User talk:AliveFreeHappy/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

December 2007 -June 2008

BRMHS

There is a discussion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Baton_Rouge_Magnet_High_School) should you have issue to the physical condition of the building being part of the wiki entry for BRMHS. Simply undoing repeatedly is unhelpful and childish. Cozret (talk) 13:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I have not simply undone, I have explained in every case. Putting a bunch of pictures that claim that the school is falling apart is no longer illustration, it is editorial. In such case it needs to meet WP:VER and WP:RS. Also, giving the pictures undue weight would be a problem. When all those guidelines can be met it would be appropriate to add the pictures or a subset of them. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 18:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

The city is voicing a plan to move the school out of the build due to the damage, and you want to call it an editorial. . .it's a fact. Cozret (talk) 23:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You misunderstood. I was discussing your pictures. Normally pictures are illustrations, but when they're used to push a point that isn't supported by text, they become of themselves editorial content. If you had strong reliable sources supporting your point, adding pictures would return to illustrative. As it is, the article is not in compliance with wiki guidelines. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:04, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

They are not my pictures. However, I have been by the school to visit (having graduated from there in 1998). The sources support the claim, the images (most of all the one of the front of the build, which you can clearly see from the top "nice" image is the same building) support the claim. I realize you are unhappy that such images are likely to be viewed negatively, but that's not the fact's fault. --Cozret (talk) 04:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't care at all whether the images are viewed positively or negatively. It matters not at all. What I care about is that we follow wikipedia guidelines. Using pictures to convey an idea without sources violates WP:OR. In addition, we have no way of knowing per WP:VER if the pictures are actual, current, etc. On top of that the amount of pictures makes it look like the only thing we know about the school is the building, violating WP:UNDUE. Now sources have finally been added, so we've solved one of the issues. We still need to address the others. My goal is not to remove negative information from articles, it's to create a good encyclopedia per the guidelines. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 04:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

So, since the image at the top isn't sourced, does it need to go too? After all, it's conveying an idea of the school. How about the bulldog image, nothing there shows that is really linked with the school. You seem very selective in which images you are taking issue with, for someone claiming they don't care about the positive or negative viewpoint that will be taken. --Cozret (talk) 05:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Typically images are merely illustrative. In such cases they certainly don't need to pass WP:VER or WP:RS unless someone challenges them (IE - "That's not my school"). But in other cases, such as the original layout for BRMHS, the images were being used themselves without sources to convey any editorial message that was unsourced. Actually I was the one who take the time to put in proper sources for the buildings condition. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

and no ones has come out going "That's not my school" for the other pictures. In fact, people keep coming in going, "Yep, that's it." I'm very interested in your ability to state what is propaganda and what is "merely illustrative" Cozret (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Stopping power

The issue over reliable source in the stopping power article appears to be entirely secondary to the conflict of interest, as Michael Courtney appears to be quoting his own work, which is a clear WP:COI as half the references listed are papers he coauthored. Certainly that's undue weight, if nothing else. scot (talk) 15:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

It's funny, because the issue I raised at Talk:Stopping_power#Quality sources was about the source which was a peta website. Michael's response has ignored that part of the issue entirely. I hadn't caught the WP:COI element of it. It does look problematic. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 18:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Adminship?

Hey! I think, it's about time you started blocking your own sockpuppets! If you're interested, I'd be happy to nominate you Over there. :) SQL^{Query me!} 20:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

An intriguing thought - what all is involved? I see some RFAs go smoothly, others get nasty. Plus what is expected of admins, other than "doing what you're already doing"? I see references to admin coaching as well. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 22:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

