User talk:Fan-1967/Archive7

If I leave a message in your talk page, reply there. I'll keep it on my watchlist. If you leave a message here, I'll reply here. Fan-1967

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Previous Archives

17 February 2006 to 7 July 2006: User talk:Fan-1967/Archive1

8 July 2006 to 8 August 2006: User talk:Fan-1967/Archive2

8 August 2006 to 6 October 2006: User talk:Fan-1967/Archive3

6 October 2006 to 20 November 2006: User talk:Fan-1967/Archive4

20 November 2006 to 11 December 2006: User talk:Fan-1967/Archive5

11 December 2006 to 2 January 2007: User talk:Fan-1967/Archive6

New messages, at the bottom, below:

Machine.

Are you a robot, or machine? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.9.139.231 (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You a Chicagoin too?

Nice to meet another one. Actually, I'm from Aurora, but still. Dropal 22:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad

Everything on here is so confusing >_< Dropal 02:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I get very confused about things sometimes. Dropal 02:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiimail

You probably could have added a Speedy deletion template here. The article was still deleted, but a CSD could have been faster. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 04:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up on repost rules, didn't relise they had changed--Oliver202 21:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your WP:AIV report on JFBurton

Hi Fan-1967, regarding your report on User:JFBurton, that case was a little too complicated for WP:AIV, which is most appropriate for cases of simple vandalism. I moved your report to here. Cheers, Deathphoenix ʕ 16:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, and added a note there. Fan-1967 16:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly Come Dancing

Thanks for the advice - I was wondering what I might have actually done that was so heinous. Hammersfan 04/01/07, 16.30 GMT

Ta very much Hammersfan 04/01/07, 16.35 GMT

Hello ASAP

Fan-1967 could you help my articles? --4vo 16:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC) ASAP[reply]

from Pernambuco

it is Pernambuco here, thank you for defending me and for restoration of my User Page. I think that Paul is mad at me because I am the person who proposed that an article with the name Cokelogic should be deleted, and that was a page which Paul made, but I am sorry, I have explained the reasons, and I am just defending wikipedia's rules, that is all. I have never heard of Cokelogic before and I have never heard of Paul either, so this is nothing personal, I just want to see the standards to be upheld correctly in Wikipedia, nothing else. That is my only motivation and why I proposed the page for deletion. Pernambuco 20:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Dempsey foo

Just a quip here, I think he's doing this simply for the sake of being childish. Makes me curious though - is there anything in Wikipedia policy that would not be a ban, but equally effective at letting him release whatever anguish he has over the now-salted Cokelogic article, without harming or disrupting Wikipedia? --Dennisthe2 10:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this is not unusual behavior. An editor signs up in Wikipedia to create one article only, to promote something personally important to them. When it's deleted, they get angry and lash out. The real question is whether the user has any actual interest in contributing to Wikipedia at all, aside from their pet project. He was given a 24-hour block, which should send a firm message. We'll just wait and see if he comes back at all, and what his behavior is then. Fan-1967 13:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Speedy Deletion Tag on Neil Rackham Article

Hi,

I'm writing in response to your speedy deletion tag of the Neil Rackham article. Based on other articles that exist on Wikipedia, I believe that a Neil Rackham article is appropriate. If the contents of the article need to be adjusted, that is fine, and I welcome your feedback and guidance. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JLE1945 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Replied on article Talk page. Fan-1967 16:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon page

Oh ok sorry. I did not realise this. Claudz88

Please explain

Quintron

I don't know how you tagged this one, or what you were trying to do. It looks like a copy/paste of part of an AFD notice, but there's no AFD discussion article. Since this is neither a valid AFD nomination nor a valid Speedy deletion tag, the article will not be deleted under any circumstances. Fan-1967 20:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hang my head in shame...used the wrong template. Sorry about that Shoessss 20:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the warm welcome to Wikipedia, and the references. I will try again to create a stub for firsthand learning making use of your suggestions.dth 20:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Tilly's Article

We attempted to submit an article about the Tilly's clothing company. We were unaware of the rules and guidelines for submitting information to Wikipedia. Therefore, our initial submission was a general description of Tilly's that was, naturally, very sales-oriented. After learning that our submission was deleted, we went back and re-submitted a description. The new submission included a description of the company with information about what kind of company it is, when and where it started, where it can be found, information about how the company has evolved, a description of how one would categorize the company, the culture to which it relates, and the type of products--without being too specific--carried by the company. In order to make sure the rules and guidelines weren't violated again, we followed Pacsun's company description as a general template--without copying or plagiarizing--since Pacsun is a similar company. We felt that our final submission was a clear description of Tilly's and wasn't any more sales-oriented than the article about Pacsun, which can be found on Wikipedia and includes brands that they carry with internal links and external links to their company Web site and related industry Web sites and Wikipedia articles.

If we have still managed to violate the rules and guidelines for submitting information to Wikipedia, please advise as to how we should proceed and what changes are necessary to ensure an unbiased, non-sales-oriented, encyclopedic entry. Thank you. (Syllit123 21:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

RE: Problems with your article

Thanks for clearing things up. I'm learning more and more about Wikipedia every day. Sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for your help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Syllit123 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

kratylos-cratylus

thanks! SPC Knappenberger, E.M. 01:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)<[reply]

Could I ask you to look a page for its history of edits

Hello, two days ago I saw this page being created Rosemary rogers. I would like an objective opinion besides mine. Ronbo76 12:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this one while on vandal patrol. Sad thing, she has some books indeed published. This brings home the point you made that if someone was truly notable, they would not be obsessed with self-publication and Sharface217's observation that another editor would nominate them. I did not want to be the nominator as another user in a crosspost indicated that he thinks I am out to get everyone. I "am just out" to get those who self-publish! Thanks for your confirmation and I respect what you said about the nominator. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ronbo76 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I revisited this page as its creator did a major edit to bring it down to what now may qualify as a writer stub. Please see its talkpage for my discussion. I believe she may not have known about WP-Bio and this may have been an innocent one which is also part of the reason I asked you to review prior. I did a minor page edit to indicate its stub bio status. What do you think? Ronbo76 13:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your archive

