User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive 2

Welcome. To leave a message for me, please press the plus sign at the top of the page. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil comments at your talk page, unless you specify that you would rather I respond here.

If you have an issue with a vandalism revert I have made, please let me know. I try to ensure that I do not revert good faith edits, but accidents do happen. Leave me a message, and I will review my action and reverse it if my assumption was false. We all make mistakes, and we are both trying to work in the best interests of the project.

Archives

/Archive 1

Thanks!

Thanks for the Styx citation. It gets pretty heated over there!--98percenthuman 02:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Superior performance during the AfD for Lists of Indian women

You've earned your cookie! Sidatio 20:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! And thank you for contributing so much to the discussion. I'm not sure we'll reach consensus with all editors, but it's certainly a valiant effort. :) --Moonriddengirl 20:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Bah, we added nothing but fluffy words. You did all the work, and you deserve all the credit. I really don't think the author of the page in question has much of a choice other than accepting the compromise as presented, but it's a great deal better than just rending her work asunder. As John Lydgate might have said were he a Wikipedian: "You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time - especially on Wikipedia." Sidatio 21:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Indian women film actors

CfD nomination of Category:Indian women artists

Broken warnings

Just wanted to let you know that both of the CfD warnings you left on my talk page have been incorrectly formatted (with that Category:category thing breaking the link). I presumed the first one was a one-off and so didn't say anything, but since it's happened twice figured I'd better let you know. I've never used that template, so I'm not sure where it's gone wrong. :) --Moonriddengirl 15:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the error. That was caused by the script that I am using. I'll see that it is fixed before I nominate any more. I will say that I found these 2 categories through my watchlist. I now see that there are several more that you created that I have concerns about. Rather than nominate all of them now. I would like to see how the discussions begin on the first 2. After that, I'll think more about how to proceed. Please do take a look at WP:CATGRS#Other considerations where it says "Whenever possible, categories should not be gendered. A gender-specific category should only be implemented where gender has a specific relation to the topic." This is the main basis of my issue with these categories. Regards. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. There are several I created yesterday as part of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Indian women discussion. Categories have been considered as a solution for that list. I've already let the editors at that discussion know that those categories are under consideration, although it had been my understanding based on my reading of policy that gender separation was allowed. (I'm sure you know that already, from my comments on the CfD. :)) Anyway, the outcome of these debates will obviously have bearing on the AfD under discussion, and I'll be sure to keep the other editors apprised in case they don't follow the CfD themselves. --Moonriddengirl 15:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the 2 above discussion have both ended with decisions to listify. Do you have any thoughts about how you might like to proceed from here? I have a couple of ideas, but I would like to see how you feel before I take any action. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a really good question, given that the decision on the List of Indian Women was to delete. How will they be listified? The Iranian women discussion is talking about making smaller lists on more focused topics. Perhaps that would work here? I believe that many of the categories under the Category:Indian women by occupation will probably stand up for gender has a specific relation to the topic. Given the focus of feminist studies, I would imagine that gender is a topic of special encyclopedic interest on subjects like diplomats, film directors, freedom fighters and such, since those fields (and many others) have traditionally not been filled by women. Given the process on writers and artists, I can easily imagine "television personalities" and "dancers" failing the test. I'm not sure about writers, since as a lit major I often took classes where gender division of authors was a major criterion. :) What do you have in mind?--Moonriddengirl 03:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Now that I'm up and awake again, I see that I may have misunderstood your question. These have already been listified, so you weren't asking how I thought we should proceed with that. :) Apparently then you mean in regards to the remaining categories and which are retainable and which not? If so, looking down the list, it seems to me that "television personalities," "dancers," "athletes" and "choreographers" are the same sort of situation as artists & actresses. (I think singers are, too, but I didn't make that category and see that for some reason singers get special treatment.) Possibly "film directors," "journalists" and "civil service" as well, though those seem more rarified professions for women. I think a case can be made that writers are different, but I'm not sure if it's a provable case and it may just be because of my professional bias. :) The rest seem to me to fit into the same general gender interest as heads of government. What do you think? --Moonriddengirl 12:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that I am aligned with you regarding those 4 (television personalities, dancers, athletes and choreographers). I think that the others have some merit for being kept as they are harder for women to gain acceptance. I'm pretty sure that singers gets its own category based on size of that whole category tree. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

