User talk:DropDeadGorgias

User:Coolcat 3RR block

Hi. Coolcat broke the 3RR on Kurdish people. I did neglect to note this on his talk page, but it was noted in the block log and WP:AN/3RR. Also, Coolcat did realize he was in danger of breaking the 3RR [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurdish_people&diff=12179998&oldid=12167517). Sorry for any confusion. Carbonite | Talk 02:17, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pac-Man

Hi DDG. With regards to the changes being made to the Pac-Man article please refer to the following two discussions.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Arcade_games#Hardware_info_in_infobox

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Arcade_games#Marquees_instead_of_titles

a vandal with a poor choice of username

Hello. Thought I should let you know that there is a vandal with the username DropDeadGorgiasSucks. You may want to keep an eye on this bad user. Should this user be banned for the poor choice of username ? I'll let you decide. Good Luck. -- PFHLai 19:16, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)

I've already reported it at RfC. Nothing seems to have happened, so I'll go back there and stir things up. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:34, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've blocked the account indefinitely. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:40, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Spinning wait cursor link

Thanks for updating it. No need to apologise. AlistairMcMillan 18:30, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

iTunes, Linux not officially supported sentence

Well, I wasn't claiming in an article that Linux has higher market share than Apple, but I have read this, I will look for citations. But the point is Linux's market share is obviously close to Apple's if you've even read Linux is expected to overtake Mac for 2nd by the end of the year (which means it's definitely already notable enough for inclusion). The iTunes and many related articles need more info on the overall DRM controversy and the recent "DVD john" compatability "hack". On a related side note, even the Linux article doesn't convey why the GPL is relevant to many developers. I recall reading a recent article about how congress was thinking about making it 100% legal for people to write iTunes compatibility software, will look for that too. zen master T 21:25, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary is a very different beast than actual article content. Someone else keeps removing the Linux not supported sentence, can you help out keeping it there? Perhaps a talk page discussion is in order, as it generally is. zen master T 21:34, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

We aren't actually anywhere near the 3RR because other changes and clean ups have been made inbetween the removal and adding of the disputed sentence (not straight reverts). But yes the talk page is the place to be, though few seem interested in actual debate these days. zen master T 21:46, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

don't think I was vandalizing

You sent me a message saying I vandalized a page, I don't think I did. If I recall, there was an unclear sentence and I cleaned it up. Sorry if I didn't leave a detailed explanation, but I didn't really have the time or inclination.

70.26.180.19

Reply about impulse buying

I made the talk page to describe the google-test for the article name, because I have been blamed for making article names with low google results, just to let u know. --SuperDude 19:21, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Giving up

Hi, DDG. I promise that I will see this thing through. When I said I was giving up, I meant that I was convinced that nothing I said or did was going to bring Sam around. That latest edit gives me a glimmer of hope. Nice note on his page. I think I'll do likewise. Maybe this is finally the turning point. We persist... - Lucky 6.9 03:03, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Template talk:Corp-stub

You deleted the talk page, but didn't actually fix the problem that Korath described in the speedy deletion notice. Template:Corp-stub needs to be deleted so that Corp stub- template can be moved back to its original location. Uncle G 19:20, 2005 Apr 20 (UTC)

• OK, this whole thing has me confused, as Korath had already copied the content manually. Nevertheless, to preserve article history i suppose, I've deleted that, and moved Corp stub- template back there. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:28, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • It took me a while to follow what Randude (talk • contribs) had done, too. Korath copied the text back as a temporary measure because otherwise Template:Corp-stub would have remained a redirect to Peerflix, and every article that happened to be tagged {{corp-stub}} would have thus sported a bunch of text about Peerflix. That's also why xe put the CSD notice on the talk page rather than on the template itself. Uncle G 19:39, 2005 Apr 20 (UTC)
    • Yeah, it's fine, but I put a note on Korath's talk page that it would probably have been more expedient to use Template:move instead and give a more detailed explanation and instructions on Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cheers, --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:43, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Elvis Presley

A devoted Elvis fan is constantly deleting what is written about Presley's possible homosexuality in two different books on Elvis and some other sources. One of these sources is written by the king's stepmother, Dee Presley. In the Wikipedia article on Elvis is only written that some authors claim that Elvis was gay. The reader may decide whether or not this accusation is true. This Elvis fan seems to be the same guy who is still under a Wikipedia hard ban. He is even deleting parts of the discussion and claims, without proof, that Elvis slept with hundreds of women. I do not understand why this Elvis fan sees the king's possible homosexuality as a problem. See Talk:Elvis Presley.

The same Elvis fan seems to have written a very denigrating Wikipedia article on David Bret.

May I ask you to have a further look at the David Bret article. Thanks. Significantly, user Ted Wllkes has again deleted one of my comments. See Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, history page.