A lot of it is just going about as you already are, but, with additional permissions. Some required reading, if you haven't already been there is Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. You're right, too, some go very smoothly, as this user that I nominated, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Od Mishehu, some... No so much, like mine Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/SQL (I still passed, however). Some, really get nasty. I think it all depends who's awake that week :). There's nothing really 'expected' of administrators, other than to be fair, calm, and trustworthy, as well, to have a decent grasp on the policies. Some days, it's real rewarding, some days, it's a huge pain (particularly on the days, where 3-4 people forget about WP:AGF :( ). As far as admin coaching goes, I think that project's pretty much dormant now. Anyhow, you might want to think about it for a bit, it's an intense process, and, can be extremely harsh. If you've got any questions, I've got this page watchlisted, and, you can always reach me via e-mail. SQL^{Query me!} 02:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I've been reading lots of stuff, thanks for the link to the reading list. Obviously a lot of that I'm already familiar with. It's funny because doing vandal patrol you sometimes run into unhappy editors, but it seems unlikely such individuals take part in RFA anyway. It certainly would make dealing with obvious socks easier, as well as some of the vandalism work. Let's give it a shot and see how it goes. We'll see how far WP:AGF can take it. Thanks for your confidence, as well as your constant assistance with problems. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 02:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, everything you've brought to me was in valid need of action :) I'll paste in the RFA in a sec (I've had one typed up for at least a day now). I would reccomend turning on you wikipedia e-mail as well, btw. SQL^{Query me!} 04:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that on the admin page and did it about 10 minutes ago. I think I may change the address there eventually, but for now I'll leave it alone. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm off to answer the three questions before I cross the bridge of death. (Apologies if you're not a Monty Python fan). AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I accepted the nomination and answered the questions - your move. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. My standard advice is "don't wear out the refresh key" :P SQL^{Query me!} 06:35, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

A "Blog" Site is Not Always Just a Personal Blog

Regarding one of your recent deletions:

I guess that we just disagree on relevance. I will defer to your judgment. However, in the future, please consider that not every website with "blog" in its name is merely a daily personal missive about the writer's mood, the weather, their passionate love of Paris, and what they are planning to make for dinner. The "blog" page that I cited (www.survivalblog.com) is widely-read (with more than 52,000 weekly unique visitors in more than 50 countries) and is considered a technical reference by many shooting enthusiasts and preparedness-minded individuals. This blog's related static pages include several FAQs that LONG pre-date the advent of "blogs", and that even pre-date the Internet as we now know it. (Three of these FAQs got their start in the late 1980s, before "WWW" browsing was extant.)

IMHO, the static reference page in question--the reference page on whether or not certain types of ammunition are corrosively primed--provides valuable data for many shooters. But again, I am deferring to your judgment and won't attempt to re-post or argue this any further. Based on on your log, I can see that you have more experience about judging deletion criteria than I do. -- Jeff Trasel, 1547 EST , 23 Dec. 2007

I saw the technical data there. However that technical data wouldn't fit the guidlines for reliable sources so we can't really take it into account when evaluating the link. Did you get a chance to read the external link guidelines? One thing that maybe changes the equation is "blogs that are a recognized authority". Typically such recognition comes from reliable third-party sources, such as newspapers, magazines, etc. Do you know of any that talk about the site you referenced? The fact that your site is visited by a lot of people doesn't really say anything in regards to whether it should be included. Lots of sites that aren't appropriate external links have high visitor counts. But if you were able to show that it is considered a valuable technical reference using a third-party source I'd change my mind. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:36, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi

(note - the first 3 paragraphs of this is copied from User talk:Kingturtle#Block question)

The edit history does not seem to match this interpretation. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 09:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Because you are not a Sikh you don't have the religious cultural knowledge of the highly offensive religious cultural insult he said to Sikh scholar

"do not refer yourself as Khalsa and insult such a pure word of our community" = To say this to a baptized Khalsa Sikh is the equivalent of saying his mother is a prostitute.--Sikh historian (talk) 09:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

AliveFreeHappy, someone has blocked Sikh scholar please unblock Sikh scholar one can understand his emotional outburst after the highly offensive religious insult he was subjected to. Lets not lose an expert Sikh Wikipedian over a vandal, only Wikipedia will suffer long term to lose a long time expert Wikipedian such as Sikh Scholar. Please do justice get him unblocked.--Sikh historian (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Sikh scholar was blocked because of making death threats. Such response is inappropriate, even to a perceived insult. If you disagree with the block, please leave a message with the admin who placed the block. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 10:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok I understand, but rules are supposed to be used in context nothing has meaning without context. To apply rule blindly and moronically ,Means you do not understand the goal or objective. Therefore, your statement only makes sense with context and under that context and background only a warning or point of reference was enough. No wonder Wikipedia is going down hill when blanket rules are used without any context when people who don't understand anything except the label of thing as Richard feynman once said. Thanks but please don't leave a reply.--Sikh historian (talk) 10:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

