User talk:CovenantD/Misc. Archives 1

Page moves

Please take a moment to review the requested moves guidelines. When a page is listed there, it should not be moved in the middle of that discussion. If there is consensus at the conclusion of the voting period, it will be moved accordingly. Please don't merge the requested move voting into previous discussion as it muddies things and makes it difficult to determine whether there is a consensus for a move. I know you don't like the current title of the SD abortion bill page, and I don't think it's the best one either, but please let the requested move process run its course. Jonathunder 21:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the page now would be premature; discussion is very much still ongoing. While that proceeds, you might want to check out the naming guidelines and policies linked to at requested moves. Jonathunder 22:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen (and facilitated) a large number of page move debates and my format of the page you refer to is very common. Often a page move is discussed in general terms, as here, and then a formal proposal is made and advertised on requested moves. When that happens, the pros and cons of that specific proposal are made under a new section. Let's just let this proceed. Jonathunder 22:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please let the requested move discussion proceed. Moving the votes and the comments together with previous discussion greatly confuses things. I assure you, the way it is formatted is the usual way for a requested move discussion. See the instructions on WP:RM and please stop disrupting. Jonathunder 22:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to add comments in the right place, but please do not mix commentary with a complete reformat which disrupts the vote. Jonathunder 22:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invader Zim

Hey, just want to know, are you a fan of Invader Zim? Cause if you are, I'll apologise for what I say next. First off, you jump right into the Invader Zim articles with (apparently) no idea about what the show is about, slap 'citation needed' stickers on everything that is established as a fact and is overwelmingly apparent to those who have seen in the episode or have listened to the commentry, reworded articles to make it sound like Jhonen Vasquez (the CREATOR of the show) is outright lying in his interviews and DVD comentries and ran off to complain on my user page about my putting dvd as opposed to DVD when I changed some of your edits back to normal (look up there, I even capitalised DVD for you). Admitedly, some of your changes did good, and you are probebly trying to help, but, you come off sounding as rude, as the person ... above me wll back up. I guess thats all I wanted to say, bye! Devilmaycare 16:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fine, my appologies and I have to (grudgingly) accept your edits based on that rule. That said, you should at least make an effort to be a little nicer. While we are doing a job (of sorts), a little kindness can go a long way. Either way, we still have some work to do between us, not all episodes have a page yet so we should quuit arguing for the time being and work on those. Later Devilmaycare 16:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

India Basher

No, sorry, I didn't check, but then who would have guessed Gwernol would have added this simultaneously[1][2] to two Log pages, May 26 & May 27? --Lambiam ^Talk 01:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish inhabited category

I'd like to point out a few things about Kurdistan from the article itself.

the exact borders of Kurdistan are hard to define.
According to Encyclopædia Britannica, Kurdistan is a mountainous region of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria, inhabited predominantly by Kurds including 27-28 million people in a 190,000 km2 (74,000 sq. mi) area
Encyclopaedia of Islam, it includes a 390,000 km2 area.
Others estimate as many as 40 million Kurds live in Kurdistan, which covers an area as big as France.

Hence why I do not believe a valid criteria can't exist. Listify, maybe... What do you think?

--Cat out 21:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think any and all such cats are inherently flawed. I'm not attached to it the way others seem to be, though, so it's not worth it to me to try to sway others to my viewpoint. I've laid out my reasons, and if others are too blinded by their own political beliefs to see how unencyclopidic (sp?) it is, then I'll leave them to wallow in their perspective. :-) CovenantD 01:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True I guess however if something is unencyclopedic, effort should be made to get rid of it right? --Cat out 15:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay Agenda

I'm unsure whether or not you looked at the article homosexual agenda which discusses the usage of this word along with its conontation. It will enlighten you to the fact that the term isn't really that POV - I hope :). Chooserr 04:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad move.

You see, we were getting along just fine, and then you go mess it up. Sure, we didn't necessarily agree, but we were communicating and cooperating, up until the point where you decided to try to get me blocked on a fictitious WP:3RR violation. Your refusal to assume good faith is going to make it harder for me to assume good faith when dealing with you. Now, very little distinction exists in my mind between you and people like User:Chooserr. That's unfortunate. Al 21:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Providence Mayor's "gay agenda"

When I pointed out to the gentleman in the story that he had been mentioned, he asked me not to identify him publically. I'll see if I can convince him to comment here, or at least to give me more info to pass on. I can say that the story I heard was almost identical to the way Cicilline told it, which is how I recognized it so quickly.--Sar e kOfVulcan 00:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kurdish inhabited regions (again)

Hey, I'd like to notify you that the category will probably be kept per perhaps some politicaly motivated keep votes unlike Category:Hispanic inhabited regions which will be deleted. --Cat out 13:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not surprised that the discrepancy happened. Just shows that logic is lacking somewhere... ;-) CovenantD 20:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Now what should we do with the category? Since it is very hard to get anything related to the kurds deleted... --Cat out 20:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the objection is that it's vague, then it needs to be refined somehow, although in this case that means the cat name has to be longer. BTW, you can just leave responses here. I'll check. No sense in having the exact same messages in two places. CovenantD 20:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you wish. :)

People voted delete to a category that had solid basis from a census (Hispanic one). As per that the category with no census to back it up should be speedied... I do not see a reasonable way to refine the category... It will be pov no matter what we try.

--Cat out 20:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You probably know more about the ins and outs of Wikipolicy than I do. From the feelings and politics involved, I don't see getting consensus to delete. The best I see happening is a rename to something less vague. Kurdish inhabited regions based on a CIA map? I don't know... CovenantD 21:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posible, perhaps: Category:Kurdish inhabited regions based on the map by the Centeral Intelligence Agency. Ah... the rant...

Politics should not determine what is wikipedia worthy, wikipedia is not a soapbox (WP:NOT policy) for that. However you do have a point.

It was fairly easy to get Syrian Kurdistan deleted (though I was not involved in any way). Turkish Kurdistan however is there.

These articles and categories in my view fall under Wikipedia:Content forking, however I do not consider myself to be the most objective person in treating articles related to Kurdistan etc... I'd like you to have a read of it if you have the time.

--Cat out 21:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't promise I'll get to them today, but I will put them on the short list. CovenantD 21:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus warnings

VANDALISM BY COVENANTD

Please refrain from repeatedly removing content from wikipedia articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

3RR warning

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.