Re:Elvis Presley

I am the person you refer to wrt some changes on the Elvis Presley listing

Firstly do not accuse me of changing parts of the entry that I did not change

Secondly I wasnt aware that I had to discuss changes with anyone, i apologise if this is the case but there is nowhere obvious that states that you have to discuss the changes with anyone...also I see so many factual errors on the Elvis Presley listing, it defies belief that youre actual think some of this content is factually correct.

Thirdly I would like to mention the content i did delete yes the claims by Dee Presley that Elvis was bisexual...really, this woman is a known rumour monger amongst Elvis fans...the allegations appeared long after Elvis died and i certainly never heard these allegations until very recently, she also made the same allegations in the National Enquirer, do you reard this as a good source of information?...you cite 2 Elvis books but neither are regarded my most Elvis fans as being particularly truthful...ive been a fan for 20+ years and have only recently heard these accusations...there are no facts to back up these claims and imo should not belong in an "encyclopedia"...you should be aware that the amount of lies/exaggerations that exist in the Elvis Presley world is unsurpassed by any other entertainer...and the content of this site should concentrate on facts and achievements

I deleted an obvious spam link to a blog...its unimportant isnt it?

I never said anything about Elvis sleeping with hundreds of women...you have me confused with someone else

Yes i am an Elvis fan who likes to hear the truth, i respect him and i certainly wouldnt add anything that i believed was factually incorrect...if you want to ban me for life go ahead...if you cant keep this listing factual then it isnt worth my time.

PH

Christianity

Thank you for reverting the awful edit by User:AlienNation on the Christianity page. I am a relatively new user; is there anything to be done about folks like that who simply don't respect the Wiki system? Maybe I'm off-base even for asking. Thanks again. KHM03 22:42, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Presidential Trivia and BJAODN

Heh, I'm not sure why you'd worry about people creating joke articles just to get into BJAODN... I just add my bad jokes directly to the BJAODN page. ;) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:35, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out!

Hey, I realized I was f-ing up the whole thing, but I didn't know what to do after a while, so I figured I'd leave it and someone wiser would come along and show me the way. Thanks a lot for your help and I promise I'll do better in the future! Atrivedi

My fans

Thanks for thr block; I always think that this sort of thing shows that we're doing something right... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:11, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cheongsam / Qipao

The qipao (旗袍), qipaor (旗袍儿), or ch'i-p'ao has always been confused with "Cheongsam". Pre-revolutionary Qipaos were more sensual, almost like the Hong Kong Cheongsam but post-revolutionary China, it has been banned. In Northern China, the two-piece Qipao developed away from the traditional Cheongsam.

Subsequently, Qipaos came to mean 2 - piece suits whereas Cheongsams were one-piece suits won by men and women alike. Qi means flag and pao means costume. Qipaos were meant to be a unique post-revolutionary Mainland Chinese costume, worn as resistance against Western modes of industrialization symbolic of Western capitalism, Western invasion, Western colonialism and imperialism.

In Hong Kong, a former British colony, conservative Chinese costumes were influenced by fifties Hollywood sensuality. As a result, unique female clothing called the Cheongsam emerged. Unlike its Western counterparts which exposed sensual breasts and shoulders, the Cheongsam was conservatively buttoned up with Mandarin buttons to the neck but added sensuality by its tailored shapeliness, though not tight and figure-hugging like Western feminine fashion.

Due to the exigence required in tailoring, Cheongsams are extremely expensive. The "cutting" and the quality of the silk is everything. Rich Tai Tais i.e. socialite wives of Hong Kong tycoons, pay exorbitant prices for appointments with famous tailors of Cheongsams in Hong Kong.

The Cheongsam is not to be at all confused with the Mandarin Gown which is based on Communist Aesthetics of non-sexuality, that emphasized men and women as equals, and in glorifying peasanthood. Cheongsams were seen as decadent of a capitalist culture. The Qipao was a two piece suit with a design similar to those worn by Chairman Mao Zedong. They emphasized pragmatism and socialist equality, not decadent Capitalist excesses. The cutting are straight and the material used usually coarser for practical work and the colder climes of North China. The material can be altered with the best and toughest silk of China though for comfortable leisure wear.

However, with the opening up of Mainland China, scores of young women are tired of repressive Communist era clothing and imitate the Capitalist glamour of Hong Kong dressing. With the rise of Shanghai as a capitalist city overtaking Hong Kong, contemporary Shanghai Cheongsams are even more revealing, with slits on both sides of the legs, and a Mandarin collar to the neck, but with cuts exposing ample bosoms. This is in contrast to 1950s Hong Kong Cheongsams, in contrast to the high slit on only one side in Hong Kong Cheongsams.

Cheongsam, is a Cantonese invention. The silk is smooth, thin and refined from the Southern climes. It literally means "long dress".

The Cheongsam became popular in the West due to its popularization by pre-revolutionary, capitalist, post-revolutionary capitalist Shanghai, colonial Hong Kong, Taiwan and colonial Singapore.

