Jump to content

User talk:Garion96/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19

Flags on MMA-articles

Hi, as someone who appears to know a thing or two about the use of flags on WP, I was hoping to get your thoughts on the flag-use on mixed martial arts articles. On event-articles such as upcoming UFC 97 and on personal articles such as Georges St-Pierre the flags are used to indicate personal nationality (as opposed to sporting nationality). The competition is not international (the fights in the US are sanctioned by state athletic commissions), and so there is thus no sporting nationality to speak of (in the US, see below). My interpretation of MOS:FLAG is that such use is discouraged and that they as such should be removed. The use was briefly brought up at WT:MOSICON and in length at WT:MMA but with no apparent resolution. Because of the guideline, and the edit-warring problems they bring with them for people with multiple nationalities, I want to remove them but I'm not sure how to proceed when so many (particularly IPs) seem to like them so much.

There is also the issue of some Japanese promotions being their own governing body. How would MOS:FLAG apply if they choose to display flags for some of their fighters? At World Victory Road Presents: Sengoku 7, I've interpreted it as being international competition and added a notice to explain how come some fighters have flags different from their nationality (US-born Nam Phan self-identifies as South Vietnamese and fought with their flags next to his name). An anon is currently disagreeing with me, wanting the American flag next to his name in stead. How do you think my interpretation of sporting nationality measures up in this case, and would such use comply with MOS:FLAG?

If you don't care/don't want to get involved I understand, but I figured it couldn't hurt to ask. Thanks, --aktsu (t / c) 04:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Images

If you read this, you'll learn more. Basically, the page is a FL, so all images need to have full information. For example, this image says it is more than 70 years old but doesn't have a publication date and says the source is another wikipedia project. this one says it's PD because the author has been dead 70 years, but it doesn't name the author. And so on and so on. -- Scorpion0422 21:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

From my experience, hidden messages don't stop anything, they usually get ignored. So why should I waste time adding hidden messages to every row without an image? -- Scorpion0422 22:51, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Template:Selected filmography

Hello, Garion96. You have new messages at User talk:The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome/Selected filmography.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Undelete

Query, Garion96 … is there a page of admins who offer to undelete articles upon author request? I would like to link it from this greeting message, rather than making a bullet list of my own … Happy Editing! — 138.88.91.205 (talk · contribs) 12:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done … Never mind … found Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles … my bad! :-) — 138.88.91.205 (talk) 12:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Chuck (TV series) checklist

Hello, Garion96. You have new messages at 138.88.91.205's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Klyde Broox

hey Garion96, just wondering what was your rationale for deleting an article on dub poet Klyde Broox, from wikki, your name came up as having done that. It seems then that you are ignorant of Broox's skills, and significance, as a poet.(First Dub Poet in Canada to win a non-ethnic literary award) You should google the name and if you're in Canada, try to go see him live. Also, you should read his award winning book, "My Best Friend Is White" He's arguably the best poem for poem poet on the planet. (72.38.0.111 (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)). CaribMan

I deleted it because it was a copyright violation of [1]. Deletion as a copyvio does not prevent recreation of the article. As long as it's not a copyright violation anymore. Garion96 (talk) 21:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining, how can i help to get a Broox bio up there? (72.38.0.111 (talk) 01:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)).

As an IP you can't create pages (why not create an account?) but you can go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instrcutions there. Garion96 (talk) 09:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:Allmovie name

Hello again, Garion96 … FYI, I have created {{Allmovie name}} to complement {{Allmovie title}} … it's cloned from {{Amg name}} because that template is currently protected, and I wanted to provide it with documentation like {{TV Guide person}} … anywho, I'm not sure how to deprecate the old in favor of the new … Happy Editing! — 138.88.91.205 (talk · contribs) 01:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done … {{Amg name}} and {{Amg movie}} are now the standard template names, with matching doc files. — 138.88.91.205 (talk) 17:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

More checklists

Hello again, Garion96 … here are a few more checklists for you to sanity-check …

Some have Filmography sections, but they need to be resorted. :-) — 138.88.91.205 (talk) 17:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

"fix per mosfilm"

Why are you deleting flags on films and changing their nationalities? Is this some idiotic new policy?