Check out this if you haven't seen it yet. Cheers, Mak (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tomlobato

Hello! I just copied to begin a translation.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomlobato (talk • contribs)

Indeed, I made a mistake. When noted I created the right Portuguese page. Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomlobato (talk • contribs)

Knopfmultimedia

KNOPFMULTIMEDIA, HERE. SORRY I FORGOT ABOUT WRITING FOR YOU. ED & I ARE NOT REALLY COMPUTER LIT. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE OFFENSE. IN TRYING TO RECTIFY THE DELETION OF TOO SHORT AN ARTICLE; I THINK I MAY HAVE JUST STARTED A NEW KNOPFMULTIMEDIA. DID I DO IT RIGHT? 'OR WHAT NOW.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Knopfmultimedia (talk • contribs)

CHP "How to add wikipedia"

Hi

I only just realised what you ment by spamming using "How to add wikipedia" see i searched for this on wikipedia and seen add a article link, so I do apologize sincerly.

What is the correct Procedure for creating a page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cyberhostpro (talk • contribs) 00:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Answered at User talk:Cyberhostpro -- Fan-1967 00:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyssero

I've been helping out on the "new pages" recently and noticed that a user that you had had your eye on in the past (JFizzle91) has created a page with dubious validity in the encyclopedia, "Cyssero."

I tagged this one initially with the "spam" tag for speedy deletion, but he has removed it three times so far. I checked out his talk page and saw that you had already warned him about his destructive editing.

Now, I'm not too familiar with the procedure for getting someone blocked, but this guy seems like a good candidate, and I have an idea that you are more knowledgeable in that subject, so I am referring both this user and his page as candidates for you.

Thanks for your time. Alekjds 03:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dallasfilthy4

You are a douche.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dallasfilthy4 (talk • contribs)

Clearfield High School

Is there any way to contest the erasing? The constitution of Clearfield High has recently been modified to change the VP Assembly Student Body Position to VP Amabit vir ipse. Which is latin for "Love of Arts" to encompass a broader responsibility. Sorry for the "booger" I was frusterated with my denied attempts to change it.

Ducemus 07:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grandma is my cool mama yahhh!!!!!!!!

Image:AGMA logo.png —The preceding unsigned comment was added by YOYOJO89 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Dan0987

I'm very new to editing pages on wikipedia and would like to see content that isn't on this certain page, on there. It is basic at the moment as I have only just started editing it but will remove it and carry on with the editing using another text based program...I hope this is ok?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan0987 (talk • contribs)

I see now, how I thought it worked was that if the season one link came from The Crystal Maze webpage, then it'd be obvious that it came from there...on the breakdown of episode comment, I have seen another programme that breaks it down, but this is currently being shown on TV (as it's a new programme)...I welcome all queries and comments and would value more advice on how to compile a better page (or page from a link

"Humourous"

"Humourous" is not "a perfectly valid British spelling". See [1]. —Wereon 19:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those dictionaries are American, and to an American I suppose "humourous" would seem a logical Commonwealth spelling. Still, it's not used. And, as a general rule of thumb, if you are arguing against the OED, you are wrong. —Wereon 20:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Calm down both of you, I reverted originally because someone had vandalised the article by removing the word in dispute and suggesting that one of the b3ta founders was dead. Can you try to come to a civil resolution, either that or remove the word entirely, I don't really think there is any need to get into a heated argument about the spelling of a single word. Fraslet 21:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subject already dropped, as far as I'm concerned. It seems that the "or" spelling is always acceptable, so I won't argue it. Fan-1967 21:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... and relax, happy new year etc Fraslet 21:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oops

Sorry, I was trying to get rid of this comment. Guess people are just too fast for me. Sorry! - CobaltBlueTony 20:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

You'd better spend your time defending Cock from vandals than tracking your own user page! Such is the fate of all admins, huh? - CobaltBlueTony 21:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pay per chat

AskPoodle is the local search engine that created the Pay per chat concept and is currently the only search engine using it. This is not advertising the company but simply defining the pay per chat concept and its origin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lpereira74 (talk • contribs) 22:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Pay per chat

How should I define pay per chat? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lpereira74 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Pay per chat

The term par per chat is directly related to online advertising in the local search space. An industry that clearly you do not understand. Terms and concepts such as pay per click, pay per call, and pay per post are also Neologism and not Notable to most people on planet Earth. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lpereira74 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Not even remotely comparable. Usage of the terms, based on Goggle searches:

Pay-per click: Very widely used: Over 3 million Google search results

Pay-per call: Quite widely used: Almost 900,000 Google search results

Pay-per post: Quite widely used: Almost 400,000 Google search results

Pay-per chat: Minimally used: Less than 2,000 Google search results

These are huge differences. Clearly the first three are established as widely used, notable terms. Yours is not. Fan-1967 23:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

amelia

i said look at a hiragana chart —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Surfingchornicle (talk • contribs) 00:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

uttergunk

ROFL-ROFL-ROFL-ROFL-ROFL

         I I
L       /   \

LOL-----______\

L        I I

THAT is a roflcopter btw, and second, why are you talking to me? i didnt write the article!

crap my roflcopter got messed up by your stupid talk page! you shall pay! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Surfingchornicle (talk • contribs) 00:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

mourning teh roflcopter

i have created a new one!

  _____
  !    L
  !    O
  !    L
  !    Z\
  !______\
  lolololol

you may have killed my roflcopter but i made a lollersk8! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Surfingchornicle (talk • contribs) 00:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

angryhippo

STFU n00b -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surfingchornicle (talk • contribs)

Ha ha ha, what are the odds? That's very funny. Nolo contendere. I really don't know Latin very well, I hope that I shouldn't be too embarassed by it, I've just taken it as a hobby.