A threat of violence in context is still a threat of violence, and definitely qualifies as uncivil behavior as well as a violation of WP:NPA. Plus I don't see how Sikh scholar reconciles this "A Sikh is NEVER aggressive, rude or offensive"[1] with this "You deserve excution - you stupid dumb fu*k"[2]. It just doesn't seem to fit. At any rate, again, you can petition the blocking admin (which appears to be User:Stephen [3]) with the arguments you've made here and see what they say. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 11:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

That actually wrong "I'm going to kill you" in a different context could be a joke or a harsh get lost. Well lets agree to disagree because it seems you will not understand the concept of context that I'm trying to make you understand. In Sikhism you are allowed to use force when something sacred like honour or life is being attacked verbally or physical, Sikhism is not a pacifist religion. Anyway this is my final reply -thanks.--Sikh historian (talk) 11:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

It's actually fairly simple in this case. Two users were uncivil to each other, both were blocked temporarily. It seems to be the correct action. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Even as a joke, "Its scum like you that needs to be executed. You deserve excution - you stupid dumb fu*k everyone in my family over 500 members are Baptized Khalsa SIKHS. We have been Khalsa Sikhs for over 400 years you dumb fu*ker. Because you have insulted me and broken the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib you deserve death -you dumb fu*ker.", is not appropriate here, even remotely. And, I don't even ALMOST see context for that to be anything less than what it is -- a threat. SQL^{Query me!} 14:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Your warning

If you go to AN/I you will see that the editor you are defending is a sock of a banned user who is injecting anti-Semitism into that article. Arrow740 (talk) 10:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I am not defending anyone. I happen to see two editors reverting each other on an article, I issued warnings to both, since sometimes people get caught up in the moment and don't realize what's happening, or are even unaware of the WP:3RR rule. If one of the users is indeed a vandal or sock, then of course an admin handling the article would take that into account. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 10:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

congratulations

A consensus has been reached by your peers that you should be an admin. I have made it so. Please review Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list and keep up the great work. Sincerely, Kingturtle (talk) 04:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much to you and to all who participated in the RFA. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Good to see you made it!!! Congrats man! :) Let me know, if you have any questions, I'll do my best to answer them! :) SQL^{Query me!} 06:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Prepare to be pestered. (Not that I wasn't pestering you already). AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Pfft. I love to be pestered :) Bring it on! SQL^{Query me!} 07:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, I know, you might turn your nose up at it, btw, but, check out what I got for christmas! :) SQL^{Query me!} 08:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You automatic rifle guys... Seriously 9mm auto rifles are a lot of fun for plinking. I'm sure you'll enjoy it. Do you reload? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 08:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Not in 9mm yet, it didn't seem worth it, until I hit the shop today.... 1000 rds for $115. The stuff used to be $6/100! :( I do reload some 7.62, for my mosin (I'm one of those, that's afraid to shoot corrosives, in his collectibles), with an old hammer-press. I've not gotten to try it yet, but, it seems like it'd be a good plinker. That's mostly what I use my only other 9mm for. I thought I read that you were into semi-auto rifles! :P SQL^{Query me!} 08:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

One of these days I'll have to buy a progressive press. Mostly I reload rifle cartridges, especially some of the ones I have are wildcats, so there's no other way. I spend more time with my bolts than I do the semi-auto's, but I do have some of those as well. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 08:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congrats, and I wish you the best of luck with your new tools. Happy editing, --Midorihana_{(talk)(contribs)} 07:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome

No problem AFH, just remember me down the road... ;-) --n1yaNt 07:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! Your user name is cool and I hope you will do a great job as an admin. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 08:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh! You live in the United States. It is a free country. I am not an American but I like Americans. I admire liberal and free attitude of Americans. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 08:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Congrats from me too! S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 18:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I concur

"I do not believe all the current hype about Global warming, sudden Climate change, etc. There are too many holes in a large chain of hypotheses to give it any credibility."

