User talk:Insanity Incarnate/Archives/2008/July

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Insanity Incarnate. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Mint Chicks Page

The band have asked for their page to be edited to be more surreal to fit in with their current marketing campaign, or for some other reason. I think many of us are adhering to the surrealistic approach they want - admittedly there's nothing funny about the amount of lesbian comments being used, but I think some is rather amusing none the less.

However, I can agree with you're removal of some comments. So my above statement is really devoid of any real arguement :)

"Surrealism" in an article isn't so bad, as long as it is still true (and verifiable). This is an encyclopedia, after all, not a fan site or promotional website. — Insanity Incarnat e 07:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Non-free image removed from your user page

Hello, Insanity Incarnate. I've removed Image:Xkcd philosophy.png from your user page, as it is a copyrighted image that is not available under a sufficiently free license and is therefore being used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. Unfortunately, by Wikipedia policies, no non-free images can be used on user pages; please see the ninth item of the Wikipedia non-free content policy and Wikipedia:Removal of fair use images. This image has not been deleted from any articles. If you have any questions, please let me know. —Bkell (talk) 07:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Alpha Mom

I removed the hangon tag, but thank you for checking out the article. I reviewed the speedy deletion tag that was originally placed on the article and found the article to be ineligible for deletion under the criterion mentioned (it was criterion A1 - little or no context). Let me know if you have any questions. Leebo ^T/C 19:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes...

i know this is really rather random, but I've got some userboxes you might like, so check out my userpage and steal any box you want! ~User: Sophiakorichi

Re.Scam

The Food Scam is a real scam. In this, "you" go into a expensive resteraunt, eat a BIG expensive meal, but you do'nt pay for it. Instead, you secretly place dead roaches, rat turds in the remains of your meal, then you threaten to sue the place. They in turn "settle the complaint" by letting you have your $400.00 meal, etc. to make sure you do NOT sue them, since a lawsuit will destroy the place's reputation. Now can you RESTORE that FACT ? I helped catch a scammer of that sort. 65.173.105.118 (talk) 05:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

User:UTisNUM1

You recently left a tag on the above user's talk page, kindly asking them to stop vandalising the Torrie Wilson article, saying that they would be blocked upon further vandalism. Recently, the user left this vandalism on the TNA Wrestling article. Would it be possible for you to tackle this issue, as I do not know how to deal with it. --SteelersFan UK06 20:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

My userpage

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. I appreciate it greatly. RJaguar3 | u | t 22:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Have a barnstar.

		The Original Barnstar
		For having vandalism on your userpage reverted by someone.

Thanks. RJaguar3 | u | t 20:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

AIV report

Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you. Specifically, the IP hadn't gotten a warning since a week ago and since it is a dynamic (portable) IP, we won't block unless it's gotten recent warnings.--Chaser - T 04:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Insanity Incarnate! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel 10:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The Counter Vandalism Award

You get this award for all your hard work on reverting vandalism. This award was made for people who are good at vandalism fighting, and you are one of them. Be careful, and have a fun day! BASE101() 19:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! — Insanity Incarnat e 20:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: November 2007

It wasn't personal analysis; I added references. --24.235.231.206 (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Even with references, it's still a non-neutral opinion. Wikipedia articles need to follow the Neutral point of view policy. See also: Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms. — Insanity Incarnat e 03:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the message you recently left to 24.235.231.206. Please remember to try not to bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.231.206 (talk) 09:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy

Do you really think that an article that asserts someone "was awarded a Distinguished Service Medal for services to Africa and later in 1985 he was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II. In 1986, he was given the Raoul Wallenburg Award for Humanity." is making not even an assertion of notability? A mere assertion defeats speedy. See WP:CSD. DGG (talk) 03:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see my mistake. I was looking at this revision, which I now see to be vandalism. Sorry! — Insanity Incarnat e 05:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Deerpath Golf Course