Cheers, Varlaam (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really seeing much of a response here. Varlaam (talk) 23:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Jack Nicholson

Hello,

I reverted your edits to Jack Nicholson as they removed lots of cited material.--gordonrox24 (talk) 22:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


When I see somebody removing over 5 thousands characters that have references, I assume it is vandalism. I still don't see how what you did was helpful.--gordonrox24 (talk) 22:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


Jodie Foster

How are her awards obsolete?--gordonrox24 (talk) 22:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I assume bad faith when I see an edit That removes huge quantities of information and I am not sure why the info is being removed. Thanks for clarifying.--gordonrox24 (talk) 22:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand fully. Sorry for the trouble.--gordonrox24 (talk) 22:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Awards removal

Hey, you have begun removing awards from infoboxes while the discussion is still active on WT:ACTOR and the awards may return. Don't you think it's better to wait for the final conclusion? I'm now thinking to start an RfC also. Shahid • Talk2me 09:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Well Blofeld has said repeatedly he prefers the section to remain, but yes, he is concerned about this being removed and yet present in the infobox. Talked to Wildhartlivie, and from what I understand, she supports the section coming back without the Razzie awards and the "other awards" field (see my talk page, correct me if I'm wrong). I think starting an RfC would bring a broader number of views from editors. I just really believe in the effectiveness of this section. Personally, as a reader, I found it very important. If the RfC turns out to support the view of the WT:ACTOR voting, I'll stay out and even try to help out with cleaning these up. What do you think? Shahid • Talk2me 10:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Major awards are those major in their own country. Filmfare is one of the most veteran and prominent film award functions in India, not according to me, not according to Wikipedia, but according to reliable sources such as books etc. I therefore don't agree nor disagree. This is not a matter of agreement. It's not really a matter of personal opinions, but pure facts.
All of what you say is reasonable. However, just like not many came to protest the removal during these two weeks, nobody protested their inclusion during these two years. That's why the RfC is a way I thought would help. Now see the Bette Davis article, How will you know that she was a two-time Oscar winner? the lead does not that. And this info is notable enough to be presented from the very beginning of the article. So I think, the infobox was a great way to present such info as awards without having to write it in a POV manner in the lead. Shahid • Talk2me 10:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't belittle you words and opinions. That's why I thought of taking it to RfC, where many editors can give their opinions even if they didn't even take this issue seriously. Regards, Shahid • Talk2me 11:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

re: Barnstar

Gosh, does it show?? Thanks SO much!! Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

re: Manual of style

Will do - as long as you tag your AWB edits as minor, so I can filter them off my watchlist! Lugnuts (talk) 10:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Cheers! I can feel my poor watchlist creaking as I type... On a related note, I see you're using that USfilm template in the infobox (which also adds the American film category to an article). Do other countries have these templates? Lugnuts (talk) 10:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Mainly due to time constraints. If it's not too big a filmography, I'll add the whole thing, otherwise, I'll just link to existing articles. Lugnuts (talk) 10:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi again! For info, I've created a few of the film templates to replace the flags in the infobox. A fair few countries are represented now (France, Spain, Italy, etc). As I create new film articles, I'm also creating the relevant flag-replacement template. Lugnuts (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

