User talk:SmartGuy/Archive March 2008

Hey Buddy

Your bias to PROTECT and Censor is public info now.

David Williams has admitted and has been PHOTOGRAPHED with his former girlfriend Summer Altice.

You can quit being an idiot.

Would you like me to get your mod rights removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.144.203 (talk) 20:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

ok now, that's enough. You've been asked nicely to cease and desist. This is not "censorship" or "protection" or whatever. It is Wikipedia policy per:

• Wikipedia:Reliable sources
• Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons
• Wikipedia:Citing sources

and so on. If you don't "get it" then there is nothing more that I can do. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 20:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

--How many times has it been said that the information was on his personal website. What do you need ? Blood? You look like you're trying to cover up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.144.203 (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Blogs, diaries, and other self-published sources are generally not acceptable sources. I can create a blog or publish a book and claim to have disproven the Theory of relativity. No one can stop me from doing that, but that doesn't make it true or reliable. Get rid of the chip on your shoulder, and start following the Wikipedia policies that have been quoted to you numerous times. Otherwise, I'm finished with this discussion and will remove any further comments. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 22:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

--70.240.144.203 (talk) 01:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC) How can you make such a illogical comparison? This was HIS WEBSITE. We don't need a book are magazine to cite it. And I am not being uncivil or disruptive.

This anon user has been blocked for 3 hours due to disruption and incivility, as shown above. I've cautioned them to provide actual sources for their contentions, and to be civil in presenting them. If they continue to be disruptive, they'll be blocked for 24 hours or longer. FYI, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hamad nagori

i left him a final warning, and it looks like it's not the first time he started that article, if i spot that article again, i'll request it to be salted. --Party (talk) 18:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I'll keep an eye out for it too. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 18:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe i'll also check for sockpuppets... --Party (talk) 18:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nom

Hey there, just a quick recommendation. When tagging articles for speedy deletion, make sure to check off that the page has been "patrolled" at the bottom right of the article. This way other users won't accidentally waste any time checking out something you've already nominated. Cheers! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 17:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

ah, okay, I thought the software did that automatically, will do ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 17:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

No harm, keep up the great work. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 17:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Ministry of Sound Egypt

Hi SmartGuy, just after your clarification on how to avoid the speedy deletion process - I've read the how to write an article page and to be honest struggled with sources, is this the main issue or is there anything else I can do to redraft the page?

Owen

OwenDaniel (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 21:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Nigel payne.JPG

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Nigel payne.JPG. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 13:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Just so you know, I have semi-protected Colombia for one month. Let me know if vandalism continues after it expires. Thanks! Malinaccier (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

TYVM my friend. That article is constantly hit by jokers, and it gets quite annoying. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 21:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Blondie Forbes

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Blondie Forbes, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.pokerpages.com/pokerinfo/hallofame/index.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Murph Harrold

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Murph Harrold, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.pokerpages.com/pokerinfo/hallofame. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not Joking I am trying my best to create new articles if you have any advice for me please tell me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 04aeverington (talk • contribs) 15:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. See the general guidelines on how to create articles. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 15:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edward_Alderton_Theatre JacobFriett (talk) 16:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Chance Felling

Hello Cary,

This page should not be deleted... Chance Felling is a person who built himself. He was a guy who started with very little and has not truly lived the American Dream. There is also an article of a person who attempted to sue Chance and discredit his name. He was found completely innocent of all charges and I want this article to show along with the discrediting article in google. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Cameron —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cweeks8907 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Rio ES

Eh, you've got a point. Usually, I expect those who speak a language fluently to edit in the wiki of that language. But okay. Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 20:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, wait! Why didn't you tell me that here? Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 20:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Never knew that. And don't worry about being a so-called "moron editor"--I probably shouldn't have tucked that link inside the rules list...diff Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 20:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I will give you a little help, but don't get used to it OK?

Today Rio de Janeiro is a rock season. WIth many local bands. And International bands on Copacabana, Ipanema and Sambodromo The Black Eyed Peas Group is a hot band, with many songs of city and free shows. The best rock show of world is the Rock in Rio. The next Rock in Rio will on 2014.