Hi. A bit confused. I came to update the Deerpath_Golf_Course subject I started and I saw it was deleted. I thought a golf course was notable and I was looking forward to posting more information as it is a very popular public course in Lake Forest, IL. I don't want to cause a problem though, but I though it wouldn't hurt to ask for it to be restored so I could update it. If not, no worries, I won't take it personally. I don't believe my starter page was about a person and if there was something I did wrong, then please provide detail so I can avoid problems in the future. Thanks! --Golfann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.240.13 (talk) 04:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The reason that I nominated that page for deletion was that it didn't give any (or enough) reason why this golf course was notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. (See Wikipedia:Notability for more information.) If you still think that the golf course deserves an article, you can ask a Wikipedia administrator (like User:Tone, the admin who deleted your page) to restore it for you. Be sure to include enough notability information in your request and the article so that your request will not be denied, and so that the page will not be deleted. Good luck — Insanity Incarnat e 22:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Insanity, thank you for the prompt reply. The golf course is one of the oldest in the history of the Midwest, as well as the United States. It is referenced on the City Of Lake Forest, IL website. The club was formed in 1926 and has over 20,000 search results for the term "Deerpath Golf Course, Lake Forest, IL" (to avoid unlikely match terms I expanded the search phrase to isolate this golf course in specific). From your response, should I be presenting what I am posting here to User:Tone? The information provided from Deerpath Golf Lake Forest, IL appears to be accurate and notable. The course is mentioned in the local news during the summer at least once per week if not daily. I read the reference you provided Wikipedia:Notability and had intended on updating my article with more information. I guess I am frustrated because I am trying to contribute and was careful to only provide what I believe to be notable information (based on notable sources and was gong to provide more but my article was deleted, lol) about a notable golf course which has been around for over 80 years. Anyway, any help you could offer or assitance would be welcomed and appreciated. I just need help and some guidance. The last thing I want to do is be seen as a user posting junk. So please help me better my work. (not signed in because not at my own PC, IP address should match though. Using computer in cafeteria. Paranoid of key loggers) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.240.13 (talk) 18:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Michael Martin Murphey Rollback, Why?

Why did you rollback my lockdown on the Michael Martin Murphey article? I have been maintaining it for 6 months. I just got a PDF from the man himself, who edited the original article, some newby went in and did a lot of damage, causing all kinds of bot problems, copyright problems, smackbot, which we didn't have. We are on a narrow course to bring this to a final update. A lot of other people got a copy of that PDF and they're chomping at the bit to make changes. I can't allow that to happen. They are not following Wikipedia guidelines for determination of encyclopedic content. I posted that message to allow the Project Members time to look at the PAPER DOCUMENT that the artist changed, added, and deleted. Half of it is not appropriate to be listed in here because it violates copyright. One cannot add a Billboard 100 charting of songs because that document is copyrighted. I'm trying to remove it and I'm having problems. I'm trying to revert the document the way it was before puckeylut messed it up. Now, you come in and wipe out my "lockdown" to allow the rest of the WikiProjectTexas members, including myself to talk and discuss WHAT in that 4 page edited biography is appropriate to bring it current. Please do not remove it until we can get the information in. It is a MASSIVE change. I am the only authorized contact with Michael Martin Murphey that can get the information that nobody could before, and I even have a photo they want me to upload and use on the page! What Puckylut put there is/was flagged for removal anyway. What figures? I'm trying to make some progress after a 6 month long hard fight to get access to Michael Martin Murphey. He has a very controlling business agent that's been a bitch to work with. Now that I got through that, tell everyone to hold on. Let me make all the changes in the article, then they can go in and refine what has been added. I would appreciate it if you let us do our work in the fastest way we can. Leave the message up on the front page until I'm done. What did I do that was so wrong that you had to go in 2 mintues later and undo it? Did you read it? I doubt it. JBretSimmons (talk) 20:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

You or your WikiProject do not own this article, and you don't have the right to order people to not edit an article. Moreover, that warning in the article doesn't belong there. If you think you have good reason to keep people from making major edits, use the {{Isrev}} template at the top of the page, leave a message on the talk page, and/or add a hidden comment () to the page. If you absolutely need to keep people from editing, you could try requesting page protection, but chances are that those people will say the same thing. Good luck — Insanity Incarnat e 23:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Help?

Can you help on the Dyslexia page? There is vandalism, but it won't let me revert for some reason. --dAnWoJo812 - mY tAlK 02:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Abortion Changes You

Hello, thanks for all you do for Wikipedia. How would I write the article to be more encyclopedia style, and less seeming of advertising? I'm sure my lack of contribution history is also sending up a flag, but this is my second article and I don't know how to post something without everyone freaking out about COI.

Should I become more active within Wikipedia before I begin to contribute original material?

Sorry for the million questions.Drapheus (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Read some Wikipedia policy pages like Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Spam for some help with making your articles more suitable for Wikipedia. If a page shows too many opinions towards one point of view, it can appear biased, and a page (like yours) about a company or organization may look like spam. You seem to already know about our Conflict of Interest policy, but if you haven't read WP:COI yet, you should do so now. In short, if you are close to the subject of an article, you should be very careful when editing it not to show any bias. (Another tip: You should generally write your own text for an article, instead of copying it off of another web site, which you seem to have done, to some extent, on your article. Wikipedia's copyright policy means that everything on the site is copylefted, and putting text from another source directly into an article as original text—especially if the original is copyrighted already—could be viewed as a copyright violation.) — Insanity Incarnat e 20:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Very helpful -- thanks a bunch. Drapheus (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Templates - thanks & question