All right, then. Based on my reading of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion, it seems that, unlike with articles, category creators do not have the authority to request deletion speedily, and those categories do not seem to match the speedy deletion criteria. I suppose that makes sense, since it is much harder as far as I can tell to determine how many editors have added links to a category. Is the nomination for CfD the way to proceed with those four? --Moonriddengirl 19:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and I think that they should be 4 separate requests, in case someone wants to make a case for keeping one of them and to try to keep things from getting confused. If you would like, I can nominate them and you could comment on each to "support as creator", or vice-versa. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I did one. Boy, those things are complicated. :) I can do the others with the same language, if you'd like, or I will happily yield the others to you and sign on my support. I'll wait to find out if something I did with the female television personalities is horribly wrong before doing anymore; please let me know if you'd prefer to go ahead with the rest. I will absolutely NOT be offended. ;) --Moonriddengirl 20:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

It looks fine to me, but I'll do the others for you, since I have a script that cuts way down on the work. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

All right. I'll keep an eye out for them and sign on. (I pulled the "colon" chain back here because they were getting hard to count.) --Moonriddengirl 20:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I should have probably warned you that you would get the notices from me at the bottom of your page. Fell free to remove or refactor them as you please. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I will, since they have no real function as notification in this case. I understand how those templates do things automatically. :) --Moonriddengirl 20:55, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Pun

Okay I don't mind it now. K H 18:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the welcome! --Cvgjunkie 00:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile


Trusilver 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!

Just saying hello and figured I'd pawn off on you the most recent Wiki-chain letter I received. Have a great day. Trusilver 00:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL! Thank you! Smiles are always day-brighteners. :D --Moonriddengirl 01:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it's on us now? Oh, and by the by - we're not really vandal patrollers. Something tells me that could become VERY time-consuming! We do watch out for the pages on our watchlist, though. Thanks for thinking of us! Sidatio 02:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

WILL YOU MARRY ME

WILL YOU DATE ME ALSO LIGHT NUZZLING — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.52.65 (talk • contribs) 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Styx record chart info

Quoting record chart info from unofficial chart sources isn't a solid citation. Citing Styx itself and some other unofficial page in which neither cite its sources is not solid research. Find a solid source for the fact, such as within the pages of the RIAA's web site or Billboard magazine, someplace that holds more credibility than an uncited, unsourced, off-the-cuff remark on an unofficial, non-record industry page or a band fan site. I'm not saying it's true or not; I just don't see a valid source for the claim.--Bamadude 03:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I could really use your help!

It's come to my attention that the List of Indian women did not pass its AfD. I'm afraid that the List of Iranian women might meet the same fate before I have finished its categorization - I have many obligations off-Wiki at present, and I fear I won't have the time. Seeing as how you categorized a much bigger list much faster than I seem to be going, would it be an imposition if we asked for your help finishing the project? Let us know.

Sidatio 14:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help. However, since two categories I created for the Indian women list are being considered for deletion, I think I'd better stay away from artists & actors. They deletion discussion seems like it could go either way right now, and I'd feel uncomfortable creating categories for Iranian actors & artists given that consensus might be that the category is inappropriate. That said, I'm at your disposal. How can I best help? You want to give me a category or two or three? :) --Moonriddengirl 14:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I had been making sure the articles were falling in the categories of: Iranian people, Iranian women, and, if prudent, Iranian women (occupation). I only had to create a few, and so far, I have not received any notice of those categories being considered for deletion. I have avoided creating a category for actresses (preferring instead to categorize them as actors, which I believe has been the precedent). I had also been doing some DEFAULTSORT tags that I now understand SmackBot does automatically.

I really appreciate the assistance!