Ducemus 04:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know! 66 is lame!

I'm just not pissing people off like I used to! -- Merope 15:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try harder then. Maybe Guy can give you some pointers. Fan-1967 15:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

God Board

Hey,

I just wanted to let you know that I replaced your deletion tag for god bord with a Speedy deletion tag because this artcile just seems like total nonsense.. Hope you aren't mad ;-) Mystify85JEC 20:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stud muffin448

Hey—Preceding unsigned comment added by Stud muffin448 (talk • contribs)

Terry Dene & others

Thks for yr message. You will notice that there are a number of artists released on Decca Records (UK) with no article on wikipedia, among these is Terry Dene. As I do not have any original contribution, I merely created a link to a site that contains some info on him, as well as his discography. I was also surprised to find that there was no article on Brian Poole, or Brian Poole and The Tremeloes. Regards, imfred —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aliceinwland (talk • contribs) 16:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Oops I forgot

I forgot to thank you for not being mad about the SD tag ;-).. Aww I just like being kind ;-)

ok

i won't do it anymore—Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamapple1 (talk • contribs)

Swapitshop

Per the latest clarified WP:CSD#G4 guidelines, an article can now only be speedied as a repost if it was deleted per an AFD (or CFD, MFD, etc.) discussion. Otherwise, the appropriate speedy criterion should just be re-used (in this case {{db-web}} and {{db-spam}}). Fan-1967 18:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I only just noticed that. Then I tried to revert myself, but not noticing your change I just clicked on the second entry in the history, and reverted to it, accidentally reverting you. I've fixed it now. David Mestel^(Talk) 18:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

..

Sorry.—Preceding unsigned comment added by The Real Saints (talk • contribs)

Your edit to Bill Gates

Your recent edit to Bill Gates (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 19:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please allow me to create article 4gmonline.com

I am creating a list of online retail shops of India and need to create article describing each company , please allow me to create such acticles.

From Chicago eh?

Im a packer myself.

Mad props.

I don't know if I tell you this enough, but thank Zeus you do new page patrol. I can always count on you to accurately tag articles and warn the creators. -- Merope 21:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zeus? Not Hera? Fan-1967 21:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole damn pantheon. Hestia, too. -- Merope 21:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about a removal of an article

exchangeyou,

i have the domain exchangeyou.com and want to introduce it as a encyclopedic article and i'm been warned of a speedy deletion cos of advertising it.. well, i'm the renter of the domain, and if i'm doing propaganda.. what is 'hospitalityclub' doing? it is not hospitalityclub.org!

should i include exchangeyou.com as the title of the page?

I will try to make 'exchangeyou' more encyclopedic, .. tell me anything else if so

What????

hey, i have 900 thousand members on my site, do you not think it meets the standards.

MySpace article is advertising, so why cant mine be, dont be hypocritical.

Joe, YourPro—Preceding unsigned comment added by Yourpro (talk • contribs)

Answered at User talk:Yourpro. -- Fan-1967 22:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cites

Yeah about that...ha ha I felt that I should do something redeemable for my actions. And it's not my high school it's sort of a rival high school, and as you can see we organize well against them, I had no (major) part in it though! Question: In my Lobbying Article how exactly do I cite, I tried a little "fill in the blanks" equation provided by Wikipedia but I'm obviously too techno-illiterate to get it right I tried a couple in my article if you want to check out my incompetency.

Thanks,

Ducemus 04:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Ignorant Reply

How Dare you even try and judge my site. Id like to see you try to create it yourself, dont try and judge other peoples work according to how important to how you think it is.

I suppose deleting these articles makes you feel important. I think it makes you very sad.

I can write an article if i like, and the Myspace article IS a blatant ad. im not comparing my site to Myspace for one second, i simply said that just because i dont have millions of members it doesnt mean that i cant have an article.

i think you are deliberately trying to make my site insignificant, i dont care if it is to you.

IT IS NOT TO ME.

In future consider that other people might like something even if you dont. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yourpro (talk • contribs) 17:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Ok....

What you like or dislike is clearly relevant, my site is 'notable' as people use it. you are an ignorant person, i have spent time on this site and im making sure people know what it is. if you have a problem with that you are quite clearly an idiot.

i cannot be bothered to discuss this any longer, you pathetic man. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yourpro (talk • contribs) 17:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

My RFA

Hey, thanks so much for supporting my recent RFA. A number of editors considered that I wasn't ready for the mop yet and unfortunately the RFA did not succeed (69/26/11). There are a number of areas which I will be working on (including changing my username) in the next few months in order to allay the fears of those who opposed my election to administrator.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you sincerely for your support over the past week. I've been blown away by the level of interest taken in my RFA and appreciate the time and energy dedicated by all the editors who have contributed to it, support, oppose and neutral alike. I hope to bump into you again soon and look forward to serving you and Wikipedia in any way I can. Cheers! The Rambling Man 19:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC) (the non-admin, formerly known as Budgiekiller)[reply]

It's been good talking with you lately. All the best! The Rambling Man 19:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deletion criteria

I have just posted a message on Paulmcdonald's talk page in which I make some comments suggesting that you may have oversimplified the advice you gave. You may possible want to comment to me or to him. DGG 20:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I must admt I didnt check the article itself. The problem that I have with speedy is trying to sort out the ones that must obviously be removed from the ones some over-hasty people think should be removed. a few seem to have judged just from the title, and many use nn when there are more apprpriate reasons. If the speedy page were organized like prop, each day's would be one day, and it would take no more time to review.--just mean you had more time to do it. I'd realy like to check only once a day and not twice. I agree there are also a few pages that reallly need to be removed without delay, such as autobio pages that provide an excess of personal introspection that will embarass or harm the user later. The balance is difficult. DGG 20:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missy toast

Sorry; sent simultaneous warning message which posted just after yours.--Anthony.bradbury 23:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rgibsoniv

The Brian Wandziliak article is about my Economics/History Teacher who has influenced my life.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgibsoniv (talk • contribs)

answered at User talk:Rgibsoniv. -- Fan-1967 04:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Well I'm sorry for wasting your time then

Good day.

