User talk:Bradeos Graphon

——————————————— Βραδέως Γράφων TALK PAGE ———————————————

User talk:Fire Star Archive February 2004 - September 2007

User talk:Bradeos Graphon Archive October 2007 - December 2007

Please add new messages to bottom of page

Contact?

Hi, I've been doing some research on a topic that you seem to know a lot about, and had some questions about your edits. Would you mind contacting me, so that I could clarify a few things? My e-mail is researchfg@gmail.com .

Hope to hear from you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.80.234 (talk) 21:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Gohde

I'm not sure how involved I should be in Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#John_Gohde_2. Thoughts? --Ronz (talk) 19:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year! --Ronz (talk) 19:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've mentioned your warnings to him in my evidence, since they were at least partially a result of my attempts at dispute resolution with him. --Ronz (talk) 23:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashida Kim

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Ashida Kim, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 06:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wudang Tai Chi Chuan

I'm just a little curious as to why the Wudang Tai Chi Chuan article has been singled out amongst the many other articles about Taijiquan as one that requires so many in text citations and secondary supporting references. This is bearing in mind that almost the entire history of Taijiquan is based on anecdotal evidence taken from stories told by various masters and practitioners.

Shouldn't all of the Taijiquan articles be treated in the same manner? There are many Taijiquan articles written from purely anecdotal evidence on Wikipedia, what shall we do about those? Realtaichi (talk) 09:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking about the idea of writing an article just about Cheng Tinhung and removing the Wudang Tai Chi Chuan article, breaking it down into separate practitioners. I feel this will remove some of the need for people to vandalise. I think that I can get some secondary material about Cheng Tinhung, and there is, as you mentioned, the video on the Internet. What do you think? Realtaichi (talk) 01:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to user Deb

In reply to your message on my Talk (still a bit confused with the wiki coding and whatnot), the URL for this user is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deb and the following are just an example of the deletions this user has done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dance_Dance_Revolution_Party_Collection&action=edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dance_Dance_Revolution_SuperNOVA_2&action=edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dance_Dance_Revolution_STR%21KE&action=edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dance_Dance_Revolution_EXTREME_2&action=edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dance_Dance_Revolution_EXTREME_%28North_America%29&action=edit

There are other deletions that other users and myself agree that were uncalled fore. I really hope that some action will be taken care of. Either banning the user or restoring the articles that were deleted by the user. I have been trying to get in contact with this user but was unable to get ahold of them. I thank you for your time. Best regards, Oni Kidou (talk) 05:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About your name

Bradeos Graphon in greek alphabet is actually Βραδέως Γράφων (ς goes instead of σ at the end of a word) and Graphon if masculine is with ω (Omega) and with ο (Omikron) if neutral. By the way it is the best nickname I've ever encountered in this encyclopedia! Egmontaz (talk) 21:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Bradeos Graphon, Thank you for your support in my RFA which passed 43/0/1. I would like to especially thank Bibliomaniac15 for being my nominator and admin coach. I would also like to thank Rudget for being my co-nominator. I'm sure that I can live up to the community's expectations as an administrator, and not totally mess everything up. Thanks again for your support! Malinaccier (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Jessica Liao

Perhaps I'm just being paranoid here, but could you tell me whether User:Tnuocca is likely to be another Jessica Liao sockpuppet? The username is 'Account' spelled backwards (like User:Nitsirk is the name 'Kristin' spelled backwards), the edits are all New York and education related (her favorite subjects), the POV and the odd syntax is highly familiar. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think I can "watch" her favorite Alternative Learning Program page? Would it then turn up in my watch list if it was recreated at a future date? (This would be a trivial technological solution if this is really her favorite page...) WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It ought to be possible to add a redlink to your watchlist by editing the raw watchlist (follow the link to Special:Watchlist/raw). If a previous version was on your watchlist, then it ought to still be there (you ought to see the redlink at Special:Watchlist/edit). Pete.Hurd (talk) 04:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

I am not one for sending round pretty pictures, but after my recent RfA, which passed 68/1/7, I am now relaxed and this is to thank you for your support. I will take on board all the comments made and look forward to wielding the mop with alacrity. Or two lacrities. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do you...