Sidatio 14:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I marked my place on the List of Iranian women talk page. I'll work down from the top when I can - probably won't be able to get to it until tonight at the earliest, may be able to do some on lunch break. DEFAULTSORT is a good friend to have, indeed! Sidatio 15:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Outstanding! You're much faster at this than we are. This will help a great deal. Thanks again! Sidatio 15:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW

I noticed Crescent rising and moved it to Crescent Rising as I believe that is the proper name. Just giving you a heads up. The Behnam 17:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. While I didn't create that one, I'd have properly put it with a lowercase "r" as well. I am not yet fully familiar with naming conventions. Slowly figuring this massive project out. :) --Moonriddengirl 17:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Since it is a proper name of the organization, per WP:TITLE#Lowercase second and subsequent words in titles we should capitalize the 'r' in this case. Indeed, it is quite tricky - I once added inappropriate capitalization to Mongolia and then had to undo all of it. The Behnam 17:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Civility

In re your comments on my page, that's a matter of opinion and I respect yours; please respect mine in this case. Some people don't respond unless you get somewhat stern with them. I've tried being nice & polite with this person and it just doesn't work; he keeps reverting the article back to reflect uncited material and complains about my reverts (which I made per WP:Verifiability) with no facts to back him up. FYI, I did the research myself and posted a compromise solution that is very close to what you and he reposted earlier that is cited by the RIAA, so that should be the end of that --- how's that for civility ;-)--Bamadude 18:31, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Styx board

Hi there. Since you've been on the Styx board, we are having a bit of a problem with Bamadude and his revisions of the page. He takes it upon himself to delete long standing information that a lot of editors have taken the time to include on the board, all with a lot of contentiousness that didn't exist before he came on the board a few weeks ago. In anycase, I was planning on waiting this out a few weeks until he gets tired of this and "fixing" his edits. Do you have any suggestions? Thanks for your time!--98percenthuman 02:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I have expressed my concerns to Bamadude about what I perceived to be incivility, specifically in the edit summary where he said "you should try this yourself instead of crying like a child about your uncited edits being reverted." He disagreed with my assessment. I've never been in the position you're in myself, but have looked into it a little bit after running into a situation like what you describe. Wikipedia:Resolving disputes recommends trying first to resolve differences on the talk page. If that doesn't work, it suggests waiting it out (as you'd planned). If I felt no resolution were possible, I would probably next consider taking the matter to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts to get the input of other editors who are used to evaluating contentious editing and incivility. If there are several editors who have attempted to work out questions of user conduct with the individual, the User conduct board seems to be the place to go. If it's less the conduct and more the content, you might try getting assistance at Wikipedia:Requests for comment. In any case, it seems like you need to document the problem fairly extensively, and, of course, be sure that you're behaving well within Wikipedia standards yourself. Hope that's helpful. Wish I had a simpler answer. :/ --Moonriddengirl 02:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will try this. --98percenthuman 02:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Dodgy AfD goings-on

Thanks for the heads-up regarding the discussion on the Laila Richard Sadeq AfD. It seems to have been done in a decidedly ass-backwards way, making it seem more suspect that it (hopefully) is. :-D OBM | ^{blah blah blah} 14:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

returning the smile


Smithcool 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!

thanks for recognizing me work. Smithcool 13:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

READ

Read the message on amir's page.Lil'Khan 22:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Your right to edit these articles is not in question, and I don't doubt that you have made many valuable contributions, including reversing vandalism. However, placing "warning" messages on the pages of good-faith contributors as you did to user:217.155.144.230 following his or her contributions to Kasautii Zindagii Kay is the kind of behavior specifically addressed in Wikipedia's Ownership policy, which discourages commenting on other editors' talk pages with the purpose of discouraging them from making additional contributions. Leaving a note on an article talk page requesting that other editors contact you before editing it is a similar situation. As a recent changes patroller, I am aware of how pervasive and frustrating vandalism can be, but one of Wikipedia's core policies is the assumption of good faith and the encouragement of free contribution.--Moonriddengirl 23:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Yretery of the Druids

While I am willing to accept your opposing view regarding the ongoing Yretery/Mystery debate, I must staunchly protest the seemingly misguided removal of the description of Yretery/Mystery as a "rappan" (rapping) game. While many have attempted to classify Yretery/Mystery, it is extremely difficult to categorize into a single genus. Therefore, rather than searching through a random grab-bag of assorted genres, and simply happening to pick out "adventure" (Please do not regard my remarks as personal criticism. While "adventure" is an extremely rough way to describe Yretery/Mystery, your error is highly unexplainable, and, I am sure, made in good faith), classification of Yretery/Mystery as a "rappan" (rapping) game is the only label which will do the title justice. With some thought on the matter, I am sure you will agree. Perhaps a compromise could be reached: a dual classification of the title as rappan/adventure. This way, newcomers to the game can gain a very approximate definition of the game's genus as "adventure" while the more hardcore Yretery/Mystery fans and loyalists will be pleased to see it properly and specifically labeled as a "rappan" game. Thank you for your time. 71.126.2.221 17:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Please feel free to edit The Mystery of the Druids with properly verifiable sources. The current sole source provided for the game very firmly establishes it as "adventure". --Moonriddengirl 17:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Elizabeth Azcona Bocock

