User talk:WarthogDemon/Archive/Archive 16
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:WarthogDemon. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
Final warning
|
The ZOMG Barnstar | |
| Presented in recognition of your extreme vandalism. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC) |
- ...<snort>...that would be sarcastic vandalism, all right... -- Altiris Exeunt 07:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [1]. -WarthogDemon 05:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- It was deleted so I salted it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I have a bit of a problem with this article. A newly created user acount is changing the article claiming it was a misrepresentation and "zionist propaganda". I'd like someone else to look at the article. In my opinion it's just someone wanting to remove any criticism from this page. However as the topic is indeed controversial I'm not sure. Thanks, 1redrun Talk 09:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 12:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [2]. -WarthogDemon 17:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
ESADE
Thanks for having the article protected from the 'crazy' edit war. I posted a response to the protection on the protecting editor's talk page. It would have been nice had you communicated your intent to me, but I understand your desire to stop what you saw as a problem. Dreadstar † 06:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Just thought you might be interested to know that I've opened a sockpuppetry case against the variously known Deedstar/As Tidies She/ESADE Class of 89/etc. at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Deedstar. --Yksin 02:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [3]. -WarthogDemon 05:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Another sock showed up -- see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Deedstar (2nd). I also put in a request for semiprotection on the page, which has been honored (expires Oct 5) -- no doubt this persistent sock will show up again then. --Yksin 18:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [4]. -WarthogDemon 18:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, this same person took out a grudge against Dreadstar for not permitting that self-promotional crap, & has been trying to disrupt his RfA. --Yksin 18:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I just spent some time tracking down where the photos in ESADE and ESADE Business School (which article just looks like a fork anyway) came from & marking them for speedy delete as copyvios. Looks like the business school article, must as the main article, is also a target of rank WP:COI promotionalism, including by an editor you've had contact called ESADEbrigade (talk · contribs) who's on block because of the COI username, & wants to be unblocked in order to apply for a username change to another username containing ESADE -- doesn't seem to get it -- & I think is probably editing as 81.1.85.146 (talk · contribs) at the moment because of the block. Who may or may not also be the same as the user who uploaded the copyvio images, Duweinst (talk · contribs), but is probably a sock of "Deedstar" because the anon IP that Deedstar used to edit under 83.41.21.10 (talk · contribs), is on ISP provider Telefonica El Espana in Spain, whereas 81.1.85.146 has ISP provider Tiscali UK Ltd -- unless of course Deedstar is traveling. Whoo. Convoluted enough for you? Sure seems as if there is a conspiracy of COI promotionalism going on here. Maybe these guys need to be Wikiscanned? --Yksin 10:20, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [5]. -WarthogDemon 19:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I just spent some time tracking down where the photos in ESADE and ESADE Business School (which article just looks like a fork anyway) came from & marking them for speedy delete as copyvios. Looks like the business school article, must as the main article, is also a target of rank WP:COI promotionalism, including by an editor you've had contact called ESADEbrigade (talk · contribs) who's on block because of the COI username, & wants to be unblocked in order to apply for a username change to another username containing ESADE -- doesn't seem to get it -- & I think is probably editing as 81.1.85.146 (talk · contribs) at the moment because of the block. Who may or may not also be the same as the user who uploaded the copyvio images, Duweinst (talk · contribs), but is probably a sock of "Deedstar" because the anon IP that Deedstar used to edit under 83.41.21.10 (talk · contribs), is on ISP provider Telefonica El Espana in Spain, whereas 81.1.85.146 has ISP provider Tiscali UK Ltd -- unless of course Deedstar is traveling. Whoo. Convoluted enough for you? Sure seems as if there is a conspiracy of COI promotionalism going on here. Maybe these guys need to be Wikiscanned? --Yksin 10:20, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, this same person took out a grudge against Dreadstar for not permitting that self-promotional crap, & has been trying to disrupt his RfA. --Yksin 18:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [4]. -WarthogDemon 18:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Another sock showed up -- see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Deedstar (2nd). I also put in a request for semiprotection on the page, which has been honored (expires Oct 5) -- no doubt this persistent sock will show up again then. --Yksin 18:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [3]. -WarthogDemon 05:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Happy Happy...
