User talk:Simonkoldyk
 | This user may have left Wikipedia. Simonkoldyk has not edited Wikipedia since 21 November 2018. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Archives
[edit]Hi!
[edit]thanks for posting the picture of Alex at Badger, made his grandparents very proud ( FYI it was his very first day on skis, and a great place for it!) from his Dad
Hi!
[edit]Hi thanks for the encouragements! I have a problem editing my article entitled Barizo. Please help me. Oh, and how can I send messages to other memberas? 20241111124050
Plus...
[edit]Help me make my own user page ü 20241111124050
Re:Storch's Production Credits "vandalism"
[edit]There was no vandalism. I accidentally clicked "Save Page" instead of "Show Preview". It has been fixed. I was only doing some legit and needed clean up. Feel free to delete this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.220.14 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Metropolis Magazine
[edit]- Hello, I am not to sure of where it is appropriate to get a hold of you to discuss the Metropolis Magazine entry. Is this page okay? Wanzhen 08:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, so I got your message. I hope this is your Talk page. So, in the Metropolis case, to me the key problem is "blatant advertising" and if the author of the Metropolis article is also the owner of the Metropolis magazine, well then this is very significant in calling it "blatant". It seems the previous discussions on the article did not mention at all whether the author was also the owner. In light of this, isn't it a slam dunk case of blatant advertising then? Wanzhen 03:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, I too had a look at the Metropolis magazine entry, as well as the (failed) mediation concerning it. I think that the article should go up for a new VfD, as it fails horribly to ascertain it's notability (WP:N: "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject."). Would you help me re-list it? Heatedissuepuppet 17:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
DarknessBot
[edit]feel free to. -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (TCE) 19:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- depends on what you mean by source. As in password, I'd be happy to email that to you. As in program/stuff, ShakingSpirit (talk · contribs) is currently running him, so ask him if that's the case. -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (TCE) 19:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
DarknessBot
[edit]DarknessBot simply uses a modified redirect.py, part of the pywikipedia framework. You can get it over at http://sourceforge.net/projects/pywikipediabot/ though you're probably better off getting it from CVS instead of a snapshot, as the snapshots are a little out of date. Please note though that your wiki will need to support either Special:Doubleredirects, or you'll need a database dump - it doesn't crawl every live article looking for redirects because that's obviously very inefficient. ShakingSpirittalk 22:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Avalon (comic)
[edit]Hi Simon, Just been through reviewing and speedy deleting a whole load of articles but this one I took the tag off so I thought I'd drop you a courtesy note to explain why. It was a fair try and I don't disagree it technically could meet speedy but a lot of experienced editors have been through over a long time without even prod ing it, it predates current speedy rules and it looks like notability is possible so I left it. You could prod or AfD or I suppose retry speedy and hope for a more aggressive admin...--BozMo talk 07:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thanks for posting the picture of Alex at badger...made his grandparents very proud (FYI it was his very first day ever on skis)...from his dad.
James Patterson novel Cross
[edit]G'day from Australia!
Just finished the book, if you haven't finished yet, you'll love it...and a bit of a teaser - the epilogue is interesting...
Drop us a line sometime to discuss the novel if you feel like it...
Hooroo...
BruMedNick 15:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi!
[edit]- This is about the change you made to the dota allstars page where you removed the info on Nevermore, with the argument that we must either have articles on every hero or none, to remain more neutral. I partially agree with this, but I think it's not the case, because Nevermore isn't just any hero, it's a hero that has been pretty bad at older versions and has recently been boosted to the point where it's so good it majorly affects top level gameplay. I didn't feel like it could all be reduced to a few lines, but that may be better. However I think we need some sort of information on Nevermore. I would gladly write some quick info on all the most relevant heroes to tournament play, but I can't write info on the 82 different heroes within a short time. In any case I want to add that the whole page is badly written, I have contributed a few things were I thought it would be useful, but a full reconstruction of the page is necessary, I just can't do it by myself. Besides I'm only qualified and interested in adding info on how the game works at the highest level of competition, but nothing more. I'm sorry if this isn't the place to post the talk about this issue, but I'm new to wiki (as an editor, not as a reader) so I'm still learning my way around. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skepticignorant (talk • contribs)
Rod Giobbs 20:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC) Hi, I still dont understand wikipedia messaging, but I wanted to write you as you warmly greeted me when I registered back in Jan. I posted a few links to job sites I use that I think are valuable, and one user in particular accused me of Spamming and frankly was rude and attacked me unprovoked and misquoted his info to boot. I wrote a response on my talk page but not sure how to get that message to the required parties. Anyway, I appreciated your good faith towards me and would appreciate you helping me continue to get my case across (sorry if I got too defensive but the one comment the other guy wrote was so out of line that it really killed all the good I thought about wikipedia that I'd heard up to now
Metropolis (English magazine in Japan)/Crisscross Merger proposal
[edit]Talk:Crisscross#Merger_proposal. There is currently a discussion whether the articles Crisscross and Metropolis should be merged. As a contributor to one or both of these articles, your input would be valued. Heatedissuepuppet 11:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Template: Fox Interative Media
[edit]The template is appreciated. However. the template {{News Corporation}} is a comprehensive template that probably should have the information in that template. As such, because it meets criteria 2 as listed [[1]]. I am proposing it for deletion, with its information to be merged into the News Corporation template. --AEMoreira042281 17:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC) (talk)
How do i become someone who monitors wikipedia?
[edit]I was wondering how i can become someone who monitors wikipedia. i think it would be cool. trcole123 14:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
lol
[edit]Hai 222.155.120.97 07:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
the downside of wikipedia
[edit]The current state of the article "Collaborative Software" (not a single reference) and the inane proposal to merge "Computer Software" and "Computer Program" make me wonder whether I shouldn't stop contributing to wikipedia. I do not agree with NPOV as a defensible standpoint as I reject the primacy of the fact/value dichotomy and the moral relativism preached in the wikipedia guide.
I will try to be concise: the proposal would have no merit if either article were more satisfactory. Neither are as poor as the article Collaborative Software where the "Implementation" section is an unreferenced advert.
We have an article on the rejection of science in favor of mere 'facts' by Islamic theologians because it matters. Not because it is a fact that falls into some category.
That the articles are not adjudicated and so flagged by experts is a failing. That articles do not require a link to web document archives is also a failing. Both could and should be remedied.
Today I found that a link within an article about an American disgrace has somehow vanished and the keyword in the link had come to be cleverly mis-spelled. I had to turn to Google to re-establish the facts from an American newspaper archive. Not because they are value-neutral facts, but because those facts are important given our values as an aspiring open society coping with the abuse of institutional power. That is why the newspaper printed the story instead of waiting to print the 'facts' allowed transcription into a courtroom trial transcript.
One improvement would be to see all articles about American cities moved to www.aboutus.org and be replaced by more factual content. I would say the same for some articles on political parties. Any article in wikipedia should meet the standards advocated by transparency.org and be a suitable reference for an article at an amnesty-international website. Or this is just a game that is not worth the candle.
Image source problem with Image:Argyless.png
[edit]
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Argyless.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 14:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Argyless.png
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Argyless.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Xombie (flash cartoon)
[edit]Just so you know, User:DreamGuy has nominated Xombie (flash cartoon) for deletion. Here's the link. Since you asked for its restoration at WP:REFUND, I figured you should be notified. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 20:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Template:IGN Entertainment has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ViperSnake151 Talk 17:54, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Template:News Corp Digital Media has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ViperSnake151 Talk 21:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]
Hello, Simonkoldyk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Simonkoldyk. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
The article Atom Entertainment has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Nothing to suggest WP:N notability.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)