I agree 100%. Oh and well done on your adminship! _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{we need to talk.}• 18:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

hi

hi AliveFreeHappy,

This is harrybabbar...i am new to Wikipedia, maybe thats why i got blocked by whole gang of anti Sikh Wikipedian like Sikh Scholar, Sikh Historian and Gurkhaboy (who claim to be sikh)...but anyways I wanted to thank you for your support on blocking (even if temporary) Sikh Scholar for his demeaning words to me....All the points I made to Gurkhaboy would have made any true Sikh swell with pride bcoz that is the truth…I do not understand the reason for both Sikhs (Scholars & Historians) outburst against me (all the 20 mails that I sent which Kingturtle say I send, they are not spam...i had just forwarded Sikh Scholars demeaning mail to all this 20 people and asking for support on the issue)..... Anyways I will give whole line of my communication between myself and gurkhaboy and Sikh scholar when my block expires and thank you once again.

Harrybabbar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.187.210.81 (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I hope you recognize from the appropriate block given to both of you that uncivil behavior is not tolerated on wikipedia and that in the future you're take more care to work in a more cooperative way with others. Feel free to challenge people on accuracy, etc., but never attack or make insults about the editors themselves, this doesn't help anyone. Our goal is to build a better encyclopedia, and we need to keep that in mind. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 22:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note, the same way Harrybabbar assumed the admin Khukri was a Gurkha, the same way he makes assumptions on everyone's identity. I never claimed to be a Sikh. Cheers, Gorkhali (talk) 19:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Nice!

Nice job on bringing some order and substance to Scripps Ranch High School! I have spent a lot of time deleting and reverting vandalism, andits nice to see some good stuff going up there. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, it still needs a LOT of work, but I've got it on my watchlist now. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hi AliveFreeHappy,

If you read my message to you properly you will see that Iam only addressing Sikh Scholar and Historian as Sikhs, see 3 rd line i quote...I do not understand the reason for both Sikhs (Scholars & Historians) outburst against me ....only on the 1st line i have included gurkhaboy name as Sikh Wikipedian (bcoz he is a part of it) I never said or assumed that he was a Sikh....anyway that is the way all this people have been playing with words and twisting and turning my statements and then getting me blocked all the time...anyways its for you to decide who is correct everything is in front of you . I till date have never insulted anyone or used unappropriate language) Yes I agree I was wrong in case of Khukri my mistake I accept (pls forward this message to Khukri also my request to you, bcoz iam new to wikipedia)...and I can never imagine a Gurkha as Sikh in my dreams and i am more then glad to set the record straight... I have to use this anon account bcoz I have been blocked and its not that I am hiding myself I have identified myself and witten to you I hope you understand

It will be of great help if you can guide me how to go about dealing with this guys....

59.181.121.67 (talk) 07:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC) harrybabbar

Please do not continue using an anonymous account, you have been blocked, and you need to wait until the block expires. If you want to discuss the block, you are allowed to edit your talk page, which I do have on my watchlist. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Instead of nominating something for deletion...

...why not try and fix it before nominating it for deletion? I refer to the note you left on the talk page of my previous username' regarding the E-flite Blade CX and which I might never have noticed if not for the fact that I was going to redirect it to my current username. I'm only using the current account for purposes of bringing articles to Veropedia. Did you not happen to notice that I had retired from this project as a regular editor?

It's precisely this kind of garbage and the total lack of respect for established editors which drove me off of this site in the first place. Frankly, I'm getting paid to write articles on hobby products; the article you nominated isn't an ad at all and I wrote actual ad copy for more than fifteen years. Have a happy new year. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 08:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

