User talk:Amedeofelix

Period of Adjustment

Okay, that's better. Your own words, not the IMDB's. DS 22:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Hm. I started with someone else's words, but frankly thought I had done enough to remake them into my own. From my experience in Uni I learned it's only plagerism if it's word for word copying...

No matter. I just wanted to get an entry in there, and hopefully build it up or other build it up in time.

Amedeo Felix 15:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ferrari Formula One car articles

Hi Amedeofelix. I've seen the comments you left on the talk pages of several of the Ferrari Formula One car articles. I'll raise the issue for discussion at the Formula One WikiProject. DH85868993 12:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good one. I forgot you know to use teh obvious example of why varuious years cars should be listed each on its own - take McLaren as example. One could do the silly thing of listing ALL post 1981 McLarens as one car called the MP4... --Amedeo Felix 12:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've started the discussion. Feel free to participate. DH85868993 12:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. --Amedeo Felix 16:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Hawthorne‎

Hi! I noticed you'd replaced the article with Formula 1 info. It seemed to me that neither the comic guy nor the racing guy is all that more "well known" outside their respective circles. I've reverted your change, and put the info you'd created into Mike Hawthorne‎ (driver), which seems to be the proper disambig for racers. I'll probably put some kind of disambig for the original article as well, as soon as I find which term is appropriate. -- GJD (Talk to me|Damage I've done) 18:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think that's questionable. I reckon a world champion is bound to be more well known than an obscure comic book maker. However a disambiguation page is a good compromise... --Amedeo Felix 23:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The racing driver's name is Mike Hawthorn, with no "e". DH85868993 14:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Well spotted. I came up with results using an e, but never mind - thanks. --Amedeo Felix 15:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, to possibly save you some future effort, there are already articles for every driver who ever participated in a F1 World Championship race - they are listed here. DH85868993 00:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How would you know for a fact that it includes EVERY driver EVERY? --Amedeo Felix 14:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a fairly well-documented list, covered by numerous sites on the web, e.g. FORIX. Within Wikipedia, we have race reports for every World Championship round. Every driver in every race report is linked to their own article. DH85868993 02:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Philip K. Dick

Your changes are highly debatable. PKD was a novelist and short story writer, and you are engaging in a bit of historical revisionism by making it seem like the films that were adapted posthumously were more significant than his most important works as a living writer. —Viriditas | Talk 11:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's YOUR opinion of what I did. It is not what was in my head. the films are MORE FAMOUS. This enables them to be a tool for highlighting his work. More people will have heard of Blade Runner than Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, and so to highlight it and to put it first (along with other film associated works) would I feel be a better synopsis of works. That's all.--Amedeo Felix 19:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Immodesty Blaze

A tag has been placed on Immodesty Blaze requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fritzpoll (talk) 13:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Immodesty Blaze

A tag has been placed on Immodesty Blaze requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fritzpoll (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Immodesty Blaze

Assuming that this article is speedily deleted once again, may I suggest that you hold off recreating the article until you can upload a version that asserts the notability of this dancer per WP:BIO? If you can assert notability with reliable third-party sources, the article will not fall into the criterion for speedy deletion. I hope this helps - Fritzpoll (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, after causing much trouble, I relised the article you want is Immodesty Blaize! Doktor Wilhelm 15:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oui. Merci!--Amedeo Felix (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ferrari 312T and Ferrari 412T

Regarding your recent suggestion that these two articles be split into individual articles over each variation, a discussion was brought up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One#Ferrari car split proposal. Your opinion regarding the matter would be helpful, specifically why you think these variations each deserve their own article. Thanks. The359 (talk) 22:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hackney Wick

Hi there, not a big thing - but I note that you're adding a number of articles on individual galleries in the area. As you've seen before there are a number of wikipedians who like to delete everything ... so, I would suggest that you ensure that you can verify the notability of these things; independently (ie not their own website) in reliable sources - maybe reviews in Newspapers. Otherwise they are quite likely to turn up at articles for deletion. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 10:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created just one, for Mother Studios. Don't knwo who created Elevator Gallery and only added links for other galleries - no pages (have messaged around the Hackney Wick art community though to ask people to look into this). Thanks for advice.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 11:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Brawn GP

Hi. I apologise if I seemed a little forceful, but it's not something any of us have any control over. I read my comments again this morning and realised that they were fairly aggressive, and I can assure you that that was not my intention. I look forward to working with you in the future, perhaps in a more subdued tone. :) Aptery gial 05:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. No grudge borne. :-)--Amedeo Felix (talk) 08:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brawn GP numbers in 2009

Please check it at http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73897. Fsarmony (talk) 15:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I see - bizarre and unnecessary, but fact it is.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 08:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It's strange to jump cars # 18 and 19, they should let Brawn use those. Anyway... Fsarmony (talk) 19:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. With the big deal they make over the money F1 costs (though I think they should think first of what it costs us punters to get in) that car number are the very least important thing. Still, if Brawn win or not the numbers they carry wil be of no contributory factor. ;-) --Amedeo Felix (talk) 00:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lotus F1

Please see the discussion at WT:F1. Thanks - mspete93 [talk] 17:24, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason not to voice opinions ON a page that exists TOO.--Amedeofelix (talk) 18:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. Its probably better to keep the discussion in one place. I'll put a notice on both of the article talk pages linking to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One page, where the discussion is longer. There you can make your point. I have no problem with you raising the issue. If a concensus is made that there was no need for the split then I am more than happy for the two to be merged. - mspete93 [talk] 18:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just didn't like the notion of being told NOT to post discussion on one or other page - that's all. If people are directed to a single point of discussion all the better.--Amedeofelix (talk) 21:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brawn GP

Hi, I placed an entry in the Brawn GP discussion page about the fact that Brawn GP are not really a debut team in F1 in 2009. What are your thoughts? By implication, references to Brawn GP being a debut team that achieved X,Y,Z should be removed from the page as they bought Honda F1.

194.46.241.100 (talk) 22:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. My position is that ALL teams that exist as a result of a purchase of a pre-existing team should reflect that in some way. Ideally I would have single articles delineating the FULL history. So for example one article starting with Toleman, changing to Benetton and then becoming the current Renault team... So I think what you say makes sense.--Amedeofelix (talk) 16:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am Miha from Croatia. I am very interested in life of Enrique Álvarez Félix. Was he your relative?--Miha (talk) 09:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Amedeofelix. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Amedeofelix. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Amedeofelix. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]