in touch for other wiki stuffs,

Cheers! --Umi1903 (talk) 12:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for that I hadn't realised I just presumed it was a tag for all deleted articles that were reposted. That will teach me not to read things fully! ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 04:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

2007 Jaden & Crans

--Asteroid Finder (talk) 07:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC) Excuse me,I don't see how you can tell me that Jaden doesn't exist. If you can't look through a telescope and tell me that that body isn't there than your claim that this is a hoax is voided and unprovable.

The fact is that I could look up into the sky at any point in time and give you the exact location of that asteroid. Any time after February 25th is obviously not possible. The image I put on those is like I stated a picture of Jaden and Crans, after being enhanced and cleared by a picture buisness in the Klock Tower Mall here in Kellogg.

I also know for a fact that the object is infact an Asteroid for a Science Professor who viewed my photos of Jaden awknoledged what I found. The professor has contacted NASA for me but has yet to inform me of a response. So until you or anyone else can prove that this space object is not in our night sky you have no right to call or report it as a hoax.

When you can prove that my Asteroid and it's moon are not there... Then, and ONLY then can you say that it's a hoax.

Asteroid Finder (talk) 07:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: templates

I'm passing

{{subst:uw-v1|Article|subst=subst:}}

. So it isn't passing a second variable. Will ^(talk) 22:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The "subst=subst:" is supposed to be there. It makes it subst everything in the template. Will ^(talk) 22:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I've worked it out. It's the new preprocessor playing havok with scripts. I'm trying to get it to work. Will ^(talk) 22:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

NSM.jpg

i dont know what you mean. how do i dot what i need to do?

Accutone

Okay, will try to work on the tone of the article. Thanks. Will try to add more third party sources, I've found a few market news articles on how this price-competitive product benefit new start-up companies, will search more, thanks again! Saintpako (talk) 03:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)pako

Freddie Nobile-- who knew?

Not BLP. Fictional character from the Godfather. Was deleted before. I'll probably restore and AfD. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 22:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

'fraid I never heard of him before. LOL. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 22:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Nakon already deleted as nonsense. Dlohcierekim 22:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

4.14 What happened to free, open content encyclopedia, Wikipedia?

Please help me to understand. I wrote the article about Leo J Meyer. I had (have) no intention of creating a shrine to him on a Webpage. I felt his history might be of interest to someone and I have not been wrong as some of your fellow administrators have indicated interest. But based on your comments "...provide reliable sources and verifiable claims of notability, then you can..." How did you or do you verify the claims in the article about Robert L. Howard. And I know them to be true because I have served under him. But please explain how you would verify the claims. That way I might also be able to provide the ability to verify. Thanx Meyerj (talk) 16:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Will (film)

I saw your comment at ANI. I'm don't do much with movies so I have no idea what is a relilable source but I did find The Hollywood Reporter if it's any use to you. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'll remember that one if I ever need it. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 02:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		For you my friend, a resilient editor who puts up with a lot of crap during your vandal-fighting efforts. They try and get you down, but I have seen how they never can! Keep up the fantastic work! Jmlk17 22:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Logo fair usage

On Wilmington Montessori School I am trying to properly upload the school's logo. I am the school's webmaster and I am working on behalf of the school to provide additional articles for the school. I would like to have an entry similar to another area school, Tatnall School and would like to have the WMS school logo displayed in the info box. I have read some of the fair use policies, but am still unsure which would correctly apply. Any help in following the correct policies and procedures regarding this image and logo usage would be much appreciated. Daddy.twins (talk) 22:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

New Pages

Hi! When tagging a page for CSD please make sure to mark the page as patrolled. Thank you! Swirlboy39 (talk) 00:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

it was not a hoax, its a real album. And why dont you archive your talk page yo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stinging P (talk • contribs) 04:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Went backwards there...

...and darn, you're quick! *g* Thanks for the note, anyhow. Tony Fox (arf!) 23:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Blanking Talk:Banned films

Hi. Thanks for catching my accidental blanking of Talk:Banned films. I've left a longer explanation on my talk page. --Dom (talk) 06:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)