Jump to content

User talk:A Nobody/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18→Archive 20

Please be more careful

Your welcome tagging is a bit careless A Nobody. Three times now you've tagged "welcome" messages on talkpage, that upon very simple observation, are obviously not new users in need of "welcome." For example "User talk:LOTRrules2" (see the history, I cleared this one), also User talk:78.150.215.186, and User talk:89.242.166.15, quite clearly, are all the same person, indefinitely blocked User:LOTRrules. The welcome is coming across as very careless and impersonal to continue to "welcome" a block-evading editor, which I know is not your intention. Please be more careful. Check the contribs of the actual user you are welcoming before you simply slap a template, please? Keeper | 76 03:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I think welcoming new users is very important. Of course there will be mistakes, but the welcoming of new users, out weighs the mistakes. Those problem users will be dealt with appropriately, regardless of the welcome. Ikip (talk) 03:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I regularly welcome new users as well Ikip, and agree it has an important place on Wikipedia. I'm simply asking politely for "A Nobody" to be more careful in the future. Thanks for your input. Keeper | 76 03:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

97.124.231.159 (talk) wishes you peace!

Spread peace and goodwill by adding {{subst:WikiPeace}} to other's talk pages with a friendly message.

97.124.231.159 (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

A query...

  • In viewing your talk, after having seen your welcome to me, I noted someone who is a user named "Secret". I wonder what this is, I do not have time to go chasing users as some people here seem to do. But what I wish to know is whether this is a username or is it an option here?Please respond if you are able on MY talk page. 75.21.98.62 (talk) 06:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
    • By the way, I don't know how this will show but it seems I'm more than one IP... do you know anything about this ANobody? Clearly I am 75.21.98.62 (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC) and also am 75.21.116.175!!75.21.98.62 (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
      • You probably have a dynamic IP. If you wish to be identified as one person rather than multiple IPs, I encourage you to get an account, which allows for some functions such as article creation that IPs do not have available. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Shameless thankspam

FlyingToaster Barnstar

Hello A Nobody! Thank you so much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. FlyingToaster

You're welcome and congratulations! Good luck! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 20:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy notice

Re: Question

Hi there! :) Sorry, but as I said in my AfD nomination for Anya/Anastasia (character), "character is not notable on her own" to warrant her own article. There seems to be very little that supports the character's Notability outside the film. The articles you cited seem to talk about the film, and not the character alone (they would actually be much more useful additions to the film article than a separate article about Anya). It's not really enough that the character has been included in several film-related merchandise; her notability as an individual character outside the original film - and the merchandise associated with the film - has to be established. Though I won't be withdrawing my nomination for deletion, I'm not opposed to merging the information from the sources you cited into the film article, as I believe it would really help improve the film article's quality. :) --SilentAria talk 06:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Please note that if I merge anything we cannot delete per the GFDL. Also, the wicked stepsisters have been in quite a number of marketing products associated with the films and there is good reason to believe those can be expanded further if not merged into an article on Wicked stepsisters (Cinderella). They are unquestionably notable characters. Now with the Aladdin ones, two of them are more notable than the others (the two that have toys, for example), but all of these are at least redirectable if not mergeable per WP:BEFORE and WP:PRESERVE. Remember, deletion is considered a last resort for hoaxes, copy vios, and libel, i.e. things that cannot be redirected anywhere or that contains damaging information that we don't want public. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 06:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Again, as I mentioned, the basis of my nominations are the fact that the article subjects are not notable, and that the articles provided no secondary sources (or no sources at all) that back these specific Disney characters' notability up. The very fact that there are no sources outside the films/series (or their promotional merchandise) in which these characters appeared in denotes that they should not have their own separate articles. They were merely composed of plot summaries and fancruft, so I don't see anything that can really be merged from them. If you strongly believe in merging/redirecting these articles, then share your input at the deletion pages of the said articles. --SilentAria talk 06:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
We don't delete based on WP:JNN or WP:ITSCRUFT, though. Regards, --A NobodyMy talk 07:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Which is why I mentioned the lack of secondary sources for the individual characters in my explanations above. The nominations don't go against WP:JNN ("Instead of just saying, "Non-notable," consider instead saying, 'No reliable sources found to verify notability', or 'The sources are not independent, and so cannot establish that the subject passes our standards on notability', or 'The sources do not provide the significant coverage required by the notability standard.'"), nor do they go against WP:ITSCRUFT (as I pointed out, the articles mostly contain plot summaries, which goes against WP:PLOT). I guess I failed to clarify exactly which Wikipedia guidelines I was basing on my delete nominations on at the deletion pages themselves (though I was prepared to explain myself should other editors question my reasons, I admit that I should have been more specific from the start), but I have sufficiently expressed my reasons for believing that it might be best to delete the said articles in our discussion here. As I said, I am not really opposed to merging/redirecting the articles should the consensus turn out that way, but I will not withdraw my nomination. -- Genuinely sorry if she sounds like a deletionist or an otherwise unpleasant Wikipedian in general after this discussion and hoping that perhaps you can forgive her somehow, SilentAria talk 11:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, some of these have enough to indeed justify a merge at least and I will most likely say as much in the discussions if I have a chance and don't worry, no need to have to forgive; we can disagree without bearing any ill will. Anyway, though, please, please Wikipedia:Do not call things cruft.  :) Also, after a recent RfC showed that a majority of the community opposed WP:PLOT, it was subsequently marked as disputed and after edit warring resulted in the page being protected. That particular guideline is very much under reevaluation. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Switzerland–Uruguay relations