OOh, thanks - that's what you do for foreign language articles. I was watching new articles and saw it before you got there - I was sure it wasn't a speedy delete, but wasn't sure what the right thing was, so I watched it, in the hope that someone would tag it appropriately, and you did. Thanks so much!— Timotab ^{Timothy (not Tim}^dagnabbit!) 23:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Camping World

I'm contesting the prod, as Camping World is clearly a notable company with more than 70 locations throughout the country, and arguably the largest retailer of RV supplies in America. However, I was wondering what specific reason you had for lack of notability, so I could fix the problem. (I'm guessing lack of sources; I'll get on that right now.) Realkyhick 02:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I've done some major work on the article, including the addition of a logo, its new RV sales division, and its major involvement in auto racing. I had no idea how involved they were in racing, particularly NASCAR, until I started looking for sources. Anyway, I think this will take care of any notability issues, but if not, you can always take it to an AfD. I'd prefer you asked me first, though, as I may be able to fix any other problems. Realkyhick 04:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You

		The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for reverting vandalism, especially some of my edits. Thank you! Laleena^{Talk to me} _{Contributions to Wikipedia} 21:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Silver Lining (game)

You say there "Nothing else in the article is supported by verifiable third-party sources", but with some googling I found now what I think are such sources and put them into the article - just writing here in case it's enough to change your deletion vote. --Allefant 11:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Notification of proposal: Guideline/policy governing lists

Given your interest in recent AfDs involving lists, I'd appreciate your input on the following:

Wikipedia: Village pump (policy)#Proposal to make a policy or guideline for lists

Thank you in advance for any thoughts you may have on the topic. Sidatio 16:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI, this conversation has moved to User:Sidatio/Conversations/On list guidelines. I look forward to your continued input in order to reach a consensus on the issue! Sidatio 00:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It's on my watchlist. :) --Moonriddengirl 00:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

hey

why did YoU ReVERt my edit i didnt do nothing bad? can you say sorry? --BobbyPlokowski 18:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

In regards to your question regarding the reversion of your edits to Newton County, Arkansas, information added to articles must be properly sourced and verifiable. Also, as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia has a standard of notability to maintain. Your addition to the article--i am bobby plokowski and i live in newtin county in arkansas and i am a editor of wikipedia--may be true, but it isn't information appropriate to an encyclopedia entry. --Moonriddengirl 18:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

it is enclopedic because it is true, its the free encyclopedia i can out wat i want. --BobbyPlokowski 18:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Please review What Wikipedia is not, which addresses that point specifically: "merely being true or informative does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia." --Moonriddengirl 18:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

ok iv read it now make me an admin or else --BobbyPlokowski 18:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

As I stated on the Help Desk, you can apply at Wikipedia:Requests for Adminship, but you will not have a hope of it passing until you have over 2000 edits, and a record of civilty, and a fair few months experience. :-) Stwalkerster talk 18:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Just thought I'd say Hi! You and I seem to think alike (or at least very similarly) with regard to WP:CVU. :) --Ratiocinate ^{(t • c)} 14:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems that way. :) I've enjoyed reading your comments. (ETA: Oh, and I like your username.) --Moonriddengirl 14:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I have enjoyed reading your comments, as well. It's nice to see someone else cool-headed and patient to explain our proposal. Cheers! --Ratiocinate ^{(t • c)} 15:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the kind reminder to sign my vandalism notices. I'm still learning this stuff. Tim Morgan 16:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism and Libel

dear moonriddengirl

I tried to translate an article to Finnish about a Jewish person who once lived in Finland and who started Spacepol (see article) and the s... hit the fan. I wrote about him and his family in some articles and recieved criticism about sources (deserved), but then the discussion and deletion discussions turned to outright libel (alluding to credential fraud, or the he has written everything in my article and on the internet about himself and that he has paid to get into biographies, etc.) against the subject of my article, which was never my intention. My problem as that now they are attempting to catorize the English article as spam and I might be able to source it well in the future. Is there any way to get it protected? I am trying to reverse the damage, so I don't end up getting sued myself! Is there a way to get the Finnish libel checked from here or stopped?