IMO it couldn't be fixed, that's why I nominated it. In addition to being unsourced and written much like an ad, it just didn't have anything to establish notability. It's pretty difficult for any particular hobbyist product to reach an appropriate level of notability to have it's own article. I'm glad that Veropedia has a place for it, not everything belongs in Wikipedia. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 09:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't move this particular article to Veropedia, but thanks for the support nonetheless. I agree that it's orphaned and no one other than myself has stepped up to fix it, so perhaps it's best deleted. It was also written a heck of a long time ago while I was still working on style. However, it's notable in hobbyist circles as being one of the most popular - if not the most popular - entry-level model helicopter on the market today. There are numerous aftermarket hop-ups for the thing, not to mention more than 17,000 distinct Google hits. The new version, not mentioned here, is the only one of its type to incorporate 2.4 GHz radio technology...and it's the same model helicopter you see flying around in the new "Alvin and The Chipmunks" movie. Take some heartfelt and friendly advice from an ex-administrator who seems to be having trouble falling asleep right now: Playing "wikicop" will only drive you nuts, especially when dealing with established users who tend to bite when cornered (yes, I admit I bit you). I got bitten hard and often until I learned not to be so bullish on patrol. That leads to burnout. Not good. There are more vandals and miscreants than there are those with the means to block them, i.e., you're needed. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 10:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the change of heart, it's appreciated. I'd be more than happy withdraw my nomination if you can point me to or add some reliable third-party sources that talk about these products. Obviously you know more about them than I do, so I assume its easier for you, just as if I asked you to find sources for some particular firearm or cartridge. You probably have easy access to publications that may not be available on the internet. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I see from the AFD that you plan on improving it, so I have withdrawn the AFD. Edit away. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Doctorate

Wiki Doctorate is a new scheme designed to recognise the people who "do all the work" on Wikipedia. It has been mainly developed for Wikipedia administrators however if you have done lots to keep Wikipedia on "the straight and narrow", including bieng members of different groups which help Wikipedia i.e "The Welcoming Committee. We have selected to email you because you can apply for the doctorate and we would be very greateful ifo you did and put the userbox on your user page to boost advertising. The following link will take you straight to our homepage.

Yours sincerely

--Dr.J.Wright MD (talk) 23:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Congrats

Anyway, my point was that a new admin can be dangerous if he or she has experience in only a single topic - not even in related topics. My advice, unsolicited, is to stay out of debates on topics that you are not familiar until you graduate from New Admin School. Bearian (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 46 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thanks for supporting me!

-Djsasso (talk) 17:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

I just got the word about the withdrawal of the AfD on the model helicopter article and I'd like to thank you for that. I appreciate the benefit of the doubt and I'll work to improve it as soon as possible. It might take some wordsmithing to keep it from sounding like an ad, but I'll do my best. Again, my sincerest thanks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, isn't that what WP:AGF is all about? Maybe you can also look at ParkZone F-27 Stryker if you have any experience with that. If there is anything I can do to assist, let me know. If you want to create the basic copy and then collaborate on un-advertising it, I'd be happy to help. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Will do. The text on that has changed quite a bit and there's an entirely new model as well. PMDrive1061 via --76.79.100.242 (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

PMDrive1061 (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

Dear AliveFreeHappy, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia.

-- AKeen (talk) 15:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

M-1 Carbine Revert War

The M1 carbine article is currently on lock down. An administrator has requested some discussion from memeber of the Firearms Wikiproject. Can you take a look? Sf46 (talk) 18:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Ha, I am the admin concerned and was about to post the same thing. Congrats on your RFA, I was on holiday at the time, otherwise I would have made it 45!! Woody (talk) 20:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'm not an expert on military rifles, but I have weighed in on the discussion. (I had one of those universals and it was truly a piece of junk.) Thanks for kind words Woody. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 23:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Gin Ichimaru

I have to ask, how exactly was that a blatant copyright infringement? in-universe, no doubt, but I don't see how it violates copyright. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

It was an exact copy of this AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

It has several similarities on the plot points, I will admit, but the Wikipedia page has existed longer and hasn't changed much. That a forum post has some of the same material hardly seems like copyright infringement. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Checking - the first several paragraphs are not "similar" but are EXACT copies, however I'm checking on the date issues now, to make sure which came first. Give me a few minutes. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

List of similar sites:

• newer
• newer
• newer
• unknown - probably newer
• newer
• newer

Restored - thanks for the heads up, sorry for any inconvenience. I've documented the research on the article talk page for future reference. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad we worked this out. However, I'll get to changing it so this hopefully doesn't happen again. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Apollo Victoria Theatre

Hi. I understand you recently deleted Apollo Victoria Theatre. I am concerned that this is described as CSD G12: Blatant Copyright infringement and that an IP user placed a warning on my page. I had a look at the page and my edits to it were limited to:

1. dates should all be in UK format
2. more specific location
3. corr cat
4. rem duplic co-ords
5. infobox
6. cat sorting
7. AWB clean up Replaced: ==Recent & Present Productions== → ==Recent and present productions==
8. AWB clean up
9. add refs

.... etc Where I have seen a similar situation, the page that was claimed to be copyright was either based on the wikipedia entry, or else had been copied from similar copyfree sources. I should like to take a look at this, but do not want to recreate the page without checking with you. Thanks Kbthompson (talk) 00:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I've checked (thru view and restore) the entry against the theatre website and it does seem to be the wiki entry word for word, with your agreement I'll restore the page with the history section (which seems to be the section for which they claim copyright) excised. The remainer of the material is not mentioned on their website. Kbthompson (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The first three paragraphs (the bulk of the article) were exact copies of this. Feel free to recreate without that material, or if you need the non-vio section let me know. Make sure to get any notability references so that it doesn't immediately get speedied right after you recreate it. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Notability is in the first para'. I'm still trying to work out how the product of heteroglossia (multiple editors) can match a website. If it had been copied from the website then the copy edits would be the work of one editor ... not multiple editors ... word for word, eh ... you don't think, nah ... they wouldn't steal the wiki entry and pass it off as their own work, would they? Cheers, I'll fix the bit they're claiming and we'll just have to see it rewritten - even better! Kbthompson (talk) 01:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Well I suppose you could check one of the internet time machines and see when their page first appeared. I've seen that happen, but couldn't show it for sure here. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Too much effort! I've restored the page, without the disputed material and with no history of the disputed material. I hope this meets the requirements. I didn't edit this theatre very much, but there are so many others - where a lot of work has been put in - that somebody could filch and then claim copyright on ... it just makes me mad Mongo ... no, I'll live, wiki will live and something will go up there in the next few days. Cheers Kbthompson (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Well thanks for putting in the work you did, like you said Wiki will survive. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No, thank you ... BTW: someone tagged your front page ... Kbthompson (talk) 01:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Yah, I just cleaned it. Thanks. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with CenterLine Software. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Redfarmer (talk) 00:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

This warning is in error. I did not create the page myself, I merely put the hangon tag while investigating and then found it to be an incorrect speedy tag, so I removed it as part of my WP:CSD work, as the tag suggests. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Gin Ichimaru

I see you removed my speedy tag on Gin Ichimaru. How would you when the other website wrote it as they copied of Wikipedia? This will help me in other copyrights. Thanks! Ohmpandya (Talk) 00:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I checked the link you gave as well as a host of others listed above on this page, and found that all similar versions of the article were in fact NEWER than the wikipedia article, showing copying in the other direction. See Talk:Gin Ichimaru for a full list, as my edit summary suggested. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

my edit to handgun

You didn't like my edit? Why not? I think people ought to know the velocities in miles per hour, too, shouldn't they? Darthvader1 (talk) 06:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

It's really an unnecessary conversion to make. Firearms velocities are always spoken of in terms of ft/sec, or m/sec. Doing an extra conversion doesn't really add anything other than one more calculation to the picture. All the firearms in Wikipedia have measurements in ft/sec or m/sec or both already, there is no reason to introduce mph into them. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Understand I am not to be blamed.

It is the other user/s who are engaged in it. If any of us are to be blocked, it is them. I have work I do for other articles on this site, and if you had me blocked from editing, they would fall to pieces. I cannot be blocked, for the sake of the encyclopedia. Thank you for the warning, anyway. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Harold Washington and Peanut Butter

You seem to be reverting edits at Harold Washington that is having the affect of restoring vandalism to the article. I'm not sure what the reason for this is? The peanut butter information there that's being removed by another editor appears to be vandalism. Perhaps this is an oversight on your part? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

See link:[4] Doczilla (talk) 05:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I thought it had to be something like that. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Ugh!