Trevorthemachoman

He vadlised the WWE page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MattC13 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Articles

I am rather a pop culture aficionado and I couldn't help but notice there are no articles on Princess Luciana Pignatelli (author of "The Beautiful People's Beauty Book" ... an iconic, ironic book by a woman who has long since become a caricature of herself) and fashion pundit and author Simon Doonan. How does one go about submitting an article to Wikipedia?

Thanks,

Flyrod—Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyrod (talk • contribs) 01:47, 13 January 2007

Read

I must admit that I do not know who made you a official censor however even if it was almighty god whatever I or anyone else writes takes time and thought and the least it deserver is that the all powerful censors read it before they delete it. Don´t know how to write my username, its vascofernandes.

Don't understand

If you did read it than i don't understand how you justify deletion. If you'd have said it didn't comply with wikipedia policy, very well, it's true, it's a bogus claim but it's true. Saying it said the same thing Active Criticism does is just not true! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vascofernandes (talk • contribs) 02:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Very well.

No it does not kill me, I just believed that wikipedia belonged to the universe who helped create it. If it was so than I see no other way to know how the majority of the users feel than allowing texts (essays) like mine to exist. If I'm wrong and it actually belongs to the wikipedia foundation represented by yourself (in whatever quality you have) then very well, otherwise you may want to reflect how can the owners of wikipedia express their feelings if you're (in a general way) thinking for them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vascofernandes (talk • contribs) 02:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Final

Finnaly, and I will leave you alone now, I don't understand what harm can a page do, specially since it is not trying to wrong anyone, I believe (now, this is just a single opinion) you over censor, trying to keep wikipedia so clean that it actually lacks heart. Vascofernandes 02:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Filthy113

I've already reported him for page blanking and template removal --Mhking 03:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know I promissed..

..but I really have to answer, for me it's not important how I feel, nor do I want come in and take over everything and say I'm right lets do things like I say. What is important is that all people, not just you (again generally) have the right to say, I think wikipedia should be a clean encyclopedia and I believe the majority of the users is on my side. The same way, I want the opportunity to say I oppose that view and give others (not force) the opportunity to agree, disagree or say anything else. Good Night. Vascofernandes 03:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zoft

Hi Fan-1967, hope it's okay, I removed the db on the above article after Herostratus's edits. Please feel free to PROD or AfD if you think appropriate. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 03:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AFD'ed. Fan-1967 03:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Astro boy1928

idiot—Preceding unsigned comment added by Astro boy1928 (talk • contribs)

Valgorth

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia by creating the page Valgorth. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Chris 73 | Talk 18:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, i did not notice. But thank you for your work! -- Chris 73 | Talk 18:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a leftover redirect page from a userfy, that I then tagged for deletion. Fan-1967 18:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops!

It's unprotected now. Keep an eye on that user, would you? -- Merope 18:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising directory

No... it is merely a STARTING POINT!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmozman (talk • contribs)

Not anymore. It has been deleted. Fan-1967 22:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deadmalls.com

I have seen you around quite a lot when I clear the CSD backlogs, I appreciate your hard work there in new page patrol, but in doing so I have often known your taggings to be a bit over-zealous. This is particularly true in the article I just posted, which you have tagged for speedy deletion. I will admit I am not 100% unbiased in this matter (regarding if I think the article should be kept or not), but the article clearly passes CSD A7... you are quoting from WP:WEB in your edit summary. That had no business as a CSD criteria. If you want to take this up at AfD, go ahead. Best, Irongargoyle 01:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article "Semen Fetishism" is sourced

The article "Semen Fetishism" is sourced "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bukkake&oldid=90217605"

What is the method which the article "Semen Fetishism" is not deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bluevainder (talk • contribs) 01:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Limelight Networks

I made several changes to Limelight Networks, and I think the article should be okay now, with notability adequately established. --Eastmain 02:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...

you just deleted my article of foop. I am foop so im not attacking anyone. im just showing myself to the world. because it is the truth

sorry i didnt read ur message thuroghly. i understand why you blocked it now i shall stop trying to get this on the site. i apologize for my rude behavior

ur mean im never going on again. and to think i was going to donate 5 dollars.

Edit War Unnecessary

This is supposed to be an encyclopedia where we share knowledge. Just because you disagree...Yer Wrong 19:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia for sharing actual facts, not dishonestly pretending opinions are facts. Fan-1967 19:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont tell YOU how to edit!

Again, just because you disagree..Yer Wrong 19:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Titipag

you are right.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Titipag (talk • contribs) 02:18, 15 January 2007

Veto of speed deletition for Zudeo.com

VETO: zudeo.com is a completely new methodology of selling video streams and needs to be documented in wikipedia. It also need to be in category "video hosting" to allow a complete overview of video hosting services. -- Michael Janich 04:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zudeo.com

A tag has been placed on Zudeo.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

Please see Wikipedia:Notability (web). -- Fan-1967 02:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many websites claim to be significant because of new technology, or new marketing methods, or because they are about a significant subject. None of these factors are relevant to the standards set at Wikipedia:Notability (web). I recommend you read those standards.

The simple fact is that, since grokster, there have been untold thousands of startups of file-sharing websites. The measure of their notability is in their staying power, and the attention they receive from the market and the public. This site has yet to demonstrate either. Fan-1967 04:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you did any research on how this concept is new. I don't think you should be that quick to click on the delete button.

