User talk:Black Kite/Archive02

1912 Olympic Games

Thanks a lot for your "warning" about the 1912 Olympic Games football matches. You are right, this was not my best idea. I will ponder to find a better way to shown this data. :) Doma-w 10:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiquette

You posted a comment, that is involvement on your part. My request is that you refrain from commenting, as I feel like you're seeking problems out to comment on and not letting other users, who are not involved in the situation make their own decisions. In effect, by participating in the method you chose you are in effect escalating the situation. This is not the first time you've done this, and I'd honestly prefer you stop focusing on me and focus on the articles that need improvement instead. FrozenPurpleCube 23:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV report + contributions

Hey! Good work at WP:AIV - I've blocked the account (see his/her talk page) per your report. I'm just dropping by to say good work, and drop by my talk page any time!

By the way, I'm a new admin (the newest in fact, having had my mop just a few hours) so let me know how I'm doing!

Regards,
Anthony 23:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbuthnot

Why not make a list and discuss? - Kittybrewster (talk) 03:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles George Arbuthnot

As far as I'm aware you can't withdraw the nom once other people have said to delete. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may be able to withdraw it, but it would be better to get an admin to close it, just to be on the safe side. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New word?

I liked your "vanispamcruftisement" tag on John May (NVG). Did you get that from someone else, or did you make it up? :D HeirloomGardener 21:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info and link! BTW, I just put that guy on the AIV list, so he shouldn't be bothering us much longer! HeirloomGardener 21:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sack Full Of Silver.jpg

Hello EliminatorJR, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Sack Full Of Silver.jpg) was found at the following location: User:EliminatorJR/Sandbox/SackfulOfSilver. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Saw your recent sock allegation. JB claims to be in the south of England which the IP isnt but I would advise you to write to User:Fred Bauder on this one. Good work, SqueakBox 17:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Question on an article

Hi, I was writing you because you nominated an article I wrote for deletion which is confusing because there's no reason why. I wrote this article and had it looked at by different wiki editors and know you nominated it for deletion for no reason. If you have a personal bias about articles being written or think something needs to be changed why is it so hard to just contact me and tell me. You don't have to nominate it for deletion without any valid reason. What, are you going to tell me it's noteworthy after wiki editors said it was. That sounds odd. I wrote this article, it was nominated for deletion, I made corrections and valid additions and the nomination was taken off, and haven't had a problem since. I'm sorry if I'm coming across rude but, this is so bizarre to me. I need an explanation. Thanks. JoeyC5 00:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick response. I'm confused because after the article was deleted, I created it again and had a wiki editor look at it. They said the article was fine and other editors have been tweaking it as I have. I listed references and links to those references. Does the article actually need external links? I put IMDB and My Space to give people more opprotunities to look up that person, not to have people go to those links for references. So, can you remove the tag? JoeyC5 00:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Afd - CJ Johnson

Hello: I seem to have stumbled into a mess. I saw this article in AfD. After reading it, I am not impressed. You had already nominated it and I voted delete as well. Now the contributor, something of a newbie, has taken major issue with my voting on the article and is accusing me of "tampering" with the debate. I am doing everything to remain cool, objective and not bite the newbie. If you could maybe explain how AfD works to him, that might be helpful. The article is a questionable one, in terms of WP:Bio, as the actor was not in two MTV series, but rather appeared twice in the same show. I have proposed a compromise of having his name listed on the article about the show. Thanks for your time. —Gaff ^ταλκ 19:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its never fun seeing an article deleted that some newbie really cares about. It happened to me when I first came to WP. It drove me nuts, but also got me more interested in the project. I really want to be fair to the newbie here. You might have seen, however, that there was a strange edit from out of nowhere that looks a lot like a sock puppet to me. I could be wrong about that as well, guess time will tell...—Gaff ^ταλκ 23:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Swans cover art

Thanks for adding in the pics! Lugnuts 18:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A7 assertion

I think it's better we don't clutter the afd debate with this tangent. For an assertion of importance or significance, an article needs no sources whatever. A "mere mention" in a textbook, which may not be a reliable source, certainly fails being the "subject of an article" or "non-trivial mention" (or however they're phrasing it at WP:N, as it's changing daily). This is, I think, why you believe it did not meet the assertion standard.