From that text, I can't do much since the way it's written there are several meanings if I try to fix it. I can speak Portuguese and Spanish, if you write that down I can translate for you. Cheers. --Mhsb (talk) 04:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Did you mean to leave this comment for someone else? ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 06:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

A person keeps undoing my edit for baseless reasons

I tried to clean up the history section of the poker article. A person by the name of Doesluch keeps undoing my edit claiming that my sources are from a personal webpage or blog. My source is not a blog, and my source is not a personal webpage, it is about cards. Not only that, my source is written by David Parlett, who is probably one of the more authoritive sources cited on the wiki poker article. I'm only coming to you because you seem to be the mod. --Jtd00123 (talk) 17:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey there. Actually I'm not an admin - but anyway - Pagat should probably be considered a good source. I'm not sure why someone keeps reverting it. I can't access that link right now (I'm behind a firewall ATM) but will give it a look later today when I get home. If I see any issues with using the Pagat link as a source then I will say so. Otherwise, it's probably okay to leave it in. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. He finally stopped. I only edited one sentence and added another. The sentence I edited was, "Poker closely resembles the game As Nas, and may have been taught to French settlers by Persian Sailors". The last half of the sentence is speculative because it isn't supported by historical evidence, due to the fact that there is no mention of the game's existence before 1890. I simply deleted the last half of the sentence, and added ", though there is evidence of it's existence prior to 1890" (see poker: discussion for other evidence against the As Nas theroy). He kept reverting my article, deleting the detail I added, under the guise of, "no personal webpages or blogs allowed". When it was obvious to me and other editors (2005) that it was not eithier, and a reliable source. He finally stoped reverting my article for the 4th time after I finally corrected him.

Later, instead of reverting, he deleted my edit again and added, "In the 1937 edition of Foster's Complete Hoyle, R. F. Foster declared: "the game of poker, as first played in the United States, five cards to each player from a twenty-card pack, is undoubtedly the Persian game of as nas". I told him that any statement not supported by evidence, even if stated as fact, is therefore opinionated, and therefore, not authorative. In addition, this statement is not supported by many modern historians. I told him that under the 'authorative sources' rule, this statement should be deleted, or at least, placed at the end of the paragraph and clarified as a statement not supported by evidence. I reedited it, adding my original edit, and in the summary said, "If a game has no evidence that it existed before 1890, then its relation to poker is questionable. Therefore, this needs to be mentioned, or As Nas should not be mentioned at all" (also, Doesluch's edit, was copied and pasted from another website without use of quotes)

For some reason, the user Doesluch does not want that added detail I made about As Nas in the wikipedia article, despite the fact that it is factual. Everytime he has edited it, he has deleted my statement on As Nas' 1890 reference, and since he has stopped giving the 'no personal webpage' excuse, he has yet to give an explanation as to why he continues to delete it. In my opinion, the historical facts show that As Nas is a game with questionalbe origins and should not even be in the wikipedia article, (such as As being a French word for ace)but instead of deleting As Nas completely, I decided to compromise with my edit (that is completely factual) you've seen in the first paragraph. I believe it is reasonable enough, and I see no reason as to why it is continually deleted. --Jtd00123 (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Doesluch only has something like 5 total edits, and all of them have been reverting/removing the source you added. Kinda strange. I think you made your point at Talk:Poker so if anyone sees an issue with this source, they should take the discussion up there rather than simply removing an (apparently) decent source. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 16:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

He hasn't reedited the article since, but I don't think its over. I want to persuade him to discuss his issue with my edit in the discussion section before he deletes my edit again, but I don't think I can do it alone. I think with more people prusuading him to take it to Talk:Poker, instead of the article itself, he would be more inclined to do it. While I may be just as guilty of reediting as he did, it was only because his explanation for the revert was untrue. IMO, he wants to give As Nas more credibility, which is fine, but he should explain his reasoning for it, and he should support his reasoning with facts, not spin. (such as quoting a statement made over 70 years ago that is not supported by evidence). From the very source he borrowed that quote from, all of the present-day historians disagreed with that statement. I believe the history section should be scholarly, and in order for that to happen, games with disputable, unproven relation to poker should be clarified as such (as I did), or not mentioned at all. I believe that the only justfication to leave out this clarification, as Dousluch is so intent on doing, is to find a book, scroll, paiting, etc that not only describes As Nas, but is over 200 years old. (or, at least source someone that has recently discovered it) Honestly, who knew minor addition to a single sentence would cause so much trouble? --Jtd00123 (talk) 07:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, who knew minor addition to a single sentence would cause so much trouble? you haven't seen the half of it yet. Sometimes editing the Wikipedia is a great experience, but other times it makes my head asplode. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 13:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)