Otherwise, the article on en:wikipedia is spacepol, but I have sources for the biography. I don't know if the person wants or doesn't want to be in Wikipedia, though. But since he is in many biography books anyone can read, I assume it is ok here too. thanx: hans — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.56.7 (talk • contribs) August 15, 2007 (UTC)

Hans, I am reading your note and will reply soon. --Moonriddengirl 19:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Like DLand, who addressed this on your talk page, I am not an admin. You seem to be in a tricky situation. I do not have an answer to your question about whether the English Wikipedia can help you on the situation occurring at the Finnish Wikipedia, although I don't believe it can. The best place to ask that is probably Wikipedia:Help desk, although since that is staffed by volunteers, you may find many of them unable to answer your question definitively as well. It may require some patience before somebody reads your question who can give you a definitive response. Reading the rest of your note, it seems that the major part of your question is how to protect your article so that problems with it can be corrected in the future. The only recourse that I know of that you have there is to explain your situation at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spacepol. AfD is not a vote, but a discussion, and if you can set forth your position well enough, you may help the rest of the community arrive at the consensus that the article is not spam. If you can't, you may need to work on the article away from Wikipedia space until it meets Wikipedia's guidelines--specifically Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Please be advised that Wikipedia AfD discussions are not historically generous to the idea that an article can be fixed up later. If you can fix the concerns raised now, that would probably be best. Good luck with your editing. --Moonriddengirl 20:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Critical applied linguistics

I removed the content from the critical applied linguistics page because it was useless.

For instance, in "Teaching English as a Missionary Language," Pennycook raises the issue of the deteriorating separation between church and state in the USA, and its effect on teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) where private language school employees may be more interested in gaining religious converts rather than teaching English. In this example, we see the dynamic between US State Department objectives (i.e., creating business opportunites for American businesses) using a religious organization's objectives (i.e., exposing people to Christianity) to foster the growth of corporatism (i.e., the corporate language school).

The language seems improper: "We see..." The language is convoluted: "...dynamic between US State Department objectives (i.e., creating business opportunites for American businesses) using a religious organization's objectives (i.e., exposing people to Christianity) to foster the growth of corporatism (i.e., the corporate language school)." I read this sentence more than once and couldn't tease out anything besides gibberish.

Only the first paragraph is necessary. As it stands, the article is about that dude's book, not about critical applied linguistics, which seems of dubious value to begin with.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.199.62.67 (talk • contribs) 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. :) Since it was your intention to remove the content, please feel free to remove it again, but please do explain it in the edit summary so that other editors understand that the removal was purposeful and not accidental or vandalism. A few simple words like "unsourced; unrelated to subject" would probably be sufficient. The edit summary box is located just above the "save page" button. Not only do edit summaries help regular editors of a page to understand the evolution of an article, but they help editors on recent changes patrol to recognize that the change is constructive. We get quite a bit more accidental text blanking than you might imagine. :/ Thanks for contacting me about it. --Moonriddengirl 02:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC

Thanks

For the help with my user page. And for that matter...wow. Onikage725 12:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Very...very odd. I've been blanked, but never by an account who made it his sole priority. You could say that I'm used to my page being randomly mugged, but this is more like a serial killer attack. Amusing start to the day. I see from his logs you were hit as well. Onikage725 13:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Haha well that could be just about anyone :p Onikage725 13:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Another Moongirl!

Thanks for the welcome! I'm glad to meet another person with similar usernames. And similar interests too! What are the odds? Lenore Schwartz 14:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Indian women categories CfDs closed...

Hello, I've closed the Indian women CfDs. I've listed the current contents of the categories, so they could be added to lists, at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 August 11. If you have any questions, please let me know. Cheers! Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: 3/2 and 2/2 testing this weekend

Copied here because, in all of the known Wikiverse, only 2 or 3 people tune into my talk page. Still, that's better ratings than UPN ever had...