Anyway: we've both missed the "zudeo" article and this is now redirected. It **IS** important enough. Please be more careful

with your quick delete opinion. THANKS -- Michael Janich 06:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the newness of the concept is irrelevant. What the new article has, not in the previous version, is indication of serious attention from the press. You didn't actually bother to read the Notability definition above, did you? Fan-1967 06:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Slvd

This user repeatedly changes {{notenglish}} to {{db-notenglish}} under many usernames, see here for some context. I have blocked the new account indefinitely and filed a new checkuser request. Please block accounts with this behaviour on sight and list them for checkuser or contact Mackensen. Thank you, Kusma (討論) 10:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

216.107.197.133 (talk · contribs)

Doo eet! - CobaltBlueTony 17:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nicktoons World Online

You win. Close my article. Delete it. That's just one less article you will have in your collection of knowledge. But when my site is a bit more "Notable" as people keep saying, may I publish an article then??

Great! You have my full permission to delete the article now! I will post a new article for you to approve first when I believe the site meets standards!Dphantom15 20:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By The Way, How do you know what the site is like on the inside (I don't mean this smartly, but I am just curious) Do you have an account there? Dphantom15 20:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now. Either way, you may delete the article. Thanks for the words of wisdom.Dphantom15 20:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your warning of the Vandal to Sexual Intercourse

Just an FYI, if you're going to give him a final warning straight off for a spam post, use {{subst:spam4im|article}} as it says "This is your ONLY warning" rather than "This is your final warning". :) -Painezor ^T^C 02:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, given this pattern of vandalism, any warning at all is pointless, but I'll remember the template. Notice how many IP's were involved in vandalizing that article? All you can do is keep adding the links to the blacklist. Fan-1967 02:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I saw, I've reverted that article a few times already and have been back and forth from WP:AIV a few times already :( -Painezor ^T^C 02:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since they use so many proxies, AIV is of limited value. Worst part is, I checked the links they keep posting. It's a really crappy search engine that only seems to find other search engines. Fan-1967 02:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess requesting temporary semi-protection is the best way to go with this article... unless the spambots stop -Painezor ^T^C 03:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This one, and one or two others. For some reason they also like Leapfrog sex position, which has just been a redirect for over a week. That one just got protected. Fan-1967 03:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual Intercourse is now protected. We won. :) -Painezor ^T^C 03:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know that just removes the pleasure out of it. But Painezor? how can you spread your AIDS to your gay fuck buddies now? ='( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DengXiaoPing123 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Riddle

Here's my riddle- ---Lazylaces-Helping Wikipedians since.. um.. for almost a year! Lazylaces (talk • contribs Riddle 12:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not resubmit this article template?

Hey! I made a template for NPP that I use from time to time that says "Please do not resubmit this article. If you disagree with its deletion, you may request a deletion review." Would this be a template you would use? Should I create it on the Wikispace (instead of my userspace as it is now)? It's good for articles that aren't vandalism or vanity (and so don't really warrant escalating {{t3a}} notices and the like), but that I don't want to salt. Thoughts? You can write back here (you're on my watchlist) or on my page. -- Merope 20:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't {{Recreated}} already cover that? Or are you thinking of cases where that wouldn't apply?

BTW, I've found I'm on a number of people's watchlists. Somebody (can't recall who) said it makes for good entertainment. Not sure whether to be insulted or not ;-) Fan-1967 20:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, crap! That template used to be different--it used to be for only things that were created after an AFD. (I think.) So. Uh. Never mind. Of course, my template still works for me because I am an administrator and I ain't givin' them permission. -- Merope 21:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raises hand Ahem, yes it was me who said the bit about your talk page being good entertainment. Your admirers still provide good reading from time to time and one day someone will compile a book of the best insults and attempted put-downs you have had to endure in your time here. :) Bubba hotep 21:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I almost said it was you, but wasn't sure. Yes, I've had some fine insults from the under-15 set: You're a knob jockey because you deleted Factory: the musical. Fan-1967 21:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change the word "deleted" for "created" and it might ring truer! Bubba hotep 22:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zacanescence

all the writing was false info, amy has not confirmed that 'All That I'm Living For' is actually the next single, she said it at a concert which cant be considered as a source, she hasn't yet said it on an official posting like Evthreads or Evanescence.com, or any interviews. so im not vandalising anything THANKYOU!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacanescence (talk • contribs)

User:Priscilla D

I came upon the user's contributions when going through the dead-end pages and saw your comments on her talk page (regarding copyvios of machine-translated articles). Do you remember if you ever get an answer regarding her edits? I'm just asking because I'd hate to go through all of them (there are hundreds of similar pages, most could probably be deleted as nonsense) if someone else already did it. - Bobet 16:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'd forgotten about her. No, I never did follow up. My guess is that most are copied from somewhere, some from Spanish Wikipedia, which is OK, others from various sites where it's not. My impression is that her English is close to nonexistent, which is the reason for the machine translations. Is she still at it? Fan-1967 16:35, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, she is. Latest edits were from yesterday, and there's just over 500 in total. The most recent seem to be from the Spanish wikipedia, the oldest are from wherever, at least the ones I could track down are copyvios. Between that and the fact that at least at some point machine-translated articles were considered worse than nothing, I guess I'll have to do something. - Bobet 16:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. As I recall, she got awfully huffy and defensive when I brought up the copyvios, even though it was really blatant. Fan-1967 16:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spam account - global somethign

FYI, I blocked this account indefinitely. --Fang Aili ^talk 17:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal count

I was bored and did a vandal count for you. {{user vandalized|36}} sounds good in your userbox, I think. -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 09:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kitty09

whatever

u need to chill ok —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kitty09 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

dude

if its an encyclopedia why can i edit any information i want—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitty09 (talk • contribs)

then

y are there video games and music artists doing here they arent significant......what if i told you that ur article sexual intercourse is not important we all know what sex is anmd how to do it duh

yea

people that dont have a life like you odviously—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitty09 (talk • contribs)

Wow: Humans warn people?

