User talk:Darksun/Archive 3

The Graham Roff Experience

YOU SAD PRICK, try and delete the Graham Roff Experience again, then we'll give you a punk rock beating —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbasswilson (talk • contribs)

Stop sending threatning messages, you checky sod. Stop deleting other people's pages. Get a life you sad cunt. Computer degree, I'm not impressed son, you need to get laid! X —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbasswilson (talk • contribs)

You were fast

You were fast on discovering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Skinner. How did you discover it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jocke666 (talk • contribs)

I was just on New Page Patrol and spotted it. --Darksun 15:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Chan Lee article

Hi, my article was deleted by an admin although I added more information to make it more notable as you advised. Also, I defended my decision to write this article by writing something on the talk page, it seems this was ignored and it was not even debated. Is this fair? Shouldn't there have been some kind of discussion over whether it was notable or not on the talk page? I assumed that this was what it was there for. Thank you. Hubbub94 00:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted by an admin, Rama's Arrow. You can contact him about it, or you could request undeletion if you feel that the article shouldn't have been deleted. The article still technically exists, but it is only viewable by admins - almost no action on Wikipedia is irreversable. --Darksun 01:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chozusha article

Please dont delete this page. Its now a stub, and others from the Shinto WIKI project will contribute to it soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean-Jin (talk • contribs)

It looks fine now. At the time it was tagged it had no content. --Darksun 12:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks!--Sean-Jin 06:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colin Simpson article

Hi Darksun,

Thanks for the feedback regarding the Colin Simpson article. As per your request, I have included two html links regarding the article and I will try and find more on-line references.

Carl142 14:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Darksun,

There are now four references regarding where the information on this article was sourced from. I trust that this meets your requirements, but please let me know if there is any more information that you require.

Best regards,

Carl142 15:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Darksun,

There are now five citations listed on the Colin Simpson article. Please advise if this meets your requirements.

Carl142 14:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it all looks fine to me. I removed the references needed tag.

Rand Kannenberg article

Darksun,

Thank you very much for your time and interest in assisting us with editing this page! Please contact us again as needed.

CJAS

Arnold O. Beckman Marching Band

I assure you that this page will be accuratelly edited by the people in the marching band. do not worry about them giving "advertisements" about themselves, as i will personally fix this if they do so. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihertyou (talk • contribs)

I'm not worried about accuracy or NNPoV, I just question whether or not this particular marching band is notable. I'd have though that in general, a highschool marching band isn't notable enough for inclusion (although maybe it could be mentioned on the high school's page). However, it may be notable if there is something special about this particular band - have they won a number of awards, or receieved significant press coverage? --Darksun 13:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it isn't very important after all. Thank you for your time. -ihertyou

Rieko Kodama

Dear Sir, I was in the middle of editing/Creating the page while you came in the middle and edited this resulted in me loosing a lot of my edited work. Atleast give a new page a day before doing useless edits such as citation needed. cube_b3 6:52PM, 20 April 2007

I disagree that my edits were 'useless'. If you view the difference I did quite a lot of work on the article. As well as wikifing it, I rewrote it in a more encyclopedic tone. You shouldn't have lost any of your work either - it is all in the history of the page. --Darksun 13:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've also just noticed that your original article was copied from http://sega-16.com/Sega%20Stars-%20Rieko%20Kodama.php - copyrighted material is not allowed on Wikipedia. --Darksun 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I was in the process of rewritting it perhaps calling your work useless was out of anger and as I am a new Wiki user, I do not know how to do alot but when I clicked save page a message came that some one else has edited the page while you were edeting it and I couldn't get my work back from that point.

There is no point in crying over spilt milk, we are working for the same cause my only request is give a brand new article atleast 24 hours before editing it. cube_b3 8:52AM, 21 April 2007

I think that you're perhaps trying to assume ownership on an article. You should expect that once you submit content to Wikipedia, it will be mercilessly edited from minute one. If you wish to develop content uninterrupted, you should use your personal sandbox before moving it to mainspace. --Darksun 12:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback, I did not know of this sandbox. I am also not declaring ownership on the article I just wanted a little time to fix it myself only, anyway now I know of the sandbox. There is one more problem for some reason the gameography table it comming at the end of the page rather then under gameography could you please tell me why? cube_b3 8:52AM, 22nd April 2007

Thank You

Neonism Article

thank you for trying to delete our article on Neonism but did it actually occur to you that every genre in Art has to be created at one time or another and as for what we have created it cannot fit into any other catergory. we have therefore created neonism (which has nothing to do with neologism or some shit greek thing, if you actually read our article and knew anything to do with art) before someone else gets there first. neonism is a genuine underground art movement and just because it cannot be found on google doesn't mean it doesn't exist (cunt). Your a "gamer"(sad wanker) and so musn't see the light often therefore dont realise that neon is all around you and therefore has a strong influence on the art culture at this present time. Thank you!