Joy Joy? -- Gogo Dodo 06:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [6] -WarthogDemon 06:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Re your message: Okay, I'll let you in on a secret... I never watched the show, but for some reason that phrase is stuck in my head. I'm in to a slightly different set of cartoons (pretty obvious). P.S. I fixed your comment. =D -- Gogo Dodo 06:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: Externally Linked Entries In Lists?
Mmm, I'm not sure what the best approach would be in a case like this. It's probably going to come down to deciding whether the entries are sufficiently notable to be worth dealing with at all; but I'm probably not the best person to ask about anything related to whatever the notability guidelines that apply to music articles are. Kirill 02:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Zeitgeist
I misspelt Zeitgeist the other day and came up with three pages that had the error. It wasn't Zeitgiest but I can't seem to duplicate it. Al I remember is that one of the pages had the incorrect spelling as part of "Zeitgeist records". Want to try and see if you can duplicate my error? And I just semi-protected Zeitgeist again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [7]. -WarthogDemon 17:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I never actually looked at the pages, juet the search results and worse it was at work so I'll have to wait and check the history. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [8]. -WarthogDemon 19:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks again. Zeitgeist records exists but I'm not sure how notable they are and you're right they don't have an article. THe main problem is that I never spell stuff right. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [9]. -WarthogDemon 22:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- At this point I'm not sure about it at all. I think rather than spend more time on it I'll wait till Saturday morning when I go to work. It may be in one of the tabs or the history. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [10]. -WarthogDemon 22:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- At this point I'm not sure about it at all. I think rather than spend more time on it I'll wait till Saturday morning when I go to work. It may be in one of the tabs or the history. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [9]. -WarthogDemon 22:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks again. Zeitgeist records exists but I'm not sure how notable they are and you're right they don't have an article. THe main problem is that I never spell stuff right. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [8]. -WarthogDemon 19:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I never actually looked at the pages, juet the search results and worse it was at work so I'll have to wait and check the history. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
"Think we should semi-protect the talk pages as well, or would that be overkill? -WarthogDemon 06:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)"
- I'd give it 24 hours and see what happens. If people keep trying to discuss the movie then we could try putting the whole discussion into Talk:Zeitgeist/Archive 1 and see if that works. I suspect that it will be on WP:ANI shortly anyway as I'm quite obviously censoring/killing free speech, etc. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [11]. -WarthogDemon 07:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if I am or not. I must admit that nobody seems inclined to take it to DRV but they may feel that I'm attempting to stifle debate. Which of course I'm not, if they want to talk about it at DRV then fine but just not on the Zeitgeist page. Anyway, a complaint about my actions isn't likely to go far as talk pages aren't for discussing the revival of articles. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [11]. -WarthogDemon 07:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank u
Thank u for welcoming me. I have a question such articles can you help me? User:DKDD 9:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [12]. -WarthogDemon 16:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I just came about an article and its missing a link to it. But my question is how do you create an article? User:DKDD 9:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [13]. -WarthogDemon 17:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I just came about an article and its missing a link to it. But my question is how do you create an article? User:DKDD 9:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks :)
Kudret abi 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.
Dreadstar RfA
WHD,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 55 supports, 15 oppose, and 1 neutral. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to vote in my nomination. I'm a new admin, so if you have any suggestions feel free to let me know. I would like to give a special shout out to Fang Aili, Phaedriel, and Anonymous Dissident, for their co-nominations. Thank you all!
Credits
This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's modification of Phaedriel's RFA thanks.