Mostly I get this bot message within 10 seconds. For some reason the bot's not working right now -- oh dear :o —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.5.187.90 (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Acquis Consulting Group

My apologies for posting this article as it was. I was attempting to create a page in the same vein as Monitor Group, Mitchell Madison Group, etc. Please allow an undelete and I can create the article more objectively.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelinger (talk • contribs)

answered at User talk:Angelinger -- Fan-1967 20:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prods

If you're interested, I can probably give you a few hundred more

Oh Lord, just when I thought I had cleaned the majority out. Yeah, I've started the process, might just as well see it through -- I've already tagged somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 pages.

That's how I saw your Prods

Not a big coincidence, I'm afraid: for the past few days, I've been working off your Move Log, moving forward in time. --Calton | Talk 23:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is everybody spying on me? Bubba's got this page on his watchlist, and at least a few others do, too. You're stalking my logs. I feel so naked.

By the way, I quoted Calton's law (need to add it to the list, next to Geogre's) in a DRV the other day. Your comment about baby actors: They are not actors, just remarkably realistic props. Fan-1967 00:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Objection, your hono(u)r! I don't stalk your contribs, only your talk page. That way, I don't need to stalk your contribs because nearly every one solicits a response here! :D Bubba hotep 16:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Cohen

Subject of multiple independent news coverage, so not speediable -- but I wouldn't oppose an AFD. NawlinWiki 04:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not nonsense

Trust me, I am trying to help wikipedia just as much as the next guy. I have seen this around the country, and I think it is pretty notable. Like I said, let us see if it works out, because maybe I am wrong. Please do not accuse me of vandalism, I would be the last one to do something like that. Fortyniners9999 06:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merchants of Deception

Not sure how the communication works on this, so I'm hoping I'm sending this to the correct place. I edited my entry of "Merchants of Deception" and tried to make it as objective as possible. I'd be interested in some pointers if editing is still needed. Thank you very much for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tranquilize (talk • contribs)

Offshore Dedicated Center

Hi - thank you for giving the suggestions. They are helpful as I'm new on wikipedia.org however like that resource very much.

Your comments were valuable, however let me disagree with the removal of ODC term (offshore dedicated center). This is tremendous trend in software outsourcing - that's why I think it should be covered in the article.

Take a look at the few independent links highlighting this form of outsourcing:

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/Offshore+Dedicated+Center+(outsourcing)

http://ezinearticles.com/?Offshore-Dedicated-Center---Cost-Effective-Model-for-Web-Development-Outsourcing&id=99280

This term is already used by CIOs and IT directors and is popular in paper editions of tech books. That's why I feel that my input into wikipedia is valuable.

--Billystut 10:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response The issue was not with the article about the term. It is certainly possible that an encyclopedic artice could be written about the term. However, this particular article looked very much like an advertisement for one particular company, thinly disguised as an article about the term, and that's why it was deleted. Fan-1967 13:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scottaucoin

Have you lived with RLS? How can you say that surviving it isn't notable. That's extremely offensive.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottaucoin (talk • contribs)

I'm a survivor.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottaucoin (talk • contribs)

Irrelevant under Wikipedia:Notability (people). Fan-1967 16:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freeport, New York

Sorry about that last edit; the vandal was faster than me, and I accidently reverted it wrong. Paxsimius 16:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ID Media

OK thanks. My edit wasnt an endorsement of the article, just RC patrol. Ab e g92contribsBoomer Sooners! 18:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apple321

deuce bag—Preceding unsigned comment added by Apple321 (talk • contribs)

Thanks mate

Thank you for reverting my user and talk pages before. You were so quick I didn't even notice it had been moved! Cheers, Sarah 23:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing name of article.

hey how do i change the name of an article ? TusharN 14:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Blog looks totally fake to me

why would someone who has her own domain, janedark.com, with blogging dating back years, suddenly get a blogspot page, with nothing on it but a handful of phrases that happen to support otherwise unverifiable claims on a Wiki page. That stretches AGF way past the breaking point. Fan-1967 18:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does look totally fake. I don't know why the new blog was created... but there is a link from janedark.com to the bonussuger blog buried in one of the archived from December (wtf?). I suspect that the blog was created by Jane Dark or at the very least someone who is friends enough to get permission to start it in his name. Why wouldn't Jane Dark want to be associated closely with the content there? Plausible deniability? Speculation based on strong circumstantial evidence is still speculation. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody linked to the blog in December, but it wasn't created until this week? How does that happen? We can only speculate. What we can know for sure is that it doesn't meet WP:RS standards. Fan-1967 18:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's fairly easy to edit old posts on a blog. (Why in the world bother? maybe so the link is not noticed by regular readers of the blog? no idea) It doesn't say "Hay, this is my other blog" - It's just 1 word in a completely unrelated topic. It's all very wierd. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

userfy

I am constantly being accused of rudeness on Wikipedia but actually, I always strive to be positive (if only to say "put it on your own website"). In this case you could have told my fellow Croydonian to create a user page. -- RHaworth 10:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was on its third go-round, and was frankly unsuitable for a user page, much of it absolute nonsense. Fan-1967 14:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User: El Bastawisi

Why is this user going round editing other peoples user pages? The edits arn't offensive, but they arnt exactly helpfull either? JFBurton 12:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volante POS Systems

The whole article isnt' a spam article, only the last posting; I've made the appropriate change... --Mhking 18:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Debatable, but point taken. The article isn't new spam, like the rest of this author's contribs. Fan-1967 18:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. --Mhking 18:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

This may seem a bit odd coming out of the blue, but thank you for being a part of this project. -- Steel 19:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dog Man 64

