User talk:Shadowlynk

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. I will respond to your message on this page. Thank you.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

UM....new to this site...need help with....

the do's and donts and how do I upload a photo to my bio? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trythatagain (talk • contribs) 06:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images are a very tricky situation to deal with on Wikipedia, since there's a great deal of copyright hurdles to deal with. Your best bet is to carefully read the image use policy, and if you feel that you can upload an image that doesn't violate the rules, use the Special:Upload page to add it. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 06:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DEMORALIZE YOUR TIME

Please, before deleting to the DEMORALIZATION of TIME page, please reffer as well to: Map/territory relation Paradigm Prognosis Casandra Complex Third Eye Budism Taoism —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iop1981 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only tag articles for deletion; the administrators decide if an article should be deleted. In the meantime, you should refer to Wikipedia's policy that Wikipedia is not for personal essays. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 08:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teabag (billiards game)

As you added the {{prod2}} I thought you might like to know. — Timotab ^{Timothy (not Tim}^dagnabbit!) 06:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I just commented. I was about to nominate it myself when I saw you had already done it. :) -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 06:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Wikipedia Article: Flugpo

Hi, my article was deleted under the context that it too much resembled an advertisment. I had requested some more time, as I was not finished editing it and felt I could have improved the article up to Wikipedia standards, however it was deleted anyway. Is there anyway I could retrieve the article so I can continue working on it? Additionally, I am having trouble creating an article which Wikipedia deems as non-promotional; my articles have been straight to the point factual, yet still get deleted.Thanks. Saracity123 09:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the first step would be to check the website notability guidelines to make sure the site meets those criteria. Make sure you can find reliable third party sources to verify that it meets those requirements. Second, review the neutral point of view and spam policies to help make the article sound more neutral. Again, make sure you can source any claims to reliable sources. If you believe you can alter the article to claim notability and sound neutral, you can ask at deletion review to temporarily restore the article to your userpage, where you can try to fix it. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 20:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. So I reviewed Wikipedia's critera and better applied those policies to my article. I have posted it in my userpage and believe I have a completely neutral and verifiable article. Could you direct me where to go next? Thanks. Saracity123 07:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, my best guess would be to ask the help desk. Add a new section and describe the whole situation in detail: you're trying to create a page about the website, it's been deleted for advertisement and lack of notability, your userpage contains your latest version of the page, and ask for help making it meet the requirements. If they can't help, I'm sure they'll know where you should ask. :) -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 08:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, I will give that a try. I really appreciate your help. As I am new to writing for Wikipedia, I am now beginning to understand the process and will be able to create articles much more efficiently in the future. 69.200.93.50 22:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox australian football

Thanks for moving that page, didn't even think about it. Cheers. --Theshiz162 12:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surreal Twilight

I'm new to WikiEditing, so I'm not completely sure why you tagged and deleted my page of the same name, "Surreal Twilight." It was a starter page so that people on my site could add to it and complete it. I go out for a couple of hours and then there's a speedy deletion tag on it. I spent three hours writing and researching that, and I'm not particularly happy about it's deletion. At least tell me why you got rid of it.

>.<

Impervium 01:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only tag articles for deletion, the administrators do the deleting if they agree with the reason. In this case, it was deleted under the notability speedy deletion criteria. An article about a website must explain why it's notable. Notability for websites on Wikipedia is defined in the WP:WEB guideline; check that page for the criteria the website must meet. If your website meets those rules, try making the article again and make sure it explains how the website meets the criteria. If the website doesn't meet those criteria, then it can't have an article. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 08:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Lance and Chuck Show

I know that you tagged the Lance and Chuck Showpage. it is now down. There is another page just like it. "the Lee W. Mowen Show" is a show on the same station. It has even less content. To be far if one can't stay up the other should not be able to stay up. So you or someone else should check into "the lee w mowen show" page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubswin5 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANY editor can mark an article for deletion, you know. If you'd like it deleted, mark it with the proper speedy deletion tag. If none of those fit, take it to articles for deletion. I just watch the newest pages list, I don't actively hunt people down. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 18:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

u's a jerkface

AND NICE PANTS, ASSHOLE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secndand10 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pants? It's over 100 degrees Fahrenheit outside where I live. I'm wearing shorts... -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 06:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Fountain of Tyr"

You deleted my entry on the "Fountain of Tyr" stating it as "nonsense", when in fact it's far from nonsense.