The 1949 Communist Revolution ended the cheongsam and other costumes reminiscent of Capitalist culture in Shanghai, but the Shanghainese emigrants and refugees fled to Hong Kong where it has remained popular. Recently there has been a revival of the Shanghainese cheongsam in Shanghai and elsewhere in Mainland China; the Shanghainese style functions now mostly as a stylish party dress (see Mao suit).

Mac OS X and macosx.com

Thanks for the help. AlistairMcMillan 00:06, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Adding Pages

I was wondering what the criteria are for creating a page on this site... if you could direct my to the link that is appropriate... would appreciate that... I have a lot of stuff I could add, or polish up (seeing as though I am 90% complete in my studies as a Social Service Worker who specialized in Drug and Alcohol Addiction COunselling and Child and Family Abuse topics)... thanks again! and I love your site! so do some people at my place of employment!

Dukes82

Sacrament

I would like to report several incidents of vandalism on the page for Sacrament. These are relatively minor incidents that have been easily fixed by myself and others. It seems, however, that the user 203.36.44.14 has a history of vandalism, including several incidents on this page. Repeated warnings have been ignored completely. Perhaps a block might be in order. That's your call. Thanks. KHM03 11:40, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. KHM03 18:30, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

User Page

I'm sorry? What user page am I supposed to have edited? Uncle G's? He doesn't even have one, so how could I edit it? ---Isaac R 15:15, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I stand by my previous statement. How can I edit a page that doesn't exist? ---Isaac R 15:35, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Whatever. It would have been helpful if you had worded your accusation more precisely. ---Isaac R

• I too have created his page for him apparently. I didn't see his talk page, his name links to the blank user page with a default action of edit. I since have read his obstinate screed about why he doesn't hve one. *yawn* I care that much, I hope it gets recreated everyday. SchmuckyTheCat 02:13, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

User:Ta bu shi da yu

Looking at his otherwise brilliant record, I believe there is no reason to make a fuss out of this, but I'd nevertheless appreciate an explanation. If he doesn't reply in reasonable time, I'll put a notice on the ANN. Again, I'm confident there is an explanation, so I say patience. Phils 17:09, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Friendly Chat

Hi, how you doing? I believe I've never had the pleasure of writing to you before. I read your comment in RFA and I must admit that you are absolutely right. When I joined Wiki, nobody welcomed me with the Wiki Policies and etc. I was totally clueless. I was so ignorant that I didn't even know about the exsistence of administrators, arbitrators and etc. In the beginging I had some skirmishes with other Wikipedians and when I started to realize how Wiki really worked, I also realized, and I'm not ashamed to say it, how stupid I had been acting. I learned what the community is all about and deidicated myself to producing good quality articles for Wiki since then. Whenever I see a new guy I remind them that they're part of a community and not a one man show. I just wanted to share this with you. Take care Tony the Marine

David Bret

Thank you for protecting that page. However, I must take exception to your statement "Your revert comments focus on the fact that the other party is an anonymous user, who you also accuse of vandalism on his page. Just because a user is anonymous, you can't assume bad faith." Note that the ONLY contributions by this user, and I listed each of his Dynamic IPs on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress, are all edit and reversals of the same three articles. I think you would agree that this kind of thing has always been called by Wikipedia as someone with an agenda perpetuated by Wikipedia's own description of vandalism. Thank you. Ted Wilkes 14:43, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You seem to have a problem in that you don't bother reading before you speak. Your latest two points on Talk:David Bret are irresponsible. If you cannot contribute positively with facts please recuse yourself from any discussions on this file. Ted Wilkes 20:42, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My version of the article on David Bret now includes a revised paragraph concerning Bret's book on Elvis. For a comprehensive discussion of all paragraphs of the article, see Talk:David Bret. This new version has again been deleted by User:Ted Wilkes. I think that the false accusations by this user are an abuse of the Wikipedia guidelines. As you know, this user repeatedly deleted passages I have written in articles and on discussion pages, which were not in line with his personal opinion. This is indeed vandalism. Everybody can see that this user's accusations are made for mistaken reasons. See also Talk:David Bret, Talk:Nick Adams and Talk:Elvis Presley. Significantly, Ted Wilkes is not a new user. In my opinion, he is identical with users NightCrawler and JillandJack who are, or repeatedly were, under a Wikipedia hard ban. See User:DW.

I just got back from a real vacation, and I'm planning on extending my wiki-vacation for a few more days until i get settled in reality, but as a blanket response to the anonymous editor above: I think that your edits have been fine for the most part but you are hurting your case by not following wiki-etiquitte. If you plan on being taken seriously in any discussions you should 1) Wikipedia:Create an account and 2) Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. You will be given a lot more respect in any of these discussions. As it stands now, it is very difficult to respond to you or contact you at all, as you post from several different IPs. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:57, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

VFD

Just letting you know about Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/HYP (universities) 2. If you have an opinion, please vote. I am notifying people who have been active on either side of the debate. —Lowellian (talk) 23:53, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Brainstorming