You probably have similar messages to this all the time, but can you give me some tips towards becoming an admin on Wikipedia?

Someone dedicated to making your day a little bit better! (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks!

Someone dedicated to making your day a little bit better! (talk) 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!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

RfA thanks from Happy-melon

I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon 15:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good faith

Hi, thanks for your note. I did read the talk pages but the article still needed wikifying and expanding. If it is "not done" to fix up and expand topics that are in the common field of information, with third person so-called accredited accounts in print and on the net, does that mean other paranormal type contents have to go too? (Y'know, Aura (paranormal), Qi and the rest.) If it's been debated for years, that shouldn't discount it from being edited and expanded in the meantime. If it is contentious, leave me out of it. I edited for improving wiki and in good faith. I have no personal stake here and I just hate to walk into yet another minefield. Really a bit sick of this kind of thing on the pedia. Cheers Julia Rossi (talk) 05:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a ps by the way, the look and scope of the article before wikifying etc was to give a really awkward impression with so much repetition, non-encyc language, pov and loads of capitalisation, και ου γινωσκω, it was hard to pass up. : ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julia Rossi (talk • contribs) 05:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It;s me again. First, thanks for staying in communication over this because there's a quite bit I don't know enough about so it's been helpful. Though it's a small article, it's a good example for me to learn from. Can you help me with this stuff please: I didn't realise every statement that was from the same source needed separate citations (as it's not academic level). Also, what's a good way to say "Most believe" to avoid the weasel effect when trying to avoid going into it as an issue, when others (who may not carry much authority) hold that it's a DIY job? I didn't realise there were such things as SPA-nners so I'm lucky it was you and not them. Thanks for admitting you've had to back off to breathe, because I nearly left last year after being bitten too often. I'd like not to give myself a Note to self: avoid etheric-type articles... but I still may – even though I too just want readable informative articles, it's a hotbed. ever the pupil, Julia Rossi (talk) 07:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about archiving and BLP issues

Hello, you might remember me from some conversations regarding the Dahn yoga article a while back. I wondered if you would be willing to take a look over the Ilchi_Lee article and be a voice of experience in the discussion, especially regarding sourcing, NPOV, and non-encyclopedic tone. We have some ongoing discussions right now, but any insight or suggestions you could offer would be helpful. If you don't have time, just let me know. Also, at what point is a discussion page considered so lengthy that it should be archived? Thank you! Forestgarden (talk) 08:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just droping a note to second the plee. I added the original article, so I might be too protective, but it seems that there are some serious violations of general Wikipedia policy, especially those regarding biographies of living people. It would be really great it a neutral, experienced person like yourself could step in.Nicola Cola (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got your note, and understand. Enjoy your celebrations this weekend, and see you over on the IL discussion page when you get a chance! THanks. Forestgarden (talk) 22:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aspire

Thanks for your help there, much appreciated. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for that block. I wanted to be helpful and answer every question that anon had about the Pipes article, but I really wasn't sure how long that was going to go on. Doczilla (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

I explained to you why I said that. The guy didn't care about this article, he just wanted to prove that he was right and wouldn't let go. So I asked him to move on. And yeah, I said "we've been doing this for years" as I already explained to you because I'm one of a few people who actually take care of that page and keep it from being vandalized. If you look through the history, it gets hit A LOT. The sites were sourced from reliable sources and should not be removed. I don't see how it isn't reliable at all. If there's a band going on tour and they're saying "we're going on this tour" on their own site, how is that not reliable? And keep in mind that he didn't just remove links to the Myspace links either. He removed an entire section which to me suggests he acted without even looking into them. I still find it unfair that I'm the one getting any sort of violation for this when he in fact did the exact same thing that I'm supposedly in the wrong for. DX927 (talk) 17:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help us with erasing the Dahn Yoga controversy- its bad for business

Bradeos, your help would really be appreciated. All of the Dahn devotees working on the article(ForestGarden, Nicole, myself included) would be grateful beyond words. Wikipedia isnt a place for controversy- its a place for glowing, positive articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew Laffert (talk • contribs) 15:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]