User talk:Search4Lancer/archive1

AfD's for vanity

If you notice an obvious vanity page, and don't think there will be any controversy about it, then you can save time and list it for speedy deletion instead of WP:AFD. To do this, just put the tag {{db-bio}} to the top of the page (don't subst).

Same with nonsense -- use {{db-nonsense}} to request speedy delete in that case.

In both cases, if an admin agrees, the article will likely get deleted in minutes, rather than days. Check out WP:CSD to see what kinds of articles can be speedied. Jamie 10:44, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK. No problem... I guess the comments are related... sort of :-) Jamie 10:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of comments

Neither do I, and as my earlier comment that you blanked was more constructive I decided to revert to my welcome message. -- Francs 2000 23:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion on Hell.com article

Don't you think that marking was a little speedy? Perhaps I didn't write the article that well, but that's not a reason to delete it, it's a reason to improve it (and when I say "not that well", the article doesn't fall into deletion criteria on its quality). Besides, I cannot see how the article was vanity. Unfortunately hell.com is a rather mysterious site (and it's MEANT to be), hence any article on it will be limited to what's known - I don't see articles on other secret societies being deleted! I would appreciate some justification for the marking before action is taken. --Alfakim-- talk 00:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion on Dylan Evans article

I'm not trying to get into any arguments, but it just makes me a little sad that my very first page, which I did a lot of research to get the right info on (I even managed to interview the guy!), was online less than one minute before it was deleted. I'm talking about the "Dylan Evans" page. Now, you might not have heard of him, which isn't surprising, since it's not like he's Steven Segal or anything, but where I live, his website is catching on. I just wish you'd review the article again and maybe fill me in on what's wrong with it. Just because you haven't heard of him doesn't mean other people aren't fans.

Thank you very much. SugarFLY 03:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime :-D

It was my pleasure. I explained to Bradmaster0, that blanking or vandalism of user pages is never acceptable. Hopefully, that cures the problem. Happy editing. KnowledgeOf Self | talk 03:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RC patrolling

I've noticed you do a lot of it, I'm just wondering how you do it - do you monitor Special:Recent changes? The IRC rc dumper? Dan100 (Talk) 11:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hell.com

I see you previously tagged Hell.com for speedy deletion, so I thought I'd drop by and let you know I've just listed it on AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hell.com, if you're interested. Cheers, _└^UkPaolo/_TALK^┐ 16:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Panama Canal

Please look at the revert you did on Panama Canal - I think the last one I had was the correct one Tiki2099 22:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Vista

You reverted to the wrong edit in the Windows Vista article. I guess it happens when two people notice the vandalism and revert it at once. No worries, I fixed it. —Alex 23:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, really...

I don't believe < nowiki>insert formatted text here< /nowiki> belongs in Sodium. :) Would you care to revert your revert? --Syrthiss 16:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heheh I thought maybe you had a good reason. ;). Turns out Femto already did it, and caught something else I missed. --Syrthiss 16:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Why do you accuse me of vandalism? Give me an example. I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. User:Bofors40

Lyrics

Ah, so external links directed to lyrics are seemingly allowed (as I understand it from WikiProject Albums as opposed to featuring the lyrics directly. My mistake. In the future however, do not impulsively/ignorantly revert an entire edit that features other pertinent information beyond lyrics. Just remove the lyrics themselves and leave an actual explanation of the revert in the edit summary. - Liontamer 18:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No need to be nasty

No need to be nasty. man. (eg. IDIOT - Eva Braun edit). It's almost never OK to use all caps - and name calling reflects far worse on the user than on the person to whom the name was directed. Have a great day. JackofOz 22:16, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

J7 is redirecting his messages to you, apparently

Hi, Apjake. Something odd happening here. The original comment was made by J7. On his page is a big orange box saying "Leave a message". I clicked on there and left the message. I didn't notice the user was now no longer J7, but you. You need to check this out for yourself and get it fixed. Sorry if you were upset. JackofOz 22:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. I also sent him a message. I refrain from ever editing another user's page, but I think you were perfectly justified in this case. JackofOz 22:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry

You'll have to forgive my brutish ways; however where I come from edits such as that are perfectly acceptable.

information on what's acceptable on the wikipedia

Would any of these pages be viewable on an 8-bit computer running a propriatery operating system?

Deal!