BLP issues

I will be gone for a bit because I am having eye surgery. Would it be possible for you to keep an eye on Mel Gibson? An editor has twice now changed the section under Allegations of homophobia. I left a posting on the talk page regarding this after I reverted his change the first time, but he did not respond to it. He removed the only valid source to a statement in the first paragraph of the section, adding an unsourced quote. There was a consensus some time ago to move the homophobia content regarding Braveheart to the film article and only leave a mention of it in the biography and a link to the Braveheart page. The rationale given was "this was all in the article before; I'm just adding it back. The Braveheart stuff was originally in here, not in the main article." He also added a paragraph about The Passion of the Christ first sourced to a dead link, then added an archive link to the page, which was blog. All of this was first done due to WP:BLP concerns. The change brings that back up. The other change today that was of concern was an unsourced analysis of the religious view of the divorce that has been filed. I'd surely appreciate it if you'd watch this. Thanks! Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'd mentioned a couple other high profile articles that will be coming up for lots of possible vandalism over the weekend and Monday to someone else, but if you notice, the 10th anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold is on April 20. There are lots of intense emotions still around about that. Have a good weekend! Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

New image project

Hi. This little form letter is just a courtesy notice to let you know that a proposal to merge the projects Wikipedia:WikiProject Free images, Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use, Wikipedia:WikiProject Moving free images to Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration into the newly formed Wikipedia:WikiProject Images and Media has met with general support at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Files. Since you're on the rosters of membership in at least one of those projects, I thought you might be interested. Conversation about redirecting those projects is located here. Please participate in that discussion if you have any interest, and if you still have interest in achieving the goals of the original project, we'd love to have you join in. If you aren't interested in either the conversation or the project, please pardon the interruption. :) Thanks. Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Personal note Hi. :) As you can see, I've signed up to do delivery work for the project. Images are still not my major element, by any means, but since my copyright work brings me into regular contact with them, it seems like a good area for me to keep involved with. Anyway, form letter delivered, off to continue playing mailman. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Why did you revert my comments?

It's not like I was lying, or was I? 76.112.25.158 (talk)

Please read WP:Civil and don't respond to comments with "Why the hell would you make such a stupid comment" or "dumbass". Garion96 (talk) 21:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Adoptee Category

Hello Garion. The adoptee categories have sufferred from overcategorization, with 20+ subsets, the majority of which are underpopulated with only 1 entry. The overcategorization has stopped people from seeing larger connections and becomes confusing. Additionally, we have a lot of people adding articles to the category who have no link to the main Adoption article, creating errors. We will have better control with a handful of categories, allowing us to better check for WP:BLP issues. I am now consolidating the categories into a handful: Adoptees, Adoptees adopted by family, Fictional adoptees, Historical adoptees. It's a long process, but it is bearing fruit.Tobit2 (talk) 23:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Rekha

Garion you can be really be a complete arse at times. WP:Civil by every stretch of the imagination. File:Rekha.jpg exists in the commons meaning that if the image is approved under that license then you are free to make deriratives of it. I did so cropping off the top left of the image and then you go and delete it with little or no discussion despite it being a legal deritative of an existing file and based on your own ever existant paranoia. Either delete this image too as it contains a supposed "copyrighted" image or do your legal homework. Files in the commons under Creative COmmons 2.0 you are free to make deritatives of it provided you attribute the owner of the image. If the owner doesn't completely own this image then you delete it. Common sense. You should know this being a so called "admin". Dr. Blofeld White cat 09:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Bot removal

Hey there. I understand why you're removing the archiving bot from some of the talk pages, and I notice that a couple of disputes have arisen as a result. One favour to ask, when you remove it from talk pages can you put in the edit summary why you're removing it. Just putting "rm bot" doesn't explain why to people, and you may well get other editors putting it back in as a result. Ta. Canterbury Tail talk 11:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

AnnaSophia Robb

Hi. I noticed that anons and new users are posting details regarding her cousin Garrett Pegg. I'm talking to this "Garrett Pegg" right now using WLM, who claims that AnnaSophia is his cousin. He says that Robb told him by phone that she would like the information to be included on Wikipedia, but I will not re-post any of the information if I cannot get ahold of a reliable source. He says that he and Robb were once mentioned in a magazine, but without the title of the magazine the information cannot be posted. He also claims that AnnaSophia is too busy to update her website with this information. If I can find any suitable sources, then I will add a citation if it is complacent with BLP. For now, however, the information will not be posted. Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 22:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Rainbow/Raduga film