Try to delete that page again motherfucker and i will come to lancaster and shove your sad computer games up your arse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.83.48 (talk • contribs)

I think you should review the policies of Wikipedia before you continue editing. All articles must be verifiable to external sources, Original Research has no place on Wikipedia. I also consider this comment a strong Personal Attack, which is also a violation of policy. Please refrain from commenting on my talk page unless you can keep a civil tongue. --Darksun 01:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moongarden

Did you look at the main reference (Gibraltar Encyclopedia of Progressive Rock) before flagging for deletion? Please see talk page. Gekritzl 01:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did. --Darksun 01:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

* I'm sorry, I didn't mean just "look at" the link - did you read the article on Moongarden? No offense, of course. I'm sure you're helping the WP effort. But did you do any more research? If you don't do research yourself, you can't summarily flag for deletion, you should give benefit of doubt to the author (or take a couple of minutes and do some research). See WP policies. Gekritzl 01:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Darksun - I sincerely apologize, I definitely didn’t want to appear like my question to cube_b3 was a personal attack on you. I was just extremely frustrated when I was creating the article on Moongarden, and suddenly it disappeared due to somebody flagging it for speedy deletion - despite the fact that it had a citation to Gibraltar Encyclopedia of Progressive Rock (GEPR). So, while trying to reconstruct after the WP bot deleted it, more frustration when I saw that you also tagged it (again, despite the GEPR reference). As you can see, I finally completed it, with lots of references.

Clearly though part of the fault is mine - I should have at least made a fairly well cited page offline using an editor rather than trying to construct it online. I guess that was cube_b3's mistake too.

Another mistake I made (and I again apologize), upon looking on your Talk page there are lots of people complaining about you flagging for deletion - but today I looked further. To characterize this as your "main mission" is totally unfair, as I see after looking at your long list of positive contributions.

You asked which article by cube_b3 I was talking about -- it's on your Talk page, Rieko Kodama - cube_b3 said "Dear Sir, I was in the middle of editing/Creating the page while you came in the middle and edited this resulted in me loosing [sic] a lot of my edited work. Atleast [sic] give a new page a day before doing useless edits such as citation needed."

Again, my apologies. Note that Wikipedia official policy ([1]) says (regarding deleting) - "When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page."

Sorry about the misunderstanding. If you want, I'll remove my message to cube_b3.

Regards... Gekritzl 21:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DarkSun - I struck through my unwarrented comments at User talk:Cube b3 per WP guidelines on apologies. Take care. Gekritzl 00:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, I think it's clear we're both acting in good faith, but all of us are sometimes subject to the effects of Wikistress. No harm done, glad we resolved this on good terms :) --Darksun 13:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. "Wikistress" -- good one. I think we were both suffering from it. Could you go to my talk page (User_talk:Gekritzl), and down at the bottom, strike through your message and write "apology accepted" after (or just remove it if you don't know how to strike through). Thanks! Gekritzl 22:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rieko Kodama article creator

I created the article, why does it call you the creator!!! --Cube b3 02:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC)cube_b3 7:25AM 28th April 2007[reply]

What exactly are you referring to here, where does it call me the creator? Also, remember that noone owns a Wikipedia article. --Darksun 03:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Darksun is right, the first entry in the history of that article says:

(cur) (last) 13:32, 20 April 2007 Cube b3 (Talk | contribs) (1,855 bytes) (←Created page with 'In an industry dominated by men, Rieko Kodama is a woman who has managed to make it all the way to the top, becoming one of the most respected designers of the last...') —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gekritzl (talk • contribs)

.

Love Not Riots

Dear Darksun, no AfD is needed, imho - the article is much better referenced and easily verifiable now. It's back to stay :) Thanks for bringing into my attention! Cheers, Phaedriel - 23:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) --Darksun 00:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Controversila Reality TV Shows