While I admit that I didn't state any verifiable sources, simply doing a Google search on "fountain of tyr" (with quotes) will provide a few references to it, and I think that in itself proves there is some validity to the entry in Wikipedia. I also think it's safe to assume that if the entry stays, someone with a verifiable reference in a book or encyclopedia will post the reference to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SuicideTaxi (talk • contribs) 08:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete it, I merely tagged it for deletion. An administrator deleted it. Please don't take it the wrong way, I'm not claiming you did anything wrong intentionally. According to the Tyr talk page, this particular "fact" is actually an act of vandalism that persisted on the Tyr page for about seven months a couple of years ago. The very few links that come up in a Google search are merely copies of that talk page, or discussions spreading that erroneous fact based on the Wikipedia article itself or one of the many sites that copies Wikipedia's material. Absolutely none of these are from reliable, third-party sources. You probably heard this info from one of those sources. Unfortunately, when vandalism doesn't get cleaned up on Wikipedia, things like this can happen. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 08:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, understandable confusion. However, I've known about the Fountain of Tyr since long before Wikipedia existed. Unfortunately, the only reference I know of it offhand is from one of Barry Sadler's books in the series "Casca : The Eternal Mercenary". Since this is a work of fiction I didn't cite it as a reference, and also since I couldn't find an online reference to it anyway. So I think in a nutshell, you're going to make me do some homework on this one, ain't ya ;) No worries, I'll track this down because I know it exists, and I actually have friends in Iceland who can assist. I'll update you when I re-submit. Thanks. SuicideTaxi 09:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it's fictional, be sure to say that in the article. Please also see the guidelines on notability of fictional subjects before resubmitting. This piece of information has been erroneously circulating as fact because of a mistake on Wikipedia, and it would be best not to repeat that mistake. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 09:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No you misunderstand. I'll work on citing a non-fictional reference. Finding the fictional reference would be fairly easy, my aim here is to make it accurate and it will take a bit of work to do so. SuicideTaxi 09:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your welcome. --Graham Grove 06:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry

Im sorry if i offended you. But the Karma Point System is real. And over 10,000 people follow it. Please leave it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karmapoint1 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article has no reliable sources to back up that claim. You need to have sources to verify its notability. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 23:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Militia Riders

I am sorry but I fail to see why articles like Biker Dogs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biker_Dogs_Motorcycle_Club) and others like legion riders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legion_Riders) are allowed in terms of notibility and the Militia Rider's charity efforts in Bikers with a Heart with MDAS is not.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PotHole (talk • contribs) 08:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need reliable sources as citations to back up the claims of their notability as a group. Be sure to check the notability guidelines I just linked to make sure they meet the requirements. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 22:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abridged Series

So why does my entry not count for a article here, I'm not making an ad, I thought that it would be a great page on here since Abridged Series are becoming beyond common.

But, what type of topic would stay here? Some things wern't all that "notable".

RUROkens 13:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is they don't meet WP:WEB's notability guidelines, even if they are becoming relatively common and popular. Don't get me wrong, I like them and all, but they haven't received outside coverage in reliable sources, which is what Wikipedia requires. Even articles on the most popular one have been deleted for not meeting the criteria. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 22:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The greatest film review ever; why would you try to ruin it?

sam24001 18:31 09 October 2007 (UTC)

leave my Crater Lake Monster page alone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.206.204.53 (talk) 17:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:OWN. Articles do not belong to any one editor. Please stop intentionally adding false information to the article or you'll be blocked again. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 21:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Penelope Jones is deleted and I could be banned

I made a article about a artist signed to a huge record company, who has released two official music videos, just like Beyonce, Justin Timberlake etc do. She has had three singles, one of which featured MYA, a huge superstar. If you looked at the sources it would have been seen, I also spent time creating it. gave sources, but obviously they were not looked at. it really isnt fair.

I might be banned also, I was trying to help. By getting all these famous people a profile on here.