The strategy is one of straight-up brute force: Take 100 people-related lists, 100 non-people-related lists, and test the 3/2 and 2/2 criteria. For example:

List of painters: 3/2: Possible outcomes - Painters by: (country) and (time period), (gender) and (country), (gender) and (style), (country) and (style), (time period) and (style)

Outcomes viable: All; each sublist suggestion would spawn maintainable, navigable lists. Possible Issues: Painters by (gender) and (country) and Painters by (gender) and (style) could possibly lead to further sublisting arguments. (Country) criteria could inspire nationalist arguments for some painters (slight risk, but mentionable).

2/2: Possible outcomes - Painters by: (country), (time period), (gender), (style)

Outcomes viable: All but gender. Possible issues: All outcomes could be susceptible to further sublisting based on size, with the possible exception of (style).

If we don't get any other help, though, we might be looking at just doing 50 of each, with 5 or so from random categories according to the List of lists. I'd like to get this done, but I'm not about to make it the focal point of my weekend. Sidatio 13:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, this is something you're going to have to finish up for me. Please see my talk page. Thanks again for all of your help! :-) Sidatio 18:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Smash Bros Brawl

Well, since Peach is playable now, there's really no need for those arguments to remain. Ryan the Game Master 22:40, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Got your message about Talk:Super Smash Bros. (series). If the conversation is no longer relevant, that might be a good reason to archive it. If it isn't applicable to improving the page, it might be okay to delete the conversation, but that's a debated practice and certainly requires explanation at least in the Help:Edit summary. It would probably also be a good idea to mention what you've done in the talk page to make it easier later for any editors who object and want to retrieve the information at its last save. :) --Moonriddengirl 23:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Thanks for the page revert

Always welcome. Pesky vandals! Pedro | Chat 19:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, Just saw your id and got curious about you. What prompted you to choose such an id? Where do u stay? What do u do? Thanks for adding List of Indian women athletes page in Soma Biswas article. --Jayanta 07:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice to know someone from US edits an athlete page in India, by the way, your profile page nor your id shows ur real name. Ur name please. --Jayanta 19:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Then you can drop a mail at jay.speaks@gmail.com if u wish. That wont be vandalized i promise :)--Jayanta 03:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

External Link Appropriate?

Hi! I'm not an experienced wikipedian, so I was hoping you could help me - I saw that you have made some effective edits to the Kaleb Schwade article. There is a new external link now and I'm wondering if it's appropriate. I would really appreciate it if you could please let me know. Since I don't edit a lot, I'm a little hesitant sometimes. Thank you! Aoibheannniamh 13:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

    -Thank you SO much for the explanation.  Now I know what to do next time.  :) Aoibheannniamh 17:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Speedy Deletion nomination of Luisosio

Yes, you are vandalizing! I can see no reason for your erasing the comments of an expert in the field. This is supposed to be an encyclopeadia, not your toy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Luisosio (talk • contribs) 20:49:39, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

…== RE:Canvass ==

You might just want to leave them a friendly note informing them of what they are doing. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 00:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

You might also take a look at Template:uw-canvass. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 00:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for saying such nice things about me. LittleOldMe 12:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Erin Mills

Hello Moonriddengirl (great name by the way),

I'm trying to figure out how to include a biography about myself, as my client (DuPont) has requested I list myself in Wikipedia for an internal project they are running inside of DuPont. I have tried to understand the guidelines, but have perhaps too hastily published the entry. I am trying to understand the guidelines further to provide further appropriate information for a living person, while also, not desiring to provide too much information to the public. I apologize if I haven't met the criteria and I will try to adjust the content appropriately.

Thank you, Erin (Erin Mills 23:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC))