The very use of the word "controversial" in the title expresses a point of view. Not everyone may agree that a certain show is controversial, or may think you have omitted a show they consider controversial. Therefore, the article violates WP:NPOV by its very nature and title. The context refers to location — until you read quite a way into the article, it is not clear that these shows are all British. We have quite a few reality shows here in the States, many of which could be considered controversial. I'm sure other countries have them, too. Realkyhick 19:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think as long as there are media sources showing that the shows are notably controversial (large number of complaints, major organisation speaks out against them, widespread press criticism), then it shouldn't violate NPOV. We have similar articles that are acceptable as long as they're correctly sourced, such as the Video Game Flops list. Furthermore, not all the shows in the list are British (but most of them are because living in the UK I know more examples of controversial reality tv shows that made the news). Each show states the country of origin, as well as the UK there are also shows from the US and the Netherlands --Darksun 19:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Hi, I've noticed that you have been referring to biased points of view and edits as POV. POV is not the opposite of NPOV. In fact, NPOV is POV because it is a neutral point of view. Help:Describing points of view#Usage noteExplains it a little better. Also, please don't take this wrongly as my nitpicking or targeting anyone. Your edits are rather helpful and it is just easier for everyone to all be on the right page.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I'll try and be more clear in my edit summaries and comments in future. --Darksun 18:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nose Picking

Hello. You wrote me the following some weeks ago: "Just to check, can you confirm that the person featured in this photo gave permission to be used on Wikipedia in this way? If so, can you make a note of that on the image details page --Darksun 16:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)" Sorry, hadn't checked in until just now. Yes, the individual pictured in the "Nose Picking" article was a friend of mine who gave permission to use it. (Other than stating that, I don't know how to prove the point in a text discussion.) It all seems to be moot anyway, being that someone removed the picture from the article. It wasn't that important to me anyway -- just trying to add color to an amusing Wikipedia entry. Harmanx 19:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Thomas (Information Commissioner)

Thanks for creating Richard Thomas (Information Commissioner). Articles like this are all too often neglected. Christopher Connor 18:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the comment, the article could do with a lot of expanding though. Hopefully I, or someone else, will get around to it at some point. --Darksun 19:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smalltown Djs

Hi Darksun - I referenced my Smalltown Djs post - you'll have to excuse my inexperience on Wikipedia. Has it improved the validiity of the post? --Peteemes (talk) (UTC)

Comedown (drugs)

Hi Darksun, after reading your statement and more about it, I agree that I acted in error. It may be worth mentioning in the article that a comedown can occur without addiction. Do you think the re-categorization of the article in Category:Substance-related disorders is acceptable? --Uthbrian (talk) 01:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deeds of Flesh

I have added in three links to prove the bands notability (I'll list them here as well). I hope that this clears up any issues of their notability, or lack there-of. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I won't remove the template yet, however, as I feel you should have a look through the links before that happens... I really don't want to start an edit war, and I'm sure you don't either.

The links are as follows:-

Hole in the wall 13:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me, feel free to remove the template. --Darksun 14:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have done, and thanks for bringing it to my attention. Hole in the wall 14:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging of MoPo

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on MoPo. I do not think that MoPo fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because a "movement" unlike an individual or firm, is IMO not covcered by WP:CSD#A7. i have replaced the speedy delete tag by a {{prod}} tag. I request that you consider not re-tagging MoPo for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk) 16:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but unless any sources are provided, I can't see this having a snowball's chance in hell of surviving an AfD, so I thought a speedy would be appropriate. --Darksun 16:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is exactly what WP:PROD is for. DES ^(talk) 17:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Puzzle Potato

I know what you mean but please respect that I am very busy and it will take time for me to create an article. I just want ot do a good job on it

-Also the only reason that there was no content except templates was because I just created the article 2 minutes ago and I ws putting a notice on the talk page at the time

I will begin constructing the article now and I will consider removing the inuse template after a few hours

Thanks for expressing your concern

-Cheers

--AragornSonOfArathorn 17:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that an administrator has now deleted this page. As I suggested in my message to you, consider developing future pages in your userspace, that way the articles generally won't be deleted or edited while you are developing them. --Darksun 17:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Osu

Yes, that section of the article looked suspect to me, I have no idea who pasted it there. I moved it to its own article to keep the main article short, thanks for pointing out that it was copy pasted. It will be removed in time. Imbelieve 21:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol

Yup, no problem. Just deciding what to do with Kanta --NeilN 21:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a horribly written article but doesn't really match any speedy criteria. Add a note to completely rewrite or prod? --NeilN 21:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it as speedy (non notable bio). The CSD allow us to quite easily speedy vanity pages and such, but they're a little lacking when it comes to some of the other stuff on WP:NOT - that Biskkake article, and a number of neologisms I've encountered being good cases. --Darksun 21:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The WP:CSD are not intented to cover all the aspects of WP:NOT, only the ones that are both the most clearcut (needing the least in judgemnt calls) and that also come up often enough that a speedy criterion removes a significant burden from WP:AFD see WT:CSD and its archives for extended discussion on this. Note also that {{prod}} is very useful in such cases. DES ^(talk) 22:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Production leveling page move

thanks and ditto. i had forgoten the process and have already requested the deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Facius (talk • contribs)