Thanks for the help on the film page for Raduga. It was about to be deleted since it said only "1944 Russian film" and I came across the speedy delete notice while patrolling recent changes. It seemed a shame to delete an existing movie like that and looking at the internet info on the film, a seemingly important film for the period. Sadly, I had never tried making a page before and my efforts weren't completely up to film article standards. Thanks! Age Happens (talk) 05:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal of cleanup tags

Hi,

This edit is accompanied by no rationale and no work since the tag was added to improve the lede's coverage of key article points. I've re-added it, as the problem remains. I usually do this work myself (good recent examples include Chris Iwelumo and Gavin Strachan), and use these tags to help process my workflow, and that's disrupted if people go removing them without the accompanying work being done. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

image csds

I admit I am not super familiar with image policy, but when images I've uploaded were duplicated at commons, the original uploads by me were deleted. Did I just get the CSD wrong or am I totally off base? Beeblebrox (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Shameless thankspam

FlyingToaster Barnstar

Hello Garion96! Thank you so much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. FlyingToaster

You Might be Intereseted

Here! Have a nice day! ax (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed tag

You removed my tag asking for an infobox on Tribal Trouble. I'm still learning: could you please explain to me why, and what is the proper way to indicate it then? --84.24.102.41 (talk) 13:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I must have accidentally logged out. Anyway: previous post by me. --DanielPharos (talk) 13:40, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Ah, OK, thanks! --DanielPharos (talk) 10:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

