User talk:Melsaran

a question

Can you please check out the talk page of papa roach?? there is something that you should see! plase read that where is written:genre the third! Melodic Horror

hope

I hope you read a question! Melodic Horror

Sorry, I'm not really interested in the Papa Roach article, I merely reverted the trolling of a banned user once. You'll have to discuss the matter with others. By the way, please sign with four tildes (~~~~) instead of three, then I can see the time at which you posted your message. Melsaran 13:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in My RfA which closed successfully. I am honored and truly more than a little humbled by the support of so many members of the community. It's more than a bit of a lift to see comments on my behalf by so many people that I respect. I'll do my best to not disappoint you or the community. - Philippe | Talk 06:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations with your adminship! Melsaran 13:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 30	23 July 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "World domination"	News and notes: "The Wikipedia Story", visa ruling, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Private Lessons (1981 film)

I have to ask what was incorrect about my rv on 5 June that warranted reversion? Did you want the bit about the Fresh Prince in there, or was I mistaken in my methods? Enlighten me. Varaaki 05:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Dictionary definitions

Please do not add the {{wi}} template and redirects for all manner of dictionary words. {{wi}} is to discourage the creation of illegitimate articles. Otherwise, they clutter the main namespace and discourage the creation of legitimate articles. There is already a message pointing readers to the wiktionary page for terms without articles. The {{wi}} templates all eventually have to be deleted. The productive solution upon finding a link to a dictionary word is to unlink the incoming link. —Centrx→talk • 01:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I didn't know that. Thanks, I'll use them more sparingly from now on. Melsaran 13:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Man O War, Man O' War reasons

These are similar enough to be the cause of spelling confusion, and the working title (ie the title used during the development of the character of Tentacruel NOT the name used in the series) is low notability. Hence the redirect of Man O War to Man O' war over a reference to Tentacruel. I note that the only link to Man O War is a reference to the race horse. GraemeLeggett 09:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I tend to disagree. Indeed, the name is not really notable, but a hatnote should suffice. It is, after all, the only thing in the list that's not written with an apostrophe. This is the usual construction for these issues (compare Transport for London, it has a hatnote referring to "Transport in London" and the article is about the company, rather than a redirect to some disambig page). Melsaran 13:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Sugarcult

Hey, just thought that I'd drop you a note to say thanks for sorting out the discography! I thought that it might've been an invalid use of the album covers and had been meaning to look into it further. Thanks for taking care of it! Apollosfire 16:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! I was surprised to see that these covers need to be removed (someone did it at Westlife discography), although it makes sense when you think of it. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hatnotes

You seem to be involved with hatnotes. Do you feel one is acceptable at Thor (Marvel Comics), Thor (Comico Comics), Thor (comics), and Count Dracula? There are probably others, but let's decide whether they're needed for these pages. Join the discussion at ThuranX and see if you can convince this person on all the circumstances when dabs are actually necessary. I've tried and failed. Thanks. Lord Sesshomaru

That's really easy, in fact. Just point him at WP:NAMB. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 03:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems he didn't take it well, see this. Can you assist me in these edits using the WP:NAMB consensus as the reason? Lord Sesshomaru

I was already busy with that. :-) I cannot really understand why this editor is so stubborn, the guideline is pretty clear in this case. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 04:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I saw, there are so many others out there, some of which I forgot but I'll let you know if I find a myriad of them again. I'll help you in reverting to prove our case. :} Lord Sesshomaru

Thanks, I'll keep an eye out as well. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 04:12, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) - A few I just recalled were Paifu and Belzi. I placed disambiguations there thinking they were necessary but I'll need your help on that. Sakura Haruno's dab may need fixing as well. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru

Did some tweaks. The hatnote at Belzi is actually very handy, usually {{distinguish}} is used for these kinds of issues, but in this case it is a redirect, so {{redirect}} is more appropriate. I placed some "anchors" in the Wandaba Style article so that redirects can be made for every individual character, and fixed the hatnote at Sakura Haruno accordingly. Did the same with Paifu. How do you like it? Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 04:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Great. Though the Sakura Haruno for Wandaba Style doesn't seem to target properly. Does it matter if it is a large "#REDIRECT" or small "#redirect" link? Lord Sesshomaru