About Sidatio

In relation to Sidatio, does Wikipedia have any policy on death threats? Yes, I know all about the blocking and everything, but do you know if there is anything that the Wikimedia Foundation actually does because of this happening through their lines? Because this problem is certainly the worst possible with Sidatio, considering the person getting their names and all. I want to help them as much as I possibly can and prevent this from happening to any future Wikipedians.Silverseren^C 14:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how the person got their names. Have you seen this yet? I suppose a person working with Sam Harris would have a lot of power. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if the person actually is Sam Harris. Sidatio seems to be handling the problem with their local police and all, but this kind of thing still makes me angry. It also happened to H as well. I believe that the Wikimedia Foundation should take a firmer stance against this kind of thing happening because it is happening directly through their lines of communication and, thus, you could consider them partially responsible for anything that happens on their sites. You're right about stuff that happens off of the Wiki, but enough stuff happens on Wiki that there are major problems. It absolutely disgusts me... A hands-offish stance never helped anyone. Silverseren^C 19:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I still can't believe that Sidatio never said anything at all about this to either of us. I mean, their going away message was directed right to the two of us, but they never mentioned anything about this. I probably wouldn't have found out anything about it at all and thought everything was perfectly normal if that person didn't post on the talk page. I can understand that they might have been trying to "protect" us from the person or something, but it still makes me kind of sad that nothing was said whatsoever.Silverseren^C 19:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Akai's page article almost all gone by user GlassFET

User:GlassFET feels that the Akai article is not well referenced and therefore, almost everything must go. It all started when he deleted a reference to a manual that gives reference to an Akai machine listed there and he converted it into a "footnote". As a contributor, I didn't object. I asked him why though, he said, because the manual is copyrighted, so I didn't object to that answer but felt a "footnote" was probably not needed. Then he erased the word "broke ground" and re-arranged the paragraph (See: [1] and his edits [2]) from the unit's paragraph because there was no reference that can verify that it did "break ground" as a porta studio of its time (1985). So, I found one ref, he dismissed as "not notable" because the link was to a studio page. Then, he told me that I wrote the paragraph on that unit wrong. Which is untrue. I wrote it factual and with the right machine specs. He decided at that point that rather than look for better sources for references, the article should be drastically trim down for lack of references. I think this user wants to meet Wikipedia standards, but also wants to incite me into to losing my civility and to disrupt the normal development of the Akai article. Can you help by making any comments? Thanks. 19:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrod2 (talk • contribs) 22 August 2007 (UTC)

--I'll go have a look. --Moonriddengirl 19:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The references can be found on the Akai main link though...everything that you put was factually according to the official Akai page. His edits seem kinda out of line. Thats my opinion anyways.Silverseren^C 19:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey seren and Moonriddengirl , thanks. I am happy to report that I was very impressed as to how quickly the issue was dealt with. That said, if I was on the wrong, I am sure you guys would have straightened me out. I have no doubts of that and it's what I would have expected. Thanks for the quick response. Jrod2 20:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Since Ratiocinate stepped in on the edit, I'll just say that I think you were smart to back off and take a breath. That's always a good first step when you think civility may be slipping. If the editor repeats the actions without taking it to discussion at the article space, it may be beneficial to launch discussion about it there yourself--not at his talk page--noting that the information is verifiable per company website. There are instances where self-published sources are acceptable, as per WP:SELFPUB. If the article says "Akai makes better product than anyone" and the only source is the company website, that's not WP:Verifiable. Product stats from the website probably are. Anyway, it's good to do it at the Akai discussion page so that it opens the dialogue to other editors of the page, now and in the future. If that doesn't work, I'd probably take it to Wikipedia:Third opinion so that there could be no argument of bias. --Moonriddengirl 20:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. Now, I have to go get some work in the real world, so my "online" status should become "offline" :) I would love it if you take one more look, at your earliest convenience, at the last comments of the template proposal in which Ratiocinate has also (I think) become more enthusiastic of its possible applications. Mainly to guide anon IP address new visitors when doing their first edits, while CVU and other members are fighting on that same page, reverts and what not. I will come back later, if these points are not making much sense, please point them out to me, or just ask me in context of a "real life" situation. BTW, I did change the image as per Ariel's advise. What do you think? Thanks and see you later. Jrod2 20:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits at Channel Zero Inc.

Bhboyle 17:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your assistance. I have one last question, is it possible to find out some information about this user? Things like IP address, real name, things of this nature? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhboyle (talk • contribs) 17:38, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

I have replied to the best of my ability at your talk page. Good luck, and please let me know if I can help you further. --Moonriddengirl 17:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Your question on my talk page

I replied there. --Teratornis 21:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I just finished replying to your reply. I appreciate your taking the time. :) --Moonriddengirl 21:28, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

I should have guessed there would be a bang in there I was missing. Thanks much! 69.134.155.140 01:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)