If a music artist has a record deal, atleast three songs out there, and videos, and a little bit of media hype, doesnt that mean it is okay? I'm just a little confused now. Raintheone 20:54, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The specific notability guideline for this is WP:BAND. Unfortunately, a couple of songs and being signed to a record label aren't enough; the guideline requires several album releases (or many other things). "Media hype" is hard to quantify, and difficult to cite as a reliable source since it's more advertising than indicating notability. Performing a song with another notable individual doesn't necessarily make that person notable, because notability is not inherited. This issue has been looked at before, and the article has been recreated before, which is why the admin jumped at it. As long as you don't recreate the article, I doubt that you'll be banned. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 22:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scrtrunks

Scrtrunks:"thanks for replying to my article on come to outworld,i'm a little ashamed,but i didn't read the rules well enough,please don't take this as offensuve but i was a little peeved at first,just for what i had already done,but the rules are clear and thank you for giving me reason.Scrtrunks 06:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Steven~10/21/0706:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Don't be worried about not knowing the rules right away, Wikipedia gives leeway for learning by mistake, as long as you do learn. :) -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 06:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage. : ) Midorihana _(talk)_(contribs) 05:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Speedy Deletion Tag of page titled "Patrick Norman"

You tagged a page titled "Patrick Norman", for speedy deletion. It was subsequently deleted by another administrator, stating copyright infringement. I am to author of the article, biography, his website, and I am his wife. We (Patrick Norman & myself) own all of the rights (all right reserved et al.)for any and all things relating to his projects "Patrick Norman" and "Patrick Norman Music". As an owner and founding member of the band "Rusted Root", Patrick Norman also owns all copyrights (all right reserved, et al.) pertaining to his band Rusted Root. This article was created to give readers an accurate biography of Patrick Norman, not only as a solo artist, but also a current member of Rusted Root. What is needed to have the page undeleted, and linked properly to the page titled "Rusted Root". Please advise, thank you. IMuseProductions 03:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)IMuseProductions[reply]

The message Pascal Tesson left on your talk page is pretty comprehensive... I guess I pretty much agree with everything s/he said, and don't have anything to add. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 04:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T. J. Miller

Thanks for doing whatever you did to fix the capitalization issue on this entry. It was my first page creation ever and I was stymied. Also it appears to have fixed the "broken" link to it from the "Cloverfield" page which I recently added. Again, thanks. Captain Impulse 06:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. If you have that problem in the future, just use the "Move" tab at the top of the page and change the name in the text box to the proper capitalization. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 06:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles Quiz archive

I owe you many thanks for helping me out. You are a real gent. --andreasegde 18:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, it actually happens quite a lot! :) -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 18:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion - Royal Sydney Golf Club

RSGC is a major golfing venue in Australia and should be represented in Wikipedia. It was the home last year of the Australian Golf Open (a Grand Slam Tournament) and I believe there would be many contributors who would like to add histories etc.

I don't understand why you wish to Speedy delete it?

FE —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankennis (talk • contribs)

None of that information was in the article when I tagged it. The article itself has to clearly state why the subject is notable, and preferably cite reliable sources to back up those claims. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 05:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declining your Speedy on Everette Harp

I'm declining to speedy delete the article Everette Harp. It doesn't meet the standards of blatant advertising GSD#G11 in my opinion. There are problems with the article, tone among others, but I suspect good sources can be found to support an article on this guy. Actually I'm more concerned with biographies of living persons in this case. Still, if you want to PROD it or take it to AfD, be my guest. I just don't think it meets any speedy criteria. Cheers, Pigman^what?/trail 01:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the tone problems that made me think it was promotional were because it was a copyvio of the person's website bio. There's a new version up now that, thankfully, looks much better. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 05:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion on Media-Soft.

Hi,

How can companies like mine, have the articles here??? I was trying to write the similar content that was on their pages.

How come a company like Sage, has it's own site and site about the product. And all those information there. Isn't that also advertising?

Help!!! Goran.novak 11:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Goran[reply]

A few tips: first of all, be careful of conflicts of interest. All the information in an article needs to be written from a neutral point of view, and that can be difficult if you're a part of the company. Barring that, make sure the article talks about why the company is important, not from a sales pitch point of view but from a notability point of view. The WP:CORP guideline is a good place to start with that. If the company doesn't meet those guidelines, then unfortunately it doesn't yet qualify for a Wikipedia article. Also, any citations of reliable, third party sources about the company will help back up any claims you make in the article. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 04:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upload images and tracks

Panagiotis_2007 20 November 2007

I want to upload an image and a track.Please give me the steps

WP:IMAGE is the place to go for that. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 02:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

db6

Thank you for catching that. Sarsaparilla (talk) 02:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NP Patrol

Could you use the 'Mark as patrolled' function? Thanks Avruch ^Talk 23:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I usually do, I just forgot on that last one. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 23:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Millenium Nustack - gone so Soon!