The problem is that that conflates the standards for argument on the merits of notabiliuty (i.e. at afd), with the standards for an assertion of importance or significance, which is all one needs to take an article out of speedy range. The fact that he mentions a source strengthens the assertion, for where there is one source, there may be more.

Looking at it another way, if he had simply said "he is the second rated textile engineer in Pakistan" and did not mention a source, wouldn't that be a clear assertion? If the answer is yes (and I can't think of any rationale where it wouldn't be), the mention of any source (reliable or not, mere mention or not), makes it more likely there are more sources, and A7 goes out the door. Whether those sources can be substantiated and are enough is the subject for debate on the merits.--Fuhghettaboutit 00:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RRS revert

I know I was being bad and vandalizing stuff. I was going to change it back. I was just talking about it in the RRS chat room and changed it for quick temporary little joke. I'm aware of how wiki works and the wiki rules and policies. Sorry for wasting your time though.68.246.188.185 04:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to DigiPen revert

It should be noted that this is coming from DigiPen's pubic IP, and I personally, am not the one who made the previous edit. That said, the previous edit, stating only "The official color is maroon" could hardly be considered valdalism. Even if it is not 'officially' true, the color could easily be considered our unofficial color. Site www.digipen.edu for clear evidence. Maroon and off-white are everywhere on campus, on official documents, the official letter head and logo (although our official logo did just recently change, this may no longer be true). On the note of blocking though, if the IP does become blocked, can it initially done such that only anonymous editors are blocked (ie- we don't have to submit a request for this after being blocked wholly)?

List of controversial album covers

I understand you may have saved the text of this page prior to its deletion and was wondering if you might consider making it available to me. I contributed many entries to this page and also to the album pages linked from it. While I understand the decision to delete the page based on the reasoning in the discussion, I would like to attempt to make an acceptable page with proper sourcing or assit in creating an acceptable page.

At wost I would use it for my own person reference if a suitable page could not meet Wikipadias standards. Please let me know. thanks! User name : Jeffreybh

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transmetal

Would a direct Spanish-to-English translation of the Es-wiki article be violating any copyrights? Just curious. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 16:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

News Team AfDs

Dude, you observation was very relevant, thanks for pointing that out, I changed my comments right away after reading that. Lipsticked Pig 22:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HHO gas

if it's an article debunking a hoax, why isn't the fact that it's a hoax mentioned at all? This is just spam.

You've voted to delete both Brown's gas, and HHO gas. Brown's gas is perfectly legit, though it has crackpot claims surrounding it that need to be debunked. HHO gas makes all kinds of crazy claims that need to be debunked. That the article needs work is not criteria for deletion. Every time we try to write a neutral article to debunk this stuff, Nomen comes in, disrupts the article with pseudoskeptical garbage, and nominates it for deletion. Why are you supporting this if you claim to want a neutral scientific treatment of the subject? — Omegatron 17:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HHO

"To be honest, the primary reason for delete was not only this, but also that there were so many POV-pushing editors continually editing the article to make it appear that this was reputable"

I figured as much. Can you give some examples of this POV editing and name the POV-pushing editors? I'm of course referring to edits in the past few months, not in the previous versions of the article. — Omegatron 23:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:HHO gas redux

Frankly, I found it ironic that an admin who keeps on complaining that I didn't follow consensus didn't do so him/herself. Anyway, I wasn't around when those redirects were deleted, so I can't really say anything about them. Raise it on ANI if you so wish; you might get more input there. I'm more keen in ignoring the deal and let the issue die out, unless something blown out of proportion happens. —Kurykh 01:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aquygen etc. Redirects

Hi,

I think Omegatron used the recently-closed DRV on HHO gas/Brown gas as precedent to restore protected redirects in similar, related cases. This is not something I would do myself, but I do not find it unreasonable. He probably thinks it accords with common sense; for myself, I don't see any harm done. Best wishes, Xoloz 03:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

In re. to Birthing From Within I added to the discussion. "Fair enough. Do I delete the page or will one of you take care of that? edited to add: And thank you for your assistance." It was not my intent to violate any policies. I will make use of your advice when I am able to dedicate more time to this. Thank you, again for your assistance. I do appreciate that you and others work very hard to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia.