ThankSpam

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.
I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU (talk) 14:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

~~~~~

Well, back to the office it is...

Susan Denberg

The image for Susan Denberg was obtained from Wkikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudd%27s_Women_(TOS_episode)

Savolya (talk) 14:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)savolyaSavolya (talk) 14:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Garion96. You have new messages at Talk:Adventure game.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--(NGG) 16:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Available for assist?

I need different admin eyes to help out with User:Ldeffinbaugh, I think. He previously pasted content into Wikipedia from external sources and tried to verify permission, but failed. That was all addressed, but now he's done it again. He also previously violated GFDL by copying content from one Wikipedia article to another, without credit. I told him how to do it. He's done that again, too. The GFDL issues could be cluelessness. I have no idea what to make of the copyvios. I've addressed the matter rather bluntly with him, but I would appreciate a second watcher to that talk page in case reinforcement would help. Since I'm the only person talking to him about this, he may not be taking me seriously. (If I knew that to be the case, I would simply block him for a few days, which might encourage him to respect copyright policy hereafter.) But he may simply not understand. Anyway, would you be able to watchlist his talk page for a few days and help out if you see opportunity? If not, let me know, and I'll ask somebody else. :)

(Meanwhile, I've gotten Dcoetzee's program to run Contributor777, and I've so far found problems in multiple other articles. Some copyright infringements have been obscured by later edits, but four more articles have been blanked and listed at cp, at least in part. :/) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Kind of busy right now, I will take a closer look in the weekend. I do have his talk on my watchlist now. What btw is Dcoetzee's program? Sounds like a very good tool to have. Garion96 (talk) 20:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

WoodAlabama.JPG

Hello, Garion96, you helped me before by explaining non-free images to me. I also need help from you. OddibeKerfeld (talk) keeps uploading an image of a Baseball author in a mudcloth jacket onto the dashiki page. I have discussed this issue with him on several occasions. Please tell me how to block the image from being uploaded on the page. As an encyclopedia, the images on wiki should properly illustrate the subject matter. I have no problem with the image itself, only that it is not a dashiki. Below is a copy of the warning a sent him:

The photo Image:WoodAlabama.JPG has been deleted from the dashiki article because the image is of Wood wearing a jacket. The garment in question is not a dashiki. A dashiki is a shirt. I am begging you to stop vandalizing the dashiki article. Many individuals here at wikipedia have spent hours, days, and years trying to maintain the article. We have many racists who vandalize it, and you keep doing so. I am assuming that you are not a racist. I explained to you that Bob Wood is wearing a mudcloth jacket. The garment he is wearing is NOT a dashiki. Please do not upload this photo again. Please take a photo of him in a dashiki, and I will leave it in the article. It will not be deleted. A dashiki is a shirt, not a jacket. Asante. Thank you. Trueblue74 (talk)

Please help me with this photo. He uploads it every few weeks. If I was too harsh with him, please tell me the proper way to handle these situations. This is the first time I have dealt with this. I moved the photo onto the Bob Wood (author) article. Did I do the right thing? Please help, I don't know what I am doing.

Filmographies

There really didn't seem to be a definitive conclusion and I had kind of grown tired of having to respond to what I felt was more grousing about me than the topic. The main recent discussion was in regard to a template that someone made for the filmography table head, and concerned the point that the table wasn't a wikitable. I noted on the template talk page that I had the primary person who had been testing the template on articles and that it may as well be deleted because it wasn't going to be used, and one editor jumped all over me alleging that my post indicated I had ownership issues with the articles/the template. That became the focus of discussion so I basically quit discussing it and worked on a wikitable heading instead. I was trying to sort out how we could use the wikitable and still use color in the heading without having to add excess code at the head of each column - in regard to the template, but that doesn't seem possible because the template locked one into a predefined column title and left a limit of available columns to what was in the template. Although I see limited use of other columns such as "director" or "co-stars" or (worse yet) unreferenced box office gross in actor filmography tables, there should be enough flexibility to use them if one wanted. I'm not sure I understand why no one has seemed to object to the over-use of color such as I noticed at Rafael Nadal career statistics but then has issue with a consistent color for filmography table headings, but there are those that do. There are those have issue with everything, though.

WP:ACTOR still has to discuss how to modify the example so that it has a wikitable class in the heading. The discussion simply was going nowhere. Lately, I've mostly been adding awards to filmographies that already exist and that seems to be well accepted, although I have made new tables on a few articles. There was no consensus to returning the awards to the infoboxes from the WT:ACTOR page, although that was discussed, so a lot of effort has been going into removing the deprecated fields from the infobox and placing the relative content in the table. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Formal Mediation for Sports Logos

As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

John Cusack

Eek!! Good call! Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

New stuff