Is there any place the data is stored? I didn't have a back up, and wanted to show it to a friend. Come on, it was, if inappropriate, funny...

Avi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avram Frey (talk • contribs) 20:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technically deleted pages can be restored, but not in the case of patent nonsense. As for its humor value, I'm afraid that kind of humor just doesn't appeal to me. All I can tell you is Wikipedia is not the place to put that sort of stuff. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 21:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In reply: I followed your patent nonsense link - you're wrong. My definition is neither indeterminate pushing of keyboard keys nor content that no reasonable person could understand. The fact that you would use such hyperbole means either you're (a) a dick, (b) take yourself too seriously, or (c) both. Any which way, smell you later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avram Frey (talk • contribs)

Well, first of all the administrator who actually deleted it agrees with me. Your joke made no sense. Second, I'm actually (d) sticking to the rules of the site until people blow a blood vessel over something as trivial as a bad joke being deleted. I really don't do anything special; everyone keeps doing it to themselves. Thank you for playing along. Fifth, please sign your comments with ~~~~. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 18:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Hoyle Vestey

Greetings, Shadowlynk. You picked up the article Edmund Hoyle Vestey at some point and left a notice of speedy deletion tag[1] and a comment[2] on the author's talk page. I removed the speedy tag from the article as I recognised the name as being that of somebody who was a member of one of the most notable families of the 20th century, which created and owned one of the biggest meat trading companies in the world and was one of the wealthiest families in the world (second only to the Queen here in the UK). I guess that the author was both inexperienced (fewer than 200 edits) and was writing it from scratch, and had not got very far when Icarus3 placed the tag 14 minutes after the author started the article. Anyway, I picked it up a few hours later (he had placed a hangon tag on it) and have expanded it. I may do a little more work on it but I trust that it is adequate for now. Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 13:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The article when we saw it was just a quote of an obituary, without any information about his importance. Thanks again for expanding it. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 18:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Important Subjects

Okay, hello. I am trying hard to be good wikipedia. If my page is unacceptable, maybe you could suggest some better, more important subjects for it? -HandsomeDave (talk) 07:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random lists of personal importance are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Perhaps you should try creating an article about one specific important subject that doesn't have a page yet, or improve an existing article. Remember to cite reliable sources for any information you add! -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 07:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa Studios

Okay, what gives? Why'd you delete the Whoa Studios page? Wikipedia has pages up for tons of different webcomics, and over 100 are waiting to be made. God forbid if someone took the initiative to actually create one. You also told me that I could put a hold on thing on the page to slow the process of its deletion. What, did I have about a five MINUTE window to do that in? -- User: Johnnywhoa at 4:35, 16 December 2007 (EST)

I didn't delete it; I only tag articles for deletion. An administrator actually does the deleting. Any article that meets the speedy deletion criteria can be deleted at ANY time. Using hangon only delays the article's deletion if you're immediately correcting the article's problem. Please read the notability standards for web content to see if the web comic meets those standards. If it does, you're free to recreate the page as long as you include something in the article itself about how the comic meets the standards. Citing reliable sources to back up that claim would be an additional help. If it doesn't meet those standards, though, then it doesn't qualify for an article at this time. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 07:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you only tag them. Can you suggest anything that would be accepted by that notability standards for web content thing? I read through it, but don't really see what it is that I'm missing. As for the references, well, I'm its creator. I figured word from the creator of a subject about said subject would cover it, but if needed I'll publish an about section on the home page. And yes, I know about the "Wikipedia is not to be used for advertising" rule. If that is why the article was deleted, or a factor in it, take note: I did not try to publish the page in an attempt to create advertising. Only to expand Wikipedia itself. Attempting to make it have all the information there is. Anyway, let me know what I can do to fix it up, okay? Thank you. --Johnnywhoa (Talk) 11:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I think the only major objection was notability. The key information is in the Criteria section. The web comic should have significant coverage in an independent reliable source, such as a newspaper, magazine, major webpage, etc. Or it might be considered if it's received some sort of well-known major award. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 01:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well it's still sorta new, so I don't have anything big in any newspapers or anything. I'll see what I can do. I work with my school's newspaper, we don't have a cartoonist, I could try that, not sure if it would count or not but. I've got some advertising on a few web sites, but no major coverage. I'll see what I can dig up. Thanks for your time. Also, I notice that the times here on wikipedia are different from those here at my home. Is there a preset time I should use, or just military local? -- Johnnywhoa (Talk) 22:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, school newspapers and advertisements usually aren't considered reliable sources. If you focus on building up your webcomic to make it famous on its own, a proper Wikipedia article will probably be written by someone else before you even realize that it's ready to qualify for an article. :) As for the time listings, you can adjust on your preferences page what times are displayed on recent contributions pages, but all times in text on talk pages are in UTC, just because it makes it easier to keep track of the actual order postings were made in. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 07:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Soldiers