Hello! Your submission of Switzerland–Uruguay relations at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Paxse (talk) 14:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I have asked Richard and Docu for help; please keep an eye on the article. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 17:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
done, thanks for reminding me. -- User:Docu
You're welcome and if we can expand further, great! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 17:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Still needs a little more, about 600+ characters. You need 2135 characters to make it a 5x expansion (as it was created in January!). Don't stop yet :) Cheers, Paxse (talk) 17:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, how about now? Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
BTW the NYT quote is also in ref (1). Thanks for considering to nominate it. -- User:Docu

User:A_Nobody#Words_of_wisdom_written_by_wise_Wikipedians

You may want to cut and paste these words of wisdom, instead of just linking to them. Ikip (talk) 00:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

If you want to do that, go ahead. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 00:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion Quest

It goes without saying that I appreciate you dilegence for the good of ARS. Your constant goodwill is a lesson in civility.--Buster7 (talk) 02:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for kind words; they are greatly appreciated. Happy editing! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 02:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hyperbole

While I don't think that comments like "kill with fire", "nuke from outer space" "burn down and start over" etc are particularly helpful, I think that the unhelpfulness is mainly in the perception. Obviously these comments are exaggeration for (comic?) effect; the effect produced is not always what the author intended though.

In a similar way, terms such as "triage", "Article ICU" and even "squadron" and "rescue" are overstating their case, and I guess we have to live with both, or neither. pablohablo. 20:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:Article_Rescue_Squadron#Some_proposals as I have indeed already suggested elimating words like "squadron." Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'd seen that, I don't know if it would really make a lot of difference - I accept that some people find these words emotive though, and perhaps they do help foster a confrontational attitude. pablohablo. 20:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The thing is with "kill with fire" and "nuke" as remarks for deletion is that whether intended as comedic or not, they lack seriousness. Now, I am not suggesting that Wikipedia should not be fun/enjoyable, but when we are discussing subjects that people have invested their time into working on and that may have a good deal of importance to them, happening upon discussions with these over the top votes for deletion just reflects a lack of seriouness and possibly maturity, i.e. are we encyclopedists or just here for laughs? Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Switzerland–Uruguay relations

Updated DYK query On May 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Switzerland–Uruguay relations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 10:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