Gosh, I hope it isn't because I have bad breath!! No, I think maybe it is because I tend to be adamant about some things and perhaps I am a little too much so. Or maybe I just rub people the wrong way, but I really don't try to do that. Then again, maybe it's because I've had so many vision problems lately (with some corrective surgery tomorrow) that I miss points being made. In any case, I hope not and I'm always trying to be a good Wiki-editor.

I've started using the template I made at User:Wildhartlivie/Projects Filmography#Filmography for filmographies. It uses wikitable with the color heading and hopefully that will minimize issues. I'm not crazy about having to use the coding at the head of each column, but once that is done, then the rest of the table is the same. I also have a page made up with copy & paste templates for filling in awards and nominations that you are welcome to use if you want. It's at User:Wildhartlivie/Award and nominations templates. I know that Rossrs and Pinkadelica both make use of it. It's a time saver.

I do have Michael Palin watchlisted, though I don't remember what made me do so. It really is in need of serious attention to keep from losing its GA status. It needs a lot better referencing, but more in particular, I would love to see the bibliography section cleaned up, the further reading section should be between references and external links, and the Monty Python section expanded a little bit more. If the filmography was tabled, then the awards section could be incorporated into it and that be cleaned up. Eeps, was that too much?? Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm a little cautious about the eye surgery, but hopefully it will put a stop to some of the vision issues that I have from becoming any worse. The worrisome part is that it will be on my good eye. This is laser surgery, and hopefully it will prevent a need for a vitrectomy, although I'm not certain I would agree to it. In any case, thanks so much, I willingly take all good luck!!
I'll look in on Michael Palin, I would love to see it back to a better quality, but I don't have access to a lot of source material for him, so I've mostly tried to protect it from getting too bad. And thanks, I like to think it isn't me, but yes, it seems some people have really become dogmatic in recent months here. The WP:ACTOR award thing almost made me quit, until I thought better of it. Have a lovely night!! Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

New stuff redux

Thanks for asking. It wasn't as productive as I'd hoped. She couldn't do the laser treatment she had intended because there was too much blood in the vitreous humor to visualize the retina, so her work was mostly minor and I need other treatment to help the fluid clear so she can do more work. It is frustrating, but then again, I've dealt with it for about 3 1/2 years now, so dealing with it a few more weeks surely can't be too difficult. Well, except for the obvious wear and tear on my nerves. It's so helpful that people are supportive. She mentioned a vitrectomy and I wasn't too enthusiastic. I'm much more amenable to laser surgery than I am to actually physically puncturing my eye. Small wonder, eh? By the way, I like the suggestion of your essay. Sort of a "sure I can, but why would I?" Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye on the Johann Hari page

Can this vandal be banned? he's been systematically trying to vandalize the page, inserting nonsense almost every day... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.145.3 (talk) 10:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Just a note

I noticed you had removed the succession box from Michael Palin. I really don't like those, but I thought I might show you what I spent ... 3 hours maybe? doing. For a peek at why it was so bad, look at Judi Dench for the worst display of the offending tables. This person probably means well, but geez. There is simply no place for that POV distinction or room for those tables. And that was mostly the best supporting actress tables. I did suggest to the person who made and posted them that perhaps a list or article with that would be far better (although I'm not sure it would pass an WP:AFD). I'm certain I'll hear about the removals. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I've always had a feeling my talk page was a widely read phenomenon, which is fine. :) I must say, Dame Judi's page looks much fresher and more professional without that clutter at the bottom. I suppose we take on one battle at a time and recently mine has been with a POV editor who seems to believe that as long as we mention every award someone has won in the lead, it's all good. Ack. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I concur. The edit in which you removed all those boxes, is one of my all-time favourites. Rossrs (talk) 11:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

F1 Drivers

While I don't really hold any brief for flag icons, removing them all would be a mammoth task - the standard has been to include the flag of the racing licence - the title "Nationality" links to "FIA Super Licence". -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Blocked user back

Hello Garion. As an FYI, 87.112.78.98 whom you just blocked is now back using 87.113.16.174--ponyo (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, and I will revert to AIV if it continues. I think that there are enough eyes on the article now that it will be sufficiently difficult for any IP to re-insert the material. Cheers, ponyo (talk) 20:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD

I've just nominated Beth Smith for deletion. Since you worked on it I am letting you know. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I must say...

You work much faster than I do. From what actor list are you working? I've been working on Academy Award for Best Actor, but I keep stopping to clean something or another up. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:42, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I honestly didn't think of that. However, the list page gives me nominees options that may not have popped up until much later. Sooooo, my list is about 5 times greater since I end up checking all the nominees. Ah well. Just as an FYI, I filed a sock case yesterday, in case you happen across similar names or the ones I've listed here. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
LOL! Actually, that could conceivably become quite a large template. Unwieldy even. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