Withdrawal and compromise. As it turns out, another user reverted to my previous amendments that you had problems with. Hmmmm. (Bofors40 11:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Username change

Your request has been fulfilled. Regards — Dan | talk 00:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wicca 3RR

Yeah, good job. If I hadn't been the one who drove him to 3 reverts, I could have handled it myself. As it is, we played it by the book. I've posted a blurb about him at WP:AN/I#Another BC/AD edit warrior. -- SCZenz 03:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

a word of advice

from an ancient.

"except the charger for my camera has mysteriously disappeared. All signs point to Kristen"

do NOT even hint at wrongdoing by your partner on the internet, where anyone in the world [almost] can see it. Carptrash 06:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Besides, after nearly two years she's had to deal with much worse than that." Well no wonder your stuff is starting to disappear. Keep this up and it might be her that is gone next time. Carptrash 17:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply] by all means then I shall go worry about my problems and leave yours alone. Carptrash 18:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism to Pathoschild's user page ("TEST2" given)

~~Regarding this edit: Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.~~ Fourohfour 11:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, this user vandalised my user page with my permission over IRC; as such, I've crossed out the warning above. Thank you. ;) // Pathoschild 11:50, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
WTF?! I'm trying to figure this one out. Are you and Search4Lancer in some bizarre dom/sub relationship where you get turned on by page vandalism? (Checks page again) Oh, okay, I didn't spot the template at the top of the page before. It wasn't in the diffs, and... well, to be honest it didn't occur to me to look for a "please vandalise me!" box... :-/ Fourohfour 13:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, re: the comment Search4Lancer left on my page, no offence intended by the above comment. Fourohfour 14:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

! Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. 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. Thanks. Fir e Fox 17:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It was a joke -_- Fir e Fox 17:21, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking

Both JoanneB and I have had trouble using the monobook.js scripts with FireFox 1.5, so hope you're still on 1.0.7, if not you might find the 'edit talk page tabs' (talk messages) acting up. If you're on the newer version you might benefit by using the old version again until 1.5 is fully supported. If you want to test the talk messages, you're welcome to 'test' my talk page :) Alf ^melmac

Pentagram

See the introductory section of the article pentagram. See also the discussion of pentagram vs. pentacle under Beliefs and Practices in the Wicca article itself and the external link given there (though that link admittedly doesn't seem to cite sources and should probably be removed - we really need to do something about the lack of reliable source citations in this article). The image is most certainly a circumscribed pentagram but it is less clear that it is a pentacle, as it is a two-dimensional representation and not a three-dimensional amulet. Personally, I'm quite happy calling it a pentacle, but I figured the change of caption would head off a potential conflict with the user who previously edited it to read "so-called pentacle". [1] - AdelaMae ^{(talk - contribs)} 10:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the Frosts are on the list on the basis of their being linked on List of Pagans and Gavin Frost's linkage from John Todd (evangelist), not because of any personal preference of mine. I mean, I disagree with pretty much everything about Fiona Horne but I still think she ought to have a Wikipedia article. The one on the Frosts doesn't need to be as flowery as the bio on their website. And it could certainly cite some passages from the Good Witch's Bible. - AdelaMae ^{(talk - contribs)} 10:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Irish people for peer review?

The additions and editions made on this page even within recent weeks - especily photos - has vastly improved it, to the better I think. Would you support it being submitted for a peer review, and help tidy it up/add some more? Fergananim 14:12, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CFD & Power Rangers

Of course, you should have fun. I try to have fun participating and a lot of what I say should not be taken literally. However, having fun should not be an excuse for wantonly deleting all the good stuff on the site, such as the Power Rangers list, which some day might have been a fine asset to Wikipedia. Cheers and happy Christmas. -- JJay 08:59, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Contorts

Sorry, I was not trying to remove the "deletion" comment, but was only trying to preserve my own text. I am unsure as to how to 're-add' the "deletion" comment, so you may redo so at your discretion or instruct me as how to do it. However, you have provided me with no explanation whatsoever as to why this page should be deleted.

"Contorts" is a concept recognized in the legal and academic establishment. My goal is to construct a page that thoroughly addresses the manner and which minimizes any potential bias on my part. Moreover, I intend to have a law school professor of Contract and Torts law review my page for accuracy and balance upon its 'preliminary' completion.

As such, I would appreciate if you did not remark for deletion my page or instruct me to do this myself. Pages should not be marked for deletion, only because a user does not immediately or automatically recognize the subject matter. Accordingly, an editor should proceed with deference, when he or she is unfamiliarized with the subject matter and when the purpose of an article appears at least reasonably calculated or intended for genuine purposes.