I understand templates that have no parameters like {{welcome}}. But when I have to add something I screw up. For example, there is a template somewhere that if filled out correctly will give the user's name, talk, contributions, etc. but I cannot fill out such templates correctly and end up with several {{{{{{1}}}}}} instead. Is there a place that explains all this - what to put in as parameters. Is there a list of what is considered a parameter somewhere. I am not sure which words are considered a parameter and which are not in those templates. As I mentioned, I am still unable to fill out a 3RR complaint after two years at wikipedia. I tried filling out some test ones from the pages you recommended and only with the very simple ones was I successful. I thank you so much for explaining about the warning templates, as I had no idea how to find a list of them to use. So know at least I will be more correct there! Thank you! Mattisse (Talk) 21:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

All of the warning templates can be used in the form {{Name|Article|Additional text}}, where Name is the name of the template (for example, uw-vandalism1), Article is the name of the article in question, and Additional text is anything extra that you want to say to the user. The parameters of a template are information that comes after the name of the template, separated by pipe characters ("|"). In this case, the parameters are Article and Additional text. Most templates have their documentation linked to or on the template page (at Template:Name)—with the exception of Template:3RR. However, that template works the same as the other warning templates. For example, if you wanted to warn a user about violating 3RR on the article Example, you would use the code {{subst:3RR|Example}}. All of the warning templates can be found at WP:WARN, and there's a directory of every template at Wikipedia:Template messages. If you're still having trouble with templates (in general or with a specific one), please ask me here. Good luck! — Insanity Incarnat e 06:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Bjarne Reuter

Hey, sorry about reverting you on Bjarne Reuter, it seems we are both going after the same vandalism but I seemed to be getting edit conflicts and I ended up reverting you. I think that it is now free from vandalism although I'm not sure (I'm not familiar with the poet/author) and by the time you read this it may have been vandalised again. Anyway the point of this message is that I was not intending to revert you. Thanks for your time and keep up the good work. James086^{Talk | Email} 08:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[[List of The Office (U.S.) Episodes

Beat me to that fix - you have any idea why it was showing up correctly (prior to the change) on Safari? Reb42 (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pay for placement

An article that you have been involved in editing, Pay for placement, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pay for placement. Thank you. Igor Berger (talk) 06:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Terry Flynn

You're 16 like me. I imagine you're a righteous person already and have morals. Why didn't take a stand and leave that stuff I wrote about that racist scum on his profile so everyone will know very clearly what a disgrace he is?

Yours sincerely, Joshua Taylor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.183.209 (talk) 22:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Your edit did not follow the Wikipedia policy of Neutral Point of View. It made the article show a clear bias against this person, which, even if true, is against Wikipedia policy. Feel free to add facts about this person demonstrating why you think this, and let the reader come to their own conclusion. — Insanity Incarnat e 23:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Award

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your work tonight with fighting vandals, I hereby award you this barnstar. Good job! --Sharkface^T/_C 01:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Spam ?

Do you like gratis accusations ?. I don´t do spam:

User:Mac, who created the article, seems to have been accused in the past of adding spam to articles.

See from when I write to Wikipedia. --Mac (talk) 06:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I may have been a little hasty adding that to the deletion tag, and I'm sorry about that. However, please understand that this is nothing against you personally, and that I did not mean to accuse you of adding spam to Wikipedia, but just noting that you have been accused of that in the past. I was only trying to make sure that other editors who might see that tag would know of any alleged—and possibly relevant—problems in the past. — Insanity Incarnat e 00:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

why

Why do you wnat tro delete my page--Dohertyizzle (talk) 23:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I have stated my reasons at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long Island Giants. The page is being improved by other editors, so the main problem right now is with the article's notability. The deletion of this page is no longer just in my hands, but in the hands of the Wikipedians discussing it on its AfD page. If you have any evidence that the team is currently notable, please post it there; otherwise, the consensus appears to be "delete" and it will probably stay that way. — Insanity Incarnat e 02:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well can you stat the reason again? Also is this article hurting anybody? And why is it such a big deal if its up or not can you just like not bother my article and leave it be?--Dohertyizzle (talk) 01:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Because I can't answer for everyone involved in the deletion discussion, you'll get better responses at WP:Articles for deletion/Long Island Giants.— Insanity Incarnat e 02:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Mumbo Token

I'm just wondering why you have put that deletion notice on Mumbo Token. First of all, I would like to say that I wrote the entire thing myself, and it does not violate copyright. Now that's out of the way, I agree that it is probably not in a suitable format for Wikipedia, but it can be improved. I have uploaded it in its original state, and I fully expect people to edit and make changes to it - if I wasn't happy with that, I wouldn't have put it on here. Therefore, people can make changes as they see fit, to make it more "encyclopedic" or whatever. I hope that makes sense. I'll leave the notice up for now, but I'd appreciate some kind of discussion about this. Thanks! Avengah (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

If you haven't already done so, please read WP:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook. Mumbo Token falls under the category of "game guide" and does not belong on Wikipedia. It would be better-fitting on another website where a game guide would be more appreciated. If you have other questions about this policy, you may ask them here, or at WP:Village pump (policy). — Insanity Incarnat e 04:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy birthday!