No, it's because you changed it to a redirect to Wandaba Style#Sakura Harano. Because I saw the names were in Japanese and English (Japanese places the family name first), I just made anchors for the first name and the last name. "Sakura" works, "Haruno" works, but "Sakura Haruno" or "Haruno Sakura" doesn't, because I didn't think it was necessary (although you can create those anchors if you want). Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 12:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I was wondering why you used "Sakura" only, it didn't work the first few times I clicked it, hence, that was my entire reason for changing it. I just tested the redirect of yours and it worked okay now. And you may want to look at this, it isn't the first time I've dealt with this user so maybe you could persuade him with something more than WP:NAMB and then remove that disambiguation? Lord Sesshomaru

Doesn't matter, fixed it. :-) and I'll take a look at that page. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

If you look at the Count Dracula page you will see Sesshomuru accused me of vandalism first. Are you going to give him a warning? He is deleting stuff against majority consensus. I am trying to retain useful hatnotes. If you look at the Count Dracula Talk page you will see that Sesshomuru has engaged in a series of unjustified personal attacks againt me to which I haven't responded. I am a constructive editor - he wants to delete stuff against majority decisions. Colin4C 19:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I see, that was wrong as well, but it happened weeks ago, so I am not going to warn him for it now. If I would have seen it, I would have warned him, no worries. And I understand that you are a constructive editor, however, I fail to see why there is "majority consensus" for a hatnote which is explicitly`advised against by the hatnote and is also not useful (as I explained on the talk page). Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 20:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Just to say that the reason some of us are in favour of the hatnotes is not to be arkward or because of egotism - its through having to deal with the particular edit history of the various Dracula pages and the confusion between Count Dracula, Dracula the novel, Vlad the Impaler the historical figure, and Dracula in popular culture. I'm clear about it myself, but I'm afraid its not immediately obvious to new editors. Basically I'm appealing to common sense. The Dracula article retains its hatnotes. Should these be now removed? If so won't that confuse people? If I said 'Dracula' to you, is it immediately obvious that I am referring to the book or the fictional character? How will people know without hatnotes? Colin4C 20:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Dracula in popular culture won't be confused with this article when you link to it in summary style using {{main}}. And I fail to see how Count Dracula gets confused with Dracula; the latter article already has a hatnote referring to the former. Just refute anyone who proposes to merge these articles or something like that. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 20:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

So why are hatnotes permissable at Dracula but not at Count Dracula? Colin4C 20:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The first one, a reference to Count Dracula, is legitimate because Count Dracula is often simply called Dracula (without the title in his name). It is not legitimate in Count Dracula because the book isn't called that way. The second one is legitimate because there are more things called "Dracula". It is not legitimate in Count Dracula because Dracula doesn't redirect there. Someone looking for, for example, Vlad Dracula isn't going to type "Count Dracula" in the search bar. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 20:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the talk pages of the Dracula articles you will see that it is a fact that considerable confusion has occured. E.g. there were those who thought that Count Dracula is 'really' Vlad the Impaler, and those who would like to import details of the Dracula films into the article about Bram Stoker's fictional character. I'm willing to bet ready cash that if the hatnotes are permenantly removed we will have a relentless series of dumb edits which those of us who are keeping an eye on the article will be kept permanently employed correcting. Not only that but I guess that some will actually try to redefine the article according to their presumptions. If the nature of the article is not made explicit, how are we going to persuade them that they are not indeed right to redefine it anyway they want? Colin4C 20:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I didn't make any personal attacks, let alone be incivil to fellow Wikipedians. And this here is the entire reason why I said "Reverted vandalism"; Colin4C undid the edit without leaving an edit summary, demonstrating that my edit was vandalism. I saw this as bad faith and reverted as such. And like Melsaran implied, object to all those who desire to combine the pages, there is no need for any dabs to prevent this from happening. Lord Sesshomaru