However, I would like to mark this page as "under construction" as well as send a message for persons familiar with this subject matter to contribute or advise me. Do you know how to do this? Any other suggestions?

--SOCIOPOWER

Addendum

Also, how exactly do you put ideas before groups of users? What does this process entail? I have an idea about how to change the Wikipedia "vandalism" pages. How can I discuss my suggestion with others?

THANKS

I appreciate your help.

SOCIOPOWER 12:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Qualms of Amsterdam

WELL BOY OH BOY, AREN'T WE ALL BUSY ON THIS X-MASS. PLEASE DO YOUR RESEARCH, USE GOOGLE, ON WHO AND WHO ARE THE FOREIGN JOURNALISTS WORTH MENTIONING? was signed Amsterdam 18:26, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm kinda sorry, but you seem to have issues either way. Furthermore: if an article was deleted numerous times (3-8),due to incompleteness, and deleted by peiople who have no affinity or none whatsoever with the subject, does that qualify YOU to decide that it should be banned? (unsigned, sig added by yours truley) Amsterdam 18:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I STILL DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THIS THING WORKS (THAT'S WHY I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHERE EXACTLY TO LEAVE MESSAGES), BUT THE GOOD LORD KNOWS THAT I AM CONTRIBUTING TO THE BEST OF MY DECENT KNOWLEDGE. YOU NEED NOT TO REDIRECT ME TO THE GUIDELINES FOR THESE BASIC RULES. I MUST SAY HOWEVER THAT YOU SEEM TO PREFER AN APPROACH OF ANIMOSITY, I GUESS JUST SO YOU CAN PROVE HOW GREAT THOU ART??? was signed Amsterdam 18:46, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AM I NOT WITHIN MY RIGHTS WHEN I DELETE ANYTHING THAT I HAVE ALREADY UNDERSTOOD? DO YOU ORDER ME TO LEAVE OLD MESSAGES LINGERING, AS I WANT TO MOVE FURTHER? WHAT ARE YOU ACTUALYY TRYING TO SAY? THAT I AM NOT AT LIBERTY TO MANAGE MY OWN TALK LIST????????????????????????? I AM NOT SOME TEENAGER, FYI I AM AN ADULT WHO HAPPENS TO SPEAK ENGLISH AS A 4TH OR EVEN 5TH LANGUAGE. DO NOT TRY TO MAKE ME FEEL OBLIGED TO MAINTAIN REMARKS WHICH I FEEL THAT WERE POSTED IN ERROR.

THE FOLLOWIBNG TEXT PROVES SUCH, AS I INCLUDED A NEWSPAPER ARCHIVES LINK IN THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE.WHICH WAS SO GRACIOUSLY OVERLOOKED BY BOTH YOU AND THE OTHER GRAEMEL PERSON.

DO NOT INSULT ME, AS I DO NOT VANDALIZE. I ALREADY EXPLAINED THAT I DID NOT KNOW WHERE TO POST MESSAGES. GOOD DAY.

As to claims of notability. If she writes regularly for a national newspaper, or has received a major journalism award (even one from a third world countries journalism comunity), that would count as notability. The fact that she is from a third world country has nothing to do with notability, something that makes her stand out from most of the other journalists is the same country would be enough. Nobel prizes are not required to be notable. Hope this helps. --GraemeL (talk) 18:46, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

MY ANSWER IS; THERE IS NO NEED TO RE-EDIT, AS THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE ALREADY INCLUDED EXTENSIVE ARCHIVES FROM THE OFFICIAL NEWS PAPER WEBSITE. WRITTEN BY Amsterdam 19:09, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Juyst out of High school??? Amsterdam 16:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CONSISTENCY IN WIKI POLICIES

PREVIOUSLY WRITTEN BY ADMIN. GRAEMEL:

"...As to claims of notability. If she writes regularly for a national newspaper, or has received a major journalism award (even one from a third world countries journalism comunity), that would count as notability. The fact that she is from a third world country has nothing to do with notability, something that makes her stand out from most of the other journalists is the same country would be enough. Nobel prizes are not required to be notable. Hope this helps..." --GraemeL (talk) 18:46, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amsterdam"

What you have posted above is true, but the article itself had no claim to notability in its text. As I have already stated on User talk:Amsterdam, I copied the text of the article to a user sub-page for you to work on and copy back to the main article namespace when it includes claims to notability. Search4Lancer has only being following policies when he tagged your articles for speedy deletion. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bea_Vianen

I am sorry if you felt that way, we were merely trying to get some work done.