I saw your username in my watchlist (your revert to Jack Sparrow), and, upon clicking on your userpage link (couldn't resist, such an intriguing name), noticed your UBX regarding your birthday, so I thought I'd just be bold and wish you a happy b'day myself. :D Happy editing!

Cheers, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 03:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC).

Georgiadogs.com

I started this page to describe a reference to an article on someone who played for the University of Georgia. Georgiadogs.com is the official online source for University of Georgia athletic programs. The only reason I created this page was because the text for georgiadogs.com was being converted into a link to a nonexistent wikipedia page in a reference enclosed inside "ref" tags. I realized that I didn't have to place "Georgiadogs.com" inside double brackets, so this page is no longer needed. Newbie mistake!

BTW, if the New York Times is worthy of a Wikipedia page, then why is an online information source such as an official university athletics program's website considered unworthy? Most NCAA division one schools have official sports websites that are chock-full of historical facts and stats. Many of these collegiate sports websites have the look and feel of a highly polished sports page with in-depth articles on athletes and up to date info on NCAA sporting events. The only difference between ESPN.com and Georgiadogs.com is the school's website is more narrowly focused. Should ESPN.com be considered unworthy since it's mainly focused on US sports? Benum (talk) 13:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

If I remember correctly (which I may not—I'm not an admin, and can't view deleted pages), this page was very short and consisted of little else but a very brief description of Georgiadogs.com. The page would have been more acceptable if it were longer, and provided balanced information on why the page was notable. — Insanity Incarnat e 18:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The Convo

Hey. I'm the guy who made edits to the convocation center page that you removed. I don't really remember what they were, and i'm not terribly upset that you removed them, but i do want to assure you that whatever I put there is probably true. I know this because I live there.

I am going to ask you this: is there a limit to how much information should be added to a page? This info has to be useful to someone, and I believe it has merit, though you can most certainly call into question the lack of references and external links.

This is all probably explained in the guide to contributing that your message suggested I read, but I really don't have time to make a major commitment to this project. However, currently there is no information on the page suggesting that besides an arena for athletic and performance events, the convocation center is also a dormitory for freshman students. I guess I'll let someone else with more reliable information make that contribtution.

Regards,

64.247.114.13 (talk) 03:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. If you have information on a topic that falls under these policies, as well as the policies of notability and neutrality, you should be bold and add them to the article, or suggest the change on the article's talk page if you're not sure. I reverted your edit to Convocation Center (Ohio University) because it was not neutral, and contained information that was non-notable and non-verifiable. — Insanity Incarnat e 04:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Greenday21

I see no reason to block. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I reported this user as a sock puppet because he/she didn't give a legitimate reason for the second account. I assumed good faith, that the account was either legitimate or an honest mistake, and really only reported it in case the account needed to be blocked, as a formality. However, I'll leave it up to you to decide what to do in this case. — Insanity Incarnat e 04:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry ocifer for marring the site

Always on patrol, I see! You have saved the Isotonic Regression page from being corrupted by enriching methematics. Good work.

So what if I don't care about citations. Zzzzz. But I suppose you guys do. I grab and use and forget. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.142.66.80 (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Michael Taylor, (Cold Fusion Programmer)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Michael Taylor, (Cold Fusion Programmer), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Michael Taylor, (Cold Fusion Programmer) is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Michael Taylor, (Cold Fusion Programmer), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 07:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Appeasement of Hitler

An administrator has already reviewed the situation and in light of comments on talk determined that the issue is a legitimate editing dispute and not vandalism. Please do not randomly insinuate yourself into the matter further. Thanks. 129.71.73.243 (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

A user has vadallsam thanks ! Planet66 .co uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Planet55 co .uk (talk • contribs) 19:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Ausgang

What exactly was inaccurate and/or biased regarding my expansion of the existing one liner explanation of the band Ausgang into a fuller description? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.176.209 (talk) 02:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Ausgang was biased because it was written in a way sounds like an advertisement of the band. The page needs to maintain a neutral point of view. Besides, the text is copied directly from here, making it a copyright violation. — Insanity Incarnat e 02:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)