Heh, look at what ThuranX said. I'm guessing this is revenge because we removed his precious Thor hatnotes, does he have the right to even call it trolling? Lord Sesshomaru

Probably. As this time he knows he cannot revert it (the guideline is very clear, Q.E.D.), he is removing your comments and being uncivil instead. Sigh. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Colin, if your only concerns are people proposing merges etc, that is not a valid reason for a hatnote. Hatnotes exist to serve the reader, not the editor. But for your sake, I added a huge (non-visible) infobox on top of the article (see [1]), and another (visible) box on the talk page (see Talk:Dracula). Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Did you mean to link to that? I think your external link is broken. Lord Sesshomaru

Oops, I used both {{fullurl}} and the entire URL. Fixed, thanks. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, just one thing: could you please sign with four tildes (~~~~) instead of three? This makes the date and time also appear, which is quite handy. :-) Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

As much as I despise the timestamp, I think I should get used to it from now on. You aren't the first to tell me that, I'll sign with four tildes every time I enter a talk page. Thanks for defending me from ThuranX. Cheers! Lord Sesshomaru 23:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, makes things much clearer at times ;). And I didn't "defend" you (Wikipedia is not a battleground), I merely stated my opinion. This time, the hatnote was clearly inappropriate, and his removal of your comment on his talk was clearly done in anger. You're welcome, though. Have fun with editing! Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing this. :-) Picaroon (t) 20:12, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, that looked a little weird ;-). Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 20:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah but hold on, this is incorrect. Note the "[a]ll numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)." The numbering is left to match with the proposed decision page so people can crosscheck the pages. Picaroon (t) 20:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it? Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for telling me, I reverted it. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 20:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Lights has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Cheers, Lights 00:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.

Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 31	30 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Another experiment and Wikimania
Report on Citizendium	Response: News from Citizendium
User resigns admin status amid allegations of sock puppetry	WikiWorld comic: "Mr. Bean"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

A personal attack?

On ThuranX's part, wouldn't this qualify as a personal attack? He said in his comment, and I quote, "... you're being a couple of jerks about it behind the scenes ..." IMHO, he deserves a warning. I understand his point about my "Excelsior!" comment but he didn't need to take it so far. Or should we just forget about it? Lord Sesshomaru 02:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is a personal attack, but I didn't feel like aggravating the issue further and/or get into a dispute. Warning him because he made a personal attack against me while in a conflict with me will probably only let things escalate and may seem a little pot/kettle-ish. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 02:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Hoi Melsaran! Bedankt voor je support vote. Wat men hier 'uncontroversial' noemt, blijkt op onze nl.wikipedia nog wat voeten in de aarde te hebben, maar het zal ook daar wel lukken lijkt me. Vriendelijke groeten, Freestyle 15:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Tsja, op nl.wiki stellen ze zich wel vaker aan, puur om de procedure/bureaucratie. Ik weet overigens niet of ze het op prijs stellen als we hier Nederlands spreken, so let's communicate in English from now on :-). Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Bien sur. Ehhh... of course! :) . Nice namechange by the way. I think we should get something like {{editprotected}} too on the dutch wiki... It can take ages for an admin to notice your request over there. Well, see you around! Freestyle 15:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's bring it up in the Kroeg. Seems like a very good idea to me, as long as it isn't abused (i.e. an article gets protected because of a content dispute and someone keeps on putting it up to request that his version is protected instead of The Wrong Version). Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll make an example in Dutch of the template first and then I'll ask it in the village pump. I'll get to it a.s.a.p. (I'm also enjoying the nice weather this week-end so I don't know for sure how soon that is.)Freestyle 18:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Template cleanup

Template:Deprecation notice --MZMcBride 02:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Raised an objection. By the way, aren't you supposed to subst templates like {{deprecation notice}}? Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 11:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Product (business)

Hi Melsaran, would you take a look at these edits I made to the page? I'm in doubt of whether a disambiguation is needed there or not. Lord Sesshomaru 14:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)