User talk:Seb az86556/archive38

Notability of politicians

In my opinion, the lists of people elected to a state or national legislature in India ought to be kept because Wikipedia considers members of a state or national legislature, past or present, to be automatically notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I hope you go ahead and retype it. The shit the guy threw onto the page is an insult to thinking people. cheers! Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I see you did. This was never about notability; it's about letting a newbie know what's acceptable. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:07, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:*poke*

Hello - I appreciate the advice/heads up on this. I need your assistance if possible on a related matter: weird as it may sound, the other editor has altered the original layout of the Rfc, essentially making it seem as though he opened the discussion process that I in fact started [1]. He also de-listed the Rfc from one of the additional relevant categories that I added it to. I'm not sure why exactly he would do all this. In any case, I didn't restore the original attribution out of respect for what you wrote. It's my understanding, however, that manipulating other editors' comments is a violation of WP:TALKNO. Would you please help redress this? Kind regards -- Soupforone (talk) 21:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, hi. I do realize that the other user is indeed more aggressive and, shall we say, generally "obsessed" with the topic. It seems he didn't change your wording, but rather "cut in line"... well, that rude, and shows his general attitude, but isn't really forbidden. Correction: I see he changed the wording and scope as well. Reverted. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:44, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Soupforone (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Seb, there's yet another problem with/hitch in the affair. Despite the consensus in the rfc that the social constructs "white" and "black" are to be discussed on the respective white people and black people articles and that biological material on human skin color is to be dealt with separately, as on the extant human skin color wikipage, the other editor went ahead and basically copied and pasted a lot of the material that he added to the black people and white people articles to two new fork pages: Black (skin color) and White (skin color). It's essentially the same skin color-based classification scheme that he has been arguing for all along. If it's not any trouble, could you please re-direct these apparent WP:POVFORKs to the main human skin color article until the rfc is at least finished? Kind regards, Soupforone (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Black (skin color)

Hello, can you please undelete the Black (skin color) article. It was speedily deleted on the reason of copyright infringement, but even though some parts of the article was verbatim to other Wikipedia article, Wikipedia is freely licensed and that cannot be considered copyright violation. We have reached consensus with Soupforone and I understand that you may find the title offensive so I'm willing change it to dark skin color. Cheers. FonsScientiae (talk) 09:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Copying material from one article to another without attribution certainly is a copyright violation. Dougweller (talk) 10:22, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

The consensus was also to re-direct skin color references to the main human skin color article. Soupforone (talk) 20:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Curiosity

Hi. What is this Chooyoo... in your signature? Any special meaning if not private? All the best. --E4024 (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

wikt:choyoołʼįįhí. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Would you mind If I called you [] as I do not know how to write those letters?.. :-) All the best. --E4024 (talk) 15:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Seb Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 18:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Request of help on North Cyprus

Dear Seb Az, need your help on 2 things, but first thanks for warning the concerned user for his disruptive editing at the North Cyprus article. 1. This is not the first time s/he is doing that kind of editing as s/he was already warned by another Admin on 1st August on the same article. Maybe a short rest would do him/her well, to find time to reconsider if s/he will continue or not causing loss of labour to other editors. 2. (First in order of importance) Trying to correct his disruptive editing I may have left out of the article valuable info added by another user on the section sports. I request you to please recover that part. Also a photo has been overwritten by text which I would again ask you to correct. Thanks in advance and all the best. --E4024 (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I know. That particular guy has used talkpages only 4 times altogether. Problematic. But I'm not an admin here; so I can only warn and report. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 18:07, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

K. Michelle neutral notification

Since you've editing K. Michelle's article, do you have any opinion about the sources used for some of the material that's in there? I asked about them at Talk:K._Michelle#Problem_with_sources. Maybe you could weigh in on the discussion?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 02:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Most of the stuff I've seen thus far was blogs and junk. I'll keep an eye on it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 03:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Jicarilla language article

Hello Seb, don't understand your edit summary "complete unk. needs to be deleted." The text in Incubator comes from the Jicarilla lexicon site, which says it's an NSF-sponsored project. Why would you object to having a link to Incubator? Djembayz (talk) 22:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Because everything you did in incubator is junk. As most of the other stuff you did, calling one-word pages an "article." It's insulting. Now leave me alone. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 01:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)