Thanks for the congrats, I took the easy way out of thanking everyone by borrowing someone else's thank you card design...but know that I sincerely appreciate your support and confidence in me! Dreadstar † 23:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [14]. -WarthogDemon 00:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
'We' in encyclopedia
Tell that to the writer's of my 1966 Encyclopedia Britanica... But it's fine 1st person words should probably be left out Alatari 01:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [15]. -WarthogDemon 01:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: Cell nucleus
Re our message: Thanks, but it really belongs to TimVickers as we both missed this. -- Gogo Dodo 04:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied eventually here (albeit on a different minor issue): [16]. -WarthogDemon 20:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Re your message: It's a misplaced comment in my opinion. You're obsessing over your count. Back away from the keyboard. Further... That's it. =) -- Gogo Dodo 06:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [17]. -WarthogDemon 16:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Re your message: It's a misplaced comment in my opinion. You're obsessing over your count. Back away from the keyboard. Further... That's it. =) -- Gogo Dodo 06:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)
Thanks for the smiley! BlueAg09 (Talk) 04:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
And from me too :) ~ Riana ⁂ 06:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
You know what
You're probably right. I'll add a visible note at the top and see if that helps. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [18]. -WarthogDemon 18:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sure let me know. Several variations are already protected from recreation and the rest should be too. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [19]. -WarthogDemon 22:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- See Talk:Zeitgeist, movie removed and template added. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Whoops, I did it again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- See Talk:Zeitgeist, movie removed and template added. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [19]. -WarthogDemon 22:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sure let me know. Several variations are already protected from recreation and the rest should be too. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
vandalism
I take a rather narrow view of vandalism: if it's just adding things that are unsourced, that's not vandalism. The source for the apartheid fact is not a reliable source, changing the section from trivia to popular culture is neither here nor there for me: trivia is frowned on calling it "popular culture" is just WP:DUCK to me. Cleverer people have changed trivia to "legacy" for dead celebrities and it has some people convinced of a trivia section's validity, but it doesn't convince me. :-) Carlossuarez46 18:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [20]. -WarthogDemon 18:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Bioorganizacion
A redirect - good call on your part. Thanks! --EarthPerson 21:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [21]. -WarthogDemon 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Why do you support intolerance
No content. -db 20:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Moved from my userpage. -WarthogDemon 18:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
The now-traditional RFA thank-spam
Dear WarthogDemon/Archive,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 83 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutrals. No matter if you voted (I mean, "!voted") support or oppose, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm new, remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them, and if I do anything wrong, feel free to add to the permanent chorus of disapproval on my talk page. Special thanks to WaltonOne and Dihydrogen Monoxide for nominating me.
Credits
This design was brazenly stolen from inspired by Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor's RFA Thanks, which in turn was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.
Nutrient
My edit summary says it all :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 02:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [22]. -WarthogDemon 04:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually it all went back to this this guy screwing it all up in July, which didn't quite get fixed. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [23]. -WarthogDemon 19:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- When I start checking edits from 3 months ago, it's a sure sign I was really trying to avoid what I had stayed up late trying to do in the real world ;O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [24]. -WarthogDemon 20:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Oh, not half as interesting as it sounds.:O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [24]. -WarthogDemon 20:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- When I start checking edits from 3 months ago, it's a sure sign I was really trying to avoid what I had stayed up late trying to do in the real world ;O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [23]. -WarthogDemon 19:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually it all went back to this this guy screwing it all up in July, which didn't quite get fixed. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks...
...for that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rrburke (talk • contribs)
WD-40
~*Ariel hands WhD some WD-40 for that sticky caps key!*~ 
(Hee hee, I really doubt you meant to shout that, but boy was it impressive anyway! 117, wow, lol) Ariel♥Gold 16:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [25]. -WarthogDemon 16:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Something Funny?
Hmm? Why not? -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 01:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I may understand that he might not know how to access your talk page the first time, but I left a notice here, with a link to your talk page, which he blanked three days later. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 01:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
The term (sic) means that something is spelled incorrectly in a quote, but another editor notes that they have deliberately spelled that something wrong to be consistent with the original (incorrectly spelled) quote. I have reverted your edit to the article for that reason. My newer computer with the latest IE blocks the popups, so I accidentally used a null description. I'm sorry. See the article sic for reference. Royalbroil 04:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [26]. -WarthogDemon 00:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Do You Know What Is Going On In Somalia?