This information is not real. What i changed it to, "Nige never crossed Korea", is. I feel the article created in the first place is vandalism as it is untrue information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Man 64 (talk • contribs)

no there is no such a dvd. please stop giving me warnings as i know more about the subject.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Man 64 (talk • contribs)

excuse me

i was making it into a good article not vandalism but thank you for taking an effort to stop vandalism and i am sorry for making my artivle to preseve as vandalism but i am planing on making it a good article. -Nate1028

Dog Man 64

can u remove it then coz i don't know how. also another thing, i dont know much about wikipedia but i know bear about staking euro papes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Man 64 (talk • contribs)

are you a person or computer? how long have u been a wikipedia policemen—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Man 64 (talk • contribs)

Dont bother changing that page. the information is offensive. but ive made it nice. are u a robot.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Man 64 (talk • contribs)

He works for the government and that information is classified.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Man 64 (talk • contribs)

screw you

its not a nonsence article you shit. --SolitaryMoterplaatz 20:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is. There is no such organization as the "Spasticted Remedial Profound Retard Association of Homosexual Midgets with Amputated Limbs". Fan-1967 20:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well

can i make the article though—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nate1028 (talk • contribs)

wow

so its a no to x rated nuns or x rated pandas—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nate1028 (talk • contribs)

ok

can you please write in english becusae i am 13 and i dont understand what you are saying—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nate1028 (talk • contribs)

PROPOSAL

anyone who rites liek this and delcares taht they are underage should be blockd. :P - CobaltBlueTony 21:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No comment. Fan-1967 21:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

raven rley

you posted some stuff on her page and i wanted to know is she the real one. i have found several myspace pages with her on it and several other pages of her all the pics are the same. and she looks like this girl i seen in williamsville calle airal z. i am courious if all this is is a scam to make a site to collect money and scam...well what do you think....± —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.24.144.4 (talk) 13:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Who knows? All "porn stars" on the web are doing it to make money. I have no idea who she really is, or which sites or myspace pages are really hers, and frankly don't care in the slightest. Fan-1967 16:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firstname Lastname

Firstname Lastname is better than this person —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SAStarbucks (talk • contribs) 16:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'm a fan!

Just wanted to say kudos for your sensible responses to all the nutjobs who attack you on this page! Er, yes, that's all. --Bonadea 17:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to handle new user sockpuppetry?

Hi. As you're already aware, I recently nominated the article Simon cobb for AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon cobb, which quickly got mobbed by apparent sockpuppetry from multiple single-purpose accounts (some of which created other non-notable youth footballer articles trumpeting that "he is good friends with Simon Cobb" and the like to try and add credibility). I try to avoid biting so in cases where it's clear that it's just someone trying to namecheck themselves or their friends, I often make a point of explaining things clearly to them on their or the article's talk page if they post there, eschewing generic templates if necessary, and in this case I decided to prod rather than just slapping a db-a7 on there because, strictly speaking, it did assert his notability (but that notability was low in the extreme). My question is, what is the most appropriate course of action in apparent "newbie" sockpuppetry cases like this? It seems a bit OTT to file a report on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets or WP:AIV, as I don't think there's a particularly malicious element to it, just a misguided newbie believing they can sway the "vote". Should I be tagging the SPA's pages with a sockpuppet tag, or is that a step best left to admins? I'd appreciate your thoughts on this. Thanks. ~Matticus ^T_C 21:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, on obvious cases like this, where it's obvious it's a nobody teenager and his friends, don't sweat it. You have to just laugh at it. Sooner or later an admin will see it and decide enough is enough, and close the damn thing. In the meantime, just periodically check to make sure they're not removing other people's votes. If that happens, drop a note on WP:AN. Don't even worry about the sockpuppet thing. Most of these kids will never edit here again. Fan-1967 21:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be considered a breach of WP:AGF to post on the sockpuppeteer's talk page directing them to WP's policy on sock/meatpuppetry, seeing as it's not proven (though blindingly obvious) puppetry? ~Matticus ^T_C 21:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a waste of effort. The kid asked his friends to log on and fight for his article. Warning them would be pointless at best, and probably just result in them causing more havoc. Fan-1967 21:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so. Sometimes I feel like Sisyphus when on new page patrol, and every time I give it up to do more constructive editing I end up drifting back again... :( Well, thanks anyway, and keep up the good work I'm forever seeing you do. ~Matticus ^T_C 21:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Teenage California

Dear Fan,

I am actually new to Wikipedia, so I would appreciate any suggestions on an article on Miss Teenage California. I actually thought I was providing information that was worthy of publishing. Certainly one could argue that Wikepidia is hardly a place where someone would think as being a place of "advertising." Would appreciate a responce. Thank you.

Since you didn't bother signing the question, or even logging in before leaving it, I'll respond here. Our repeated, almost universal experience is that people are totally incapable of producing impartial unbiased content about themselves or their enterprises. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

The notion that people wouldn't think of Wikipedia for advertising is laughable. A good deal of effort is spent on removing self-promotional and advertorial content. This looks like more of it.

Notable enterprises do not need to create articles about themselves. Others, unconnected with the enterprise, will naturally want to document them. The fact that no one other than you has ever felt your enterprise worth documenting here says a lot about its notability.