hello Shadowlynk u deleted my Royal Soldiers article when i clearly showed its importance. it said that the Royal Soldiers was a clan/guild that played an important role in the formation of clans on Star Wars Battlefront II for Playstation 2. Before the Royal Soldiers not very many people knew what clans were or how to form them and how to keep them well organized and battle. So with your approval can i please put my article back up?

--Mark0528 (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first of all, I only patrolled the page and requested its deletion; only administrators can delete the article. You can see exactly who deleted it each time here. Second of all, exactly what makes a group notable by Wikipedia's standards has a strict definition at WP:ORG and WP:N; just raising awareness of clans isn't enough. The article has to state why the group is important, based on the previously noted guidelines, and it should have reliable sources cited that back up those claims. Reliable sources are needed because everything on Wikipedia is supposed to be verifiable. This might be a problem as most computer and video game clans don't get regularly discussed in the media. Still, if your group is an exception you could try resubmitting a revised version of the article with these issues addressed. However, I wouldn't try it unless you're ABSOLUTELY sure you can fix those problems. You've already resubmitted the article several times, and doing so over and over without fixing the problems could be interpreted as ignoring the rules and might get you temporarily blocked. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 04:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Church of Dick

You just deleted it about 5 minutes ago. You said that I did not signify it's importance. I feel that could be considered you not respecting many people's right to religion. Why are you not deleting christianity or budhism? Or even Discordianism from Wikipedia? Please tell me how those religions are any more important than The Chuch of dick.

From: theknightofdarkness 1:24 Am February 5th, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theknightofdarkness (talk • contribs) 09:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, I did not delete it. I only marked it for deletion; only an admin can delete an article if they agree it should be deleted (you can see who deleted it and why here). Second, the right to practice religion has nothing to do with the right to put an article on Wikipedia about it. Notability, as far as Wikipedia is concerned, is determined by outside recognition and coverage in reliable sources. The reason for this is because Wikipedia wants all of its information to be verifiable outside of itself. That's why religions that have stood for decades/centuries/millennia with lots of outside discussion and debate have Wikipedia articles, and religions you made up with your friend on a message board yesterday do not. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 09:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question then. Why have you not tagged discordianism for deletion? I have personally never seen in it in coverage, it is obviously a fake religion and the only reason it has any basis is because it is an actual published work. The books of Philip K. Dick are also published, so why the need to deny that they have coverage and outside discussion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theknightofdarkness (talk • contribs) 09:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then perhaps you should check the references and external links in the article, as it seems to have plenty of citations. Whether or not it's a "real" religion is irrelevant; a parody religion can very well be notable AS a well-known parody religion. As for why I'm not scrutinizing it, frankly I don't give a damn. I just patrol new pages looking for stuff that shouldn't be added. If you have issues with the Discordianism page, feel free to express them on the article's talk page yourself. I'm sure someone who's dedicated time to the article would be willing to answer your questions and address your concerns. As for Mr. Dick's books being published and discussed, that establishes notability for him and his books, not the religion you made up yesterday around them.

Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~. That adds your name and the time you made the comment to the comment itself for easy reference. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 10:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just patrol, you don't actually do anything for society, you just patrol. Do I have that right? And I did dedicate time to the article. May I ask how I would be able to create my page and not have people like you tag it for deletion for pure vandalism and malicious intent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theknightofdarkness (talk • contribs) 10:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks aren't really a good idea, for starters. I'm only talking about what I do on Wikipedia, my activities outside this website are of no one's concern but my own. Second, I was talking about people who dedicated time to editing the Discordianism article helping you with concerns you have about that article; I wasn't referring to time spent on your article. As for your article, my suggestion would be to not make it at all, at least for the time being. I've linked it several times, but Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. That page covers pretty much everything I've said already: without coverage in reliable sources, your article won't be going anywhere. Popularize your religion first, get it widespread public attention, THEN come back and make an article about it. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 10:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider that a personal attack, I would consider that an attack on you acting pompous. It was an attack on your behavior, not character. So, if I were to create a news website that featured an article about The Church of Dick, would it then be eligable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theknightofdarkness (talk • contribs) 10:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only act the way I do because it really riles up people who are so horribly upset over their silly article being deleted. :) I'm sorry, I don't make the rules and the rules say the article had to go. You being angry at me isn't gonna change a thing; it's only feeding my bizarre, insomnia-fueled sense of humor. You're in luck, though, because the world isn't gonna end over this! I swear it. Vent all your frustrations at me, and when it's all over you'll feel better and realize it's not such a big deal.

As for making your own news website... it looks like that wouldn't work. A key component of verifiability is that the primary citations for verification are independent of the subject itself. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 10:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move of page

Can you tell me what I did wrong? I thought I made a subpage for my user page. It was the first page I have ever made, and I (thought) followed the directions.

Thank you for the assistance. Leobold1 (talk) 06:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was just slightly misnamed. All user pages and subpages start with "User:". The page at Leobold1/Helpful Links doesn't have that, so it ended up in main article space. I moved the page to User:Leobold1/Helpful Links, which makes it a user subpage. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 06:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to figure it out, and came to that conclusion probably just as you were typing this. Thanks again. Leobold1 (talk) 06:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Warren (Alief AP History Teacher)

I want to make a page for my AP history teacher. I wana dedicate this page to him because he is very popular in the district and won many awards. so can you let me do it?

-marshmalloww 1:30PM houston TX FEB 24 2008

Which school does he teach at? I went to Hastings (Class of '95). Leobold1 (talk) 21:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alief Hastings high School... we would like to dedicate a page for him since he has done soo much.. -marshmalloww 9:47PM houston TX FEB 27 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.155.15 (talk) 03:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless any of the things he's done make him notable by the WP:BIO guideline and these things can be verified in a reliable source, I doubt you'll be able to repost your article. If they ARE notable and can be found in reliable sources, then you can try writing an article with those references included. Since you've been blocked for repeatedly recreating it, though, be careful not to repost it unless you're SURE the new article meets the guidelines. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 05:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citing and linking references within the text

Still working on how to make an internal footnote link work right to interconnect to a cited reference at the bottom of the page, so that the footnote numbers coincide. Ugh. Am a newbie, neophite. Still haven't got it! Sorry.

Boolalah (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC) March 4, 2008[reply]

A Tract of Time

I finished adding what information I had to A Tract of Time, which you had tagged as needing references and possibly not meeting criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. I removed the tags, but if you feel it still needs more, please tag the article again. I need to find a copy to read, to add more information. Jacqke (talk) 13:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it looks much better now! -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 05:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citing and linking references within the text

Still working on how to make an internal footnote link work right to interconnect to a cited reference at the bottom of the page, so that the footnote numbers coincide. Ugh. Am a newbie, neophite. Still haven't got it! Sorry.

Boolalah (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC) March 4, 2008[reply]

Try this page on making footnotes on Wikipedia. Hope this helps! -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 19:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OohYa Chat! deletion

Hi, I was wondering why the page for OohYa Chat! was deleted and why it isn't listed on the Online Chat page under Online Chatting Sites? It a valid free chat site. I should know because I chat on it! Thanks. pxfbird (talk) 04:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, I don't think I was involved in its deletion in any way, or at least I can't find out where it was or when. If you know what title the article used to exist under, you can check that page again to see the deletion log, which should mention the reason it was deleted. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 08:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can also try searching the deletion log for it. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 08:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hattie Spetla Deletion

Hi, I am currently working on a wiki page on Hattie Spetla. I merely restored a page that was auto deleted. It is incredibly frusterating as it is also being vandalized while it is being written. Please refrain from auto deleting this page as it is a work in progress. Admiralpantsgoblin (talk) 02:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)Tom, 3/16/2008[reply]