Lancaster

Yep, heading into my third year at Lancaster although I'm going to be a fresher again! Taken me two years to realise quite how bad a decision Philosophy, Politics and Economics was, so starting again with Business Studies. Furnessian here, yourself? (Edit: Maybe I should read profiles first in future! Have a couple of friends in Grizedale; will be interesting to see what they make of it!) --Earl CG 21:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Speedy deletion of MusicMarker page

Hello,

I added a hangon tag on the MusicMarker article. I rewrote the article to make it more encyclopedic. Here are some sources to add to MusicMarker's credibility:

www.musicmarker.com

http://www.hottopic.com/hottopic/store/product.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302028458&PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=845524442161817&bmUID=1185267721389

http://www.myvirtualzone.com/detail.aspx?ID=14286

http://reviews.cnet.com/mp3-player-accessories/musicmarker-now/4505-6519_7-32473783.html

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by EinfachToll101 (talk • contribs)

The article was already deleted by an administrator - but if you recreate it using those sources, it should be sufficient to avoid speedy deletion at least --Darksun 10:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chocolate Rain

If you really care about wikipedia, don't delete the chocolate rain entry. Its bulklshit. It informs those who read it (self-included, after I googled the cache), and harms no-one who doesn't.

Bottom line: Chocolate Rain is all over Youtube and has been featured on nationally syndicated radio shows, and thousands of people are coming to wikipedia for info on it. "Noteworthy" is of anything, a gauge of what people are interested in reading about. And regardless of what self-appointed tastemakers think, Chocolate Rain currently fits that criterion.

I'm reinstating it. I won't remove delte tags again. But ask yourself..why in the hell do you insist on re-entering them in the first place? What purpose does it serve? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffjrstewart (talk • contribs)

The reason I insist on tagging it is that it unquestioningly meets CSD G4 and is tagged as such. Had I been aware of the original AFD, I may have been inclined to vote merge or even keep, depending on the relevance of the sources. If you feel it should be reinstated, the correct thing to do is follow the deletion review process - generally, actions of Wikipedia shouldn't be undertaken if they are against community consensus. --Darksun 13:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

It'd be better to merge them in one article, especially in BBC Radio.Thanks --NAHID 17:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly, but I don't think BBC Radio is an appropriate article. You could suggest a merge to the original author, but I can't think of an appropriate title off the top of my head. Either way, a radio show, especially one broadcase on a major national radio station, does not meet the CSD. Darksun 17:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short-lived BBC Radio shows

I have tagged a couple of these in the last little while. There are a number more in the New Pages. If these do not fit speedy, (and I think they do), what is your suggestion? The articles almost call the various shows "non notable" in their wording. The references are bare. I did one with tags but there are a number and maybe they should be dealt with as a group or whatever. I'll quit with them until I see a common approach to these stubs. Cheers! --Stormbay 23:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion would be to merge them into a single article, or mass AFD them. See if the author has any other suggestions. --Darksun 23:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music Marker, Ltd.

I need to change the title of this entry. As it turns out the company should be written like this "MusicMarker Ltd." The difference is no comma and no space between Music & Marker. How can I edit the title?

Thanks

See WP:MOVE for instructions on moving pages. --Darksun 13:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DUFF

OK, I will send to AFD. NawlinWiki 12:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on G.P.U.T. Article

I have added the {hagon} notice as requested, and have put my reason on my disuccsion page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babahot (talk • contribs)

Tyler Redick article

Look, this article isn't full of lies, you can talk to Tyler on his Wikipedia account User:MessingwithPiggsy this is all legit, i swear. Sean mc Sean 20:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never said it was full of lies. It has been tagged for speedy deletion because it fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines, specifically those concerning biographies. --Darksun 20:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Fearn

Hoaxes aren't a criterion for speedy deletion, but non-notability is. Deb 21:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...Oh, and so is personal attack, which this unquestionably is. Deb 21:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: M62

Thank you very much :) I'm hoping to get it up to FA by September. Also, you might want to join the motorway WikiProject. Will ^(talk) 00:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Echobinary

A mistake. Sorry. Now gone. -- Beardo 17:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spermipedia

Intelectual Masterbation to quote Wikipedia as fact with the only other referances being numerous other sites that mirror Wikipedia content and or Answer sites that have often false answers from Wikipedia.

This is known as Intelectual Masterbation or Spemipedia for short.