Omegatrons actions

I share your concern. I posted it on the noticeboard. --Tbeatty 07:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AIV report

Thank you for making a report about 24.147.199.23 (talk · contribs · block log) at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. The concern here is that it was an IP address with no vandalism after a recent warning (with IPs, recent usually means within 24 hours). --Chaser - T 00:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The IP received a warn4 yesterday from User:Theresa Knott (diff [1]) and then vandalised again just now (diff [2]). OK, slightly more than 24 hours, but it's a vandalism-only account...EliminatorJR ^Talk 00:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some disccussion about speedy deleted article was started

I've performed some discussion with adminstrator Wimt before restoring of that article and he decided, that some specialists of pages hacking are necessary. Please, look at our discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wimt#What_is_Your_opinion_about_Red_Army_crimes.3F and explain Your position about speedy deleting of my article, created when I suffered from some Red army crimes hiders!

Ttturbo 23:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need some help

Could You tell, please, what was ununderstandable in my article I've tried to describe some hacking of wiki user:talk page?. Ttturbo 11:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baby Be Mine

I hadn't seen it. :) Corvus cornix 22:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. Remove the image, while you're at it, it's a fair use violation. Corvus cornix 23:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strained yoghurt

Thanks for your note! There is still work to be done here, though. For one thing, I am pretty sure that dahi and Bulgarian yoghurt are not strained, but simply yoghurt. See for example [3] on Bulgarian yoghurt, which says that yoghurt has the same fat content as milk. Our own article says that shrikand is made by straining the yoghurt, etc., i.e. the yoghurt has not yet been strained. Unstrained yoghurt can be quite thick, especially if it is made with milk that has been boiled down or enriched with dry milk. We need to find reliable sources one way or the other. --Macrakis 21:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both sources use the same (presumably copied) wording: "Bulgarian yoghurt is often strained by hanging it in a cloth for a few hours to reduce water content.". This clearly says that there is a substance (BY) which "often" is processed a certain way. That is, "is strained" is functioning as a passive verb, not as a copula plus a participle, as in, say, "Clapboard houses are usually painted." If the wording had been different, e.g. "Bulgarian yoghurt is usually strained." or "Bulgarian yoghurt is generally strained, having been hung in a cloth to reduce water content.", I suppose it could have been considered ambiguous. --Macrakis 22:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need your comments on the Bianca Montgomery article

EliminatorJR, you may remember me from the Victor Newman and Nikki Reed deletion debate. Considering that you are one of the better Wikipedian editors, I need your commentary on the Bianca Montgomery article. I recently gave it an overhaul in that I provided references (reliable), and real-world impact. This character has a lot of real-world impact and I feel that I can get this article to featured status with more formatting of this article. I asked two Wikipedian editors from Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas for their thoughts on this article and the Josh Madden article, which is another soap opera character with some real-world impact that I've included into his article, but they haven't responded to me on the matter (at least not yet).

I know that soap opera articles are not what you usually edit, but I would still very much appreciate any advice you can give me on bettering the Bianca Montgomery article. As the article is at this moment, the plot would be deemed a little long, but this is also a long-running character, in a soap opera, which is on television more days than a prime time character. Can you give me any insight on how to go about editing down the plot summary of this article, or if you feel that this article's plot summary needs to be edited down? Also, what else would be best in improving this article? Flyer22 14:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, EliminatorJR, I probably shouldn't have bothered you with this matter. One of the editors from Wikipedia: WikiProject Soap Operas that I queried on this matter finally responded. But thanks again for the patience that you demonstrated with me in fixing up the Victor Newman and Nikki Reed article, as well as the Nicholas Newman and Sharon Collins article. See you around later. Flyer22 04:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]