"The odd edits at Italian conquest of British Somaliland have been going on for a few days now. -WarthogDemon 17:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)"
- Not sure. I'm normally pretty happy having people contributing who aren't the normal WASP profile - gives more balanced perspectives. The problem here seems to be an inability to grasp the basic WP culture of POV, citing sources etc. This time I had a go at copyediting it rather than just rving to see if this created a bit of goodwill and stopped a longer term edit war! We'll see.....Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 18:19, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [27]. -WarthogDemon 00:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
American Zeitgeist
It had its own Afd as well, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Zeitgeist. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Zeitgeist (2)
Hi WarthogDemon:
I saw the reversion of my addition of American Zeitgeist on the Zeitgeist disambig page, and when I checked, saw that the article (which had been there when I made the addition) had been deleted. This was my first visit to the Zeitgeist page, and today was my first encounter with the movie. I totally understand your removal of a redlink, but I would have appreciated a more constructive and clear edit summary as I had no idea what was going on, and had made the addition (of an article which at that time had existed) in complete good faith. Cheers, and happy editing! Anchoress 04:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Whoops, they were two different movies. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [28]. -WarthogDemon 04:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [29]. -WarthogDemon 04:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Forgot I'd delted the talk page. That means there are a few others I should probably restore. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied (eventually) here: [30]. -WarthogDemon 02:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Forgot I'd delted the talk page. That means there are a few others I should probably restore. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply to the message on my talk page.
Well, it's very useful, but not if it redirects back to this page, that's why I reverted it. TheBlazikenMaster 18:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [31]. -WarthogDemon 18:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!
Someone vandalized my Userspace! 
But a little angel came along and fixed it! 
Thank you! Ariel♥Gold 22:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}!—Preceding unsigned comment added by ArielGold (talk • contribs)
- Replied here: [32]. -WarthogDemon 22:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Page content does not have to meet the notability requirements
Mentions on a disambiguation page are not their own articles. Noone in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeitgeist_the_Movie discussion condemned a mere mention of the zeitgeist film on the Zeitgeist (disambiguation) page or even mentioned the disambiguation page. Most disambiguation pages DO NOT contain only mentions with their own articles, nor is it one of the goals of wikipedia notability requirements to erase nonnotable content as soon as it crops up. The reasons for my breaking the appeal for complete silence on the topic were clearly stated. Please offer arguments to the contrary on my talk page if you disagree.Brinerustle 23:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here: [33]. -WarthogDemon 23:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am not arguing that there should be an article Zeitgeist the Movie NOR DO I THINK ITS BEEN SHOWN TO BE NOTABLE AND HAVE ITS OWN ARTICLE! However, nowhere in the discussion does it call for some kind of censorship on the disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages are full of unnotable content, the very example disambiguation page Mercury is no exception! AND NONNOTABILTY DOES NOT EXTEND TO ARTICLE CONTENT. Brinerustle 00:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am tired of helping you out. I've taken this up at WP:ANI. PLease stop reverting the addition of this single line. While an article on the film may be unnoteworthy, people should know that these two films are different. That's the POINT of a disambiguation page, and NOT what the debate over the existence of the article was about. Brinerustle 01:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am not arguing that there should be an article Zeitgeist the Movie NOR DO I THINK ITS BEEN SHOWN TO BE NOTABLE AND HAVE ITS OWN ARTICLE! However, nowhere in the discussion does it call for some kind of censorship on the disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages are full of unnotable content, the very example disambiguation page Mercury is no exception! AND NONNOTABILTY DOES NOT EXTEND TO ARTICLE CONTENT. Brinerustle 00:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Disambig
Looks fine. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
It's about time...
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| I hereby award you this barnstar for the many times you have watched over my and other editor's user pages and for the all around general good work you do in reverting vandalism. -- Gogo Dodo 19:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC) |
- Why thank you my friend. :) -WarthogDemon 20:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)