Please, don't bug me about these non-existent personal attacks right now. I'm under too much stress to deal with anything properly, see here: User talk:Riana. Look at the way I'm responding to you! I'm sorry, but you picked a bad time to issue me your comments. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 00:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Chad Hooper

This article has biographic importance. He changed the town of Madison, AL for years to come. What must I do for this page to stay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wakeboarddrumma (talk • contribs) 02:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

For starters, take a look at notability guidelines to see the Wikipedia guidelines for what articles to include. Remember that wikipedia is an encyclopedia. In addition, make sure to include verifiable reliable sources and that will help a lot. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 02:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Freedom of Speech and Your Censorship

Why did you delete Bjarni Rúnar Einarsson from wikipedia? Your opinion is what deleted the article from wikipedia. Was the picture not conservative enough for you? Mr. Einarsson deserves credit and recognition among his peer group. Get a life buddy and stop harassing other wikipedia members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bikingviking (talk • contribs) 08:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The article was tagged for speedy deletion because it didn't meet notability guidelines. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Blatant advertising

Hi,

I'm just wondering whether the article on Simply Digital was flagged because the business is too new or because no secondary sources of information were provided. If there were reference links provided in the article, would it have been deleted?

It's not my business, but it is a good local business. I realize Wikipedia isn't a business directory; however, the criteria for notability are debatable.

--Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msd16 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Simply Digital Photography, LLC was flagged because it was a short article that was written like a small ad. In addition, it certainly didn't meet WP:Notability requirements as it stood. If you'd like to discuss notability criteria, try Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), it's a good place for that. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Upon reflection, it seems the business doesn't meet WikiPedia's notability standards for the time being. Thanks for clearing that up. --Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msd16 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Simple Question

(diff) (hist) . . User talk:AliveFreeHappy‎; 02:16 . . (+315) . . Cozret (Talk | contribs) (→BRMH)

On "My Watchlist" page I have noticed numbers after the webpage name , as above (+315),..What does that number mean? Sometimes its a negative number...

ThanksDavidPickett (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

That is the number of characters added (positive) or removed (negative) from the article with the edit. -- Boris Barowski (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

What you find below isn't from me!!DavidPickett (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

THANKS ASSHOLE

Thanks for deleting my article asshole!!!!! All i was trying to do was inspire people the way this guy and his company inspired me. Thanks for getting between the educational system and people becoming inspired! Like the show "The Big Idea" with Donny Deutsch, this article was an inspiration to entrepreneurs everywhere. With assholes like you around, who needs enemies? Stimulate (talk) 03:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's Day!

User:Wilhelmina Will has wished you a happy Valentine's day, and good luck in love and friendship!

A short/sweet little message, which I hope has made your day better! Happy Valentine's Day!!! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Possible resource for US v. Heller

From a history professor at George Mason university, and author of a book on teh 2nd Amendment: http://hnn.us/articles/47238.html scot (talk) 16:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, I'll check it out. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Lead Warnings

You're starting to see lead references creep in all over Wikipedia because the political left is using it as a new ground to attack firearms owners, hunting and the 2nd amendment. Trying to pass laws with titles like "Protecting Children From Lead Poisoning" which are aimed at making leaded ammunition impossible to obtain because of state regulations. With bans and many ranges against steel ammunition this will simply stop people from shooting as copper is too expensive as well. It is organized and intentional, they seek to further the bad image of firearms for their own means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.173.229 (talk) 00:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Little help?

User:Michael Courtney has been splashing Hydrostatic shock references on popular articles. Could you please join the discussion on the notability of including this entry on cartridge pages? Thanks for the help. For the record, I'm asking a few others with a vested interest. --'''I am Asamuel''' (talk) 16:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:ArthurHicken2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ArthurHicken2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 02:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareList?lc=en&cc=us&dlc=en&os=219&product=374568&printable=yes&encodeUrl=true&

Ill duk I up uhher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.250.34 (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Interview

I am trying to find a wikipedia administrator who would readily do an interview for a research project I am conducting from the perspective of a wikipedia insider. If you'd like to do this, please email me at goat77 (AT) gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goat77 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Help!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_gorrillas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minab_factory

Check them out, please! they are speedy deletion quality. sorry for the typos I am busy as an admin!

69.113.203.57 (talk) 16:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Clip vs. Magazine

I was wondering if you could chime in on the debate regarding the definition of a clip vs. a Magazine. I am looking for other firearms folks. The view at issue is that Clips are Magazines and the two editors for changing this are citing the dictionary. Don't know what your position is, but thanks for your help in advance. --'''I am Asamuel''' (talk) 02:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5