ThankSpam

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.
I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

~~~~~

Well, back to the office it is...
You're welcome and Happy Memorial Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

....:)

Based on our extensively different opinions on RfA, it makes me smile that I nominated a contributor that would merit your strong support. Happy editing to you. Keegantalk 07:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I am always pleased when I make another Wikipedian smile! :) Happy Memorial Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 03:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the update and Happy Memorial Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 03:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Al Farooj Fresh

Hello! Your submission of Al Farooj Fresh at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Shubinator (talk) 14:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I am not seeing the entry anymore? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 05:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Judiciousness in the use of welcome templates

Hi. As a general rule, welcoming new contributors is a good thing, but I think it is important to be judicious in our welcoming -- particularly the welcoming of new anonymous IPs. I think you have been overly generous in your welcoming.

There are numerous anonymous contributors who make only one minor contribution and never return, so I figure it's generally not a productive use of my time to welcome one-time anonymous contributors, unless their work was unusually good. If you enjoy doing this, however, far be it from me to say it's not a good use of your time. However, Wikipedia looks rather silly when long and glowing welcome statements are issued to IP users whose only contributions were vandalism. Unfortunately, this was the case with a few of your recent "welcomes." I am alerting you to these to help you watch out for similar cases in the future.

After I reverted 76.28.191.252's sole edit for being unconstructive, I went to issue a warning and was surprised to see that you had provided a warm welcome at the user's talk page. Another case of a user whose work didn't deserve a glowing welcome is User_talk:122.167.88.80 -- that user's only contribution was reverted for being link spam. In another instance, did you actually think that this edit on Jimbo's talk page justified a "welcome"? (Even if that user hadn't later been identified as a sockpuppet, that "contribution" was not something that makes me want to rush up to the contributor and say "thank you for that contribution -- please register and do more work just like it.")

I hope you can be more careful in the future about maintaining the credibility of your "welcome" statements. --Orlady (talk) 02:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Ugly sisters

This is shaping up really well, well done. Are you finished with it for now? There is some research I want to do (not OR!) but I don't want to tread on your toes, I'm sure you hate edit conflicts as much as I do, especially on long pages. pablohablo. 19:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I have class for the next three hours, so be my guest. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 20:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

It's going to take longer than that! Basically my beef is with the whole first section - I have started rewriting this, but as the Cinderella myth is really, really ancient and occurs in different forms in many languages and cultures, I think it needs a strong "early" section to balance out the later Disney/Shrek detail, which is better documented, at least on the Internet. I may have to go and dig out some Actual Paper Books™ in order to get it into the shape that I think it should be. pablohablo. 22:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll gladly give you some time to rework what you would like before I return to the article. Just let me know when you think I should resume. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 23:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

It's all yours. I need to find some stuff for referencing and my editing time is limited due to work pressure, so have at it! pablohablo. 22:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

If you would like to work on it some more per User:Pablomismo/Uglysisters, by all means. I am grading book reviews for about the next week and as such my Wikipedia editing is limited to fast edits that don't require much thought and time. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 22:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry accusation

Thank you A Nobody, the matter has come to my attention.

You are welcome, but I hope these are not true. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 22:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi I'm allready using turkish wikipedia. http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kullan%C4%B1c%C4%B1:Cromartie i couldnt find how can you sending messages each other. we do this with changing our profiles. now i will get a english wikipedia account. good bye 88.247.5.12 (talk) 22:05, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, happy editing! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 22:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Thnanks

for the welcome, i'm not going to register Greeks are not really welcome to wikipedia, you see.--85.74.196.77 (talk) 22:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome, but you should not let any one case deter you. As far as I and many editors are concerned, nationality/ethnicity is absolutely not a basis for discrimination here and should never be. Greeks, as with any nationality/ethnicity, are always welcome to edit Wikipedia in my book! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 22:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

Really? I disagree. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
To A Nobody, for consistently well-reasoned arguments at RfA. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
How thoughtful of you! Have a wonderful night! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support

I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. Thank you again for your support and you will always be A Somebody in my eyes! Cheers and happy editing.--kelapstick (talk) 18:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome and thank you for the kind words as well. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 00:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Neat, thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Groubani articles

your message

best to always log in and use your account. there is no way of actually 100% proving this was the user in question. LibStar (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree as I do not think I have accidentally edited logged out in at least months. Anyway, I asked the user on his talk page to clarify if it was him. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

In need of some help

I noticed that you came to my rescue before when I was being attacked by sockpuppets. I'm having a lot of trouble with creating new popular culture articles lately, and I thought you might be able to assist me, as I'm getting really frustrated with what I perceive as people forcing actions against any real consensus. Mintrick (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific? I am always happy to help fellow editors and I know a number of trustworthy and impartial admins I could recommend you to (I am not admin) or if you need help with a board on ANI thread. If you are being attacked by sockpuppets, that is of course unacceptable something that can be dealt with. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 20:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk)

Mifter (talk) 23:36, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome, congratulation, and good luck! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 23:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar notice

Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
We disagree frequently. There's a quotation that you've probably heard attributed to Voltaire, but I have it on good authority that it's a misattribution — it says "While I disagree with what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it". As such, this barnstar is awarded because while your opinions might not be ones with which I agree, they are very valuable to the project, and users like you are necessary as checks and balances on users like me (and vice-versa :)). Stifle (talk) 11:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A_Nobody/Archive_16&oldid=1254739615"