This looks like a practically unknown, independent state-only pageant having nothing to do with the well-known Miss Teen USA pageant. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to at least guess at the possibility that this article might have been an attempt to gain exposure for it. Fan-1967 22:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page you want to delete

Have you ever seen the zontar films? It seems you like deleting other people's articles too. Watch the films then delete the article but I have already stated my reasons why I think it is important. Would like a reply to this please. Just don't want to think you're one of those wierdos who get kicks out of destroying other people's work! (Ferdinand4321 23:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Well there's the deltic 22 website www.royalscotsgrey.com under latest news advertising the new zontar video. You can't reasonably expect me to find third party sources out of a hat like that. All, i can say is that I know plenty of people who have seen them and consider them extremely funny. I also wasn't saying the article should stay because it is on youtube. I was saying that it should stay because it is a perfect example of current trends in what is created for youtube in the united kingdom. I.e not chicago. If I went round deleting all the stuff about american TV shows and popular culture there wouldn't be much left because I think yours is some of the blandest in the world. You cannot operate as a self appointed censor deleting based on personal preference. Someone who posted a previous message on your user talk said you are over zealous. Maybe you should take a break and consider the fact that just because you don't like something nobody else will. It took me time and effort to write that article and I will improve it. Had you not been so hasty in requesting its deletion you might have seen me justify it. After all Wikepedia is for sharing of knowledge and useful information. That is why kids use it to do their schoolwork. It is NOT a place for people to share only the information THE think should be shared. That is not democracy. Although you americans don't like that word do you.

Replies to this on my user talk please.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferdinand4321 (talk • contribs)

Reply (also at User talk:Ferdinand4321

Several points:

An ad is not a Reliable Source. Have people actually written about these videos?

Why should we have an article about this and not the other 64,999 videos youtube gets every day?

Whether I like it or not is irrelevant. Whether you like TV shows is irrelevant. Those are subjective measures. We can verify, however, that there are thousands of newspaper articles and reviews on news sites of even the worst dreck of televison. It doesn't mean they're good. It means they're notable. I have no idea if your videos are good. It doesn't matter. I've seen nothing to indicate they're notable.

These are your videos, aren't they? You'd like to list them here in hopes of getting more people to view them? We call that advertising. It's not what Wikipedia is for. Fan-1967 23:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No the videos aren't mine! I don't like you insinuating that I would advertise on Wikipedia because I am totally against that. None of my other additions to wikipedia have been questioned. I simply felt that the zontar films, which I stumbled upon by accident were sufficiently well known amongst people in th UK to make them noteable. Unfortunately you don't have the UK perspective on them so you can't understand their notability.

I think personal view is important because I would dismiss for example darts as not being a sport but many other people think it is and so I have to abide by this. Many people think the zontar fims are funny and therefore you should abide by them.

Anyway, as I thought we were all supposed to be one big happy wikipedia family maybe you could check for the third party sources so as to make my article meet YOUR obviously very exacting standards.

But I know now that you are the kind of person who, no matter how obvious it is that you are totally wrong, will continue along your selected path. However know this. If the zontar article is deleted before I have had more time to change it i will contineue to replace it for as long as it takes for you to drill it through your obviously thick skull that it warrants a place on this great resource. A resource which you are doing your level best do destroy!

Again any respones on my user page I want to keep the zontar talk page clear of your ignorant remarks.

thank you again. please see the folowing link and let me know if it is ok.

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070123/NEWS/701230354/1005/SPORTS0106

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070119/FEATURES01/701190351/1026/FEATURES

can you please check the links i put up? Thnak you so much for your comment and help1

RfA nomination

Nishkid64 would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Nishkid64 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fan-1967. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

The last time I offered to nominate you, you said you wanted "maybe somewhere down the road, but not right now." I think you're definitely ready now. Please consider my offer. :) Nishkid 64 02:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

can u give me an example like what kind of article is ok? It's ok you make fun of us. We will be on this for sure. just a matter of time. thanks for your help again.

Thank you again for you help! From OnlineIdols

Woomoobs57

Stupid kids. TheQuandry 16:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You just wait for the IMax version of Factory: The Musical. That'll show you. Fan-1967 16:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starring Mikhail Baryshnikov, no doubt. Haha. TheQuandry 16:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dee dee dee

Ian Gerardo is a real person, secondly, The Chicago Bears will never win a Super Bowl ever again (As they suck balls, yes its true (Grossman's Rating against Green Bay: 0.0)). HAIL GREEN BAY PACKERS!

Signed, King of the World. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xowfmp (talk • contribs) 18:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Maybe real, certainly not notable. If he ever graduates from junior high, it's possible he might be notable someday, but not now. Fan-1967 18:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he has been looked at by scouts from colleges around the US, including Michigan, UCLA, Notre Dame, USC, Wisonsin and Ohio State. In a few years, you'll read about him in the papers.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Xowfmp (talk • contribs)

Make sure you cite those papers when the articles actually exist. Leebo⁸⁶ 18:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If he ever becomes famous, he'll merit an article. He isn't now, so he doesn't now. Fan-1967 18:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia sucks. In my opinion.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Xowfmp (talk • contribs)

Maybe if you tried contributing, instead of vandalizing and adding nonsense? Fan-1967 19:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

im very sory for vandalising the website i didnt realise it would save it. i wont do it again.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.37.127 (talk • contribs)

The Order of Ares

The Order is notable enough. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ares Elite (talk • contribs) 21:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

OK. Just provide sources to verify that. Standards are at Wikipedia:Notability. Find where it's been "the subject of multiple non-trivial reports" in notable, reliable publications. Fan-1967 21:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Order of Ares

I provided the homepage, that should be enough. plus im the Ares Elite.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ares Elite (talk • contribs)

Sorry, the home page isn't enough. Anyone with a couple bucks (or even without) can set up a home page. Does anyone other than you think you're notable? If not, Wikipedia won't either. Fan-1967 21:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Order of Ares

The whole Order is backing me on this, they say it is notable so it is notable.

Not by our standards, and on Wikipedia, it's Wikipedia standards that matter. What we have is some unnamed number of people, that no one else has ever heard of, who aren't even major enough to buy a real webpage. You have a free page on proboards.com. Nothing remotely notable there. Fan-1967 21:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lighten up, Jane Dark

Jean d'Arc,

    AOL is discontinuing free journal.  Friends refered me to various

free sites as blogger.com, blogspot, Huffington etc. Why on earth would my little life concern you so.? Kathy Knopf KHARMAKIDS (talk) 20:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]