By the way, I just noticed that you were willing to userfy deleted articles. At some point, could you possibly userfy "Phoenix Film Critics Society" for me? The individual awards lists are still here, but no main page. I asked another admin, but didn't get a response. I'd really appreciate it. Thanks! Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
That would be even better. I have a userpage with "templates" that I use to add awards to filmographies although I don't keep the pages per se watchlisted. One day it was just gone, and yet they are notable to WP:ACTOR people. I can add sources to it or whatever is needed. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, you're super fast. It looks to be in better shape that I thought it would. I'm off for a while, happy, happy! Wildhartlivie (talk) 11:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:MOSICON

Hi, I have no stake in the dispute but please remember that rollback is only to be used for blatant vandalism. Removal of a dispute tag is not removing vandalism, so please use an edit summary in the future (or discuss on the talk page). Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps, but better to discuss or at least use an edit summary. WP:ARBDATE, which just concluded, resulted in several editors' being topic banned from MOS over things over removing and adding dispute tags, so be careful. By the way, thanks for your opinions at this discussion. The consensus on the issue could affect many featured lists. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

There's no edit summary because an honest edit summary would read "edit warring to remove a dispute tag to avoid discussion." Oicumayberight (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

such antagonism and the general sense of intransigence is the very reason why people are reluctant to discuss. You can't force people to discuss, and telling them off for not discussing is not much more helpful. Ie, we're all volunteers here. While they are not happy with the issue, there is no apparent payback for an awful lot of trouble. Approaches need to be rethought. Or perhaps it too late for that and positions are now permanently entrenched with no scope for constructive resolution. Well, at least that is how I see it. --Merbabu (talk) 23:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

List of HIV+ People

Replying to your message, you might have worked enough on the article but you (nor anyone) do not own the article. The rules are set by Wikipedia, not you or me. If you disagree with this than you should not edit on Wikipedia. If you could have found a reliable source, you could have replaced the "unacceptable" link and replaced it. I've done it numerous times for other articles that have dead links. There is nothing wrong about that, but trying to indirectly say that this is your list because you have worked enough on it is wrong.--XLR8TION (talk) 17:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

    • Once again, simply replacing the link with an "acceptable" link would not only save time but also lengthy conversations just like this. Replacing a dead link or replacing a link with another one from a more established source saves times. Performing a Google search takes less time than talking on here. Edits are effort made by interested who take thier time to make a work acceptable. Erasing one's edits completely when an alternative method could have been taken to save time and maintain patience is considered to be more noble.--XLR8TION (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ad-Libs Improvisational Comedy Theater

I've proposed Ad-Libs Improvisational Comedy Theater, an article you edited but didn't created, for deletion via WP:PROD. --I dream of horses (talk) 16:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

AnnaSophia Robb

Hi. AnnaSophia herself claims to be in a relationship with Garrett Pegg; he now claims the same thing. However, I do not have an official source to back this up. When I initially asked, she said that this was private information, but it seems now to be publicized (albeit still not on an official source). Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 22:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos.
For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 02:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Cruft credits in Sleeping Beauty (1959 film)

Hi, I removed this list of credits because it's cruft. No other Disney article I've seen has this. Ice Age lover (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Why have you not replyed? Ice Age lover (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, but it really is ilrelavent. See this form example. Also the person who added it has multiple warnings on their talk page, mainly for Oliver & Company and The Secret of NIMH. Ice Age lover (talk) 20:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
OK so that really isn't a fair fight, but yeah I did give evadence. Can you change the protection level for Chicken Little (2005 film)? It currently is fully protected until sepetember, but that guy is just gonna keep comin' back, and it isn't fair to be fully protected. So please change it to indef semi, since you're an admin. Ice Age lover (talk) 21:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!!!!! Ice Age lover (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
FYI, that is yet another Bambifan101 sock. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

3RR

I've not made the same edit 3 times in a row. In fact User:Oicumayberight has made the same revert 3 times in a row and so is in breach of 3rr 86.42.65.193 (talk) 20:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry no we've both rv'd twice sorry ,no one is in breach of 3rr 86.42.65.193 (talk) 20:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok thanks for the pointless warning . 86.42.65.193 (talk) 20:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Blocked for not breaking 3rr? 86.42.65.193 (talk) 20:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok thanks 86.42.65.193 (talk) 20:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

If you're going to tell someone not to add flag icons to film infoboxes like you did User talk:Varlaam, could you please also take a moment to remove the flag icon instead of leaving it there? Thanks. 209.247.22.166 (talk) 12:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

What do you think I've been doing? :) I obviously must have missed this one though. Garion96 (talk) 13:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Garion96/Archive_16&oldid=1190128343"