User talk:MacGyverMagic

Hey McGwyver: I found you in the Recent changes page, this page had a question mark, meaning that obviously no one had welcomes you yet. Youre only the second person in two years I get to welcome aboard. I myself was welcomed by Mav.

My main subjects here are boxing and airlines. But everyonce in a while, I wander off, such as when I wrote about Menudo or Arrowhead Water or Grand Theft Auto: Vice City or anything else Im a fan of.

Thanks for your message, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Bolthead Martin

PS: checking your user page, I thought you'd be interested in List of teen idols, I originated the page, feel free to update it as needed.

Archives and links

(If I perform a long archiving session the page will be temporarily protected using this notice)

The B-day wishes I received prior to my B-Day on May 16, 2005 are located here.

Archive 1 Oldest discussions.
Archive 2 Oct. 10 - Nov. 23, 2004
Archive 3 Nov. 24, 2004 - Feb. 1, 2005
Archive 4 Feb. 2, 2005 - ?
Archive 5 - includes Armenian Genocide dispute.
Archive 6 - includes final discussion on dispute, also loads on DYK.
Archive 7 - includes Signpost, more DYK, CU taskforce and DYKbot discussion.
Archive 8 - vandal hunting, amino acids, vfd pages (Leeroy +purple).
Archive 9
Archive 10

glycosylation vs glycation: a humble request

Do you know we have both articles? I don't quite understand the difference between glycosylation and glycation and have a suspicion that there isn't much and they could probably be usefully combined or at least cross-referenced. If you have some interest and expertise in this relatively narrow topic (not that it isnt just as interesting as HPL and EAP), I-- and perhaps hundreds of others, who knows?-- would be grateful if you could merge the two articles or else write a brief explanation of the difference between glycation and glycosylation and cross-link them appropriately. Chemistry is good. alteripse 15:10, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cricket pages

There are articles for each team and competition, and also chronological articles covering everything. Therefore the same write-up of a match could appear in 4 different articles - 2 team articles, a competition article and a chronological article. As far as I'm aware transclusion is the most effective way of doing this. Kind regards, jguk 22:06, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

Hi, Mgm. No problem – do you think I was sufficiently effusive? Cheers, smoddy 22:08, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There was a certain level of irony in the above statement. :p smoddy 22:18, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Register account first

Then i will lose my contributions list and watch list. Kevin Baas^{talk: new (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kevin_baas&action=edit&section=new)} 23:56, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal

Hi! I've been sort of holding the mediation line with a Mediation Cabal for a little while now. People interested in helping out watch the page and swarm to locations where there is possible trouble, supplying immediate first-aid, and trying to solve the situation, should rapid response not be sufficient, then further stages of dispute resolution are tried.

That's the idea anyway. In reality some of our longer standing or open cases are indeed on the mediation cabal page, but often enough we just pick stuff up via irc/watchlist/rc patrol whatever, and solve problems upfront before things get worse. So most of our work never shows up on the wiki.

Anyway, feel free to watch that page, help out, or better yet declare the mediation cabal obsolete so I can go do something else with my life ;-) (I wish! :-P )

Ah well, we'll probably still have to wait a little while before we can declare it obsolete, or convert it into a better organised emergency response team.

Anyway, since you seem to want to try and pick up the original mediation, that's great! Note that Wgfinley and Inter have already been doing some basic groundwork. Listen to them carefully!

Hope to hear from you (and the resurrected mediation committee) soon!

Kim Bruning 00:31, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mr Tan

I had thought about mediation, but (as the RfC, and the various Talk pages indicate), this is neither just about Mr Tan and me nor about just one article. Moreover, a number of people have tried to reason with Mr Tan, and he refuses to listen to any of them. As I said on the Noticeboard, I'd be grateful for any attempt to get through to him, but I'm now starting on the Arbitration route. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:32, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Seconded. I have tried mediating between them for the longest time, but Tan just won't accept the fact that (for the <math>10^3<math> time) his English is far below the level of other, more experienced editors, and that he cannot therefore judge the state of an article. He's been putting a copyedit template on Zanskar because "it doesn't match his style"; his edits on other articles (such as Tsushima Islands, Wee Kim Wee) are quite controversial, and, most importantly, he does not let other editors gauge the quality of his work or correct his mistakes. Nor does he accept any kind of advice, from fellow editors or Singaporeans. JM Bell ° 11:56, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I did. But why did I find much more difficulty in associating with him than to others? You are accusing me of me not accepting the fact that my English is poor, but I did many a times, especially in Talk:Lee Kuan Yew.

Mr Tan 12:07, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)Tan

I'll have to stop you all here. If you're willing to go into mediation do so. I have nothing to do with arbitration and as the notice on top of this page says, disputes are to be resolved on the appropriate pages -not here. Mgm|^(talk) 12:14, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Mediation reforms

If you haven't already done so (and I've not spotted it), would you like to create a page outlining your ideas for reform of the MC? I'd like to join such discussions, but see no central place to do so. Dan100 11:36, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation (2005) Kim Bruning 13:57, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think the balls in your court now really - your ideas are good, you need to move things on to the next stage now. This is a golden opportunity! Dan100 11:10, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Furry / Furry fandom mediation request

Hi, thanks for the reply, and sorry for my carelessness. I had hoped that by making a request it would ease the tension regarding the issue and that the User:Almafeta would be willing for a third party mediator too, but it looks like the situation (at Talk:Furry) has gone - as I feared - genuinely out of hand. The anonymous user and Contie appear to have calmed down, but Almafeta is now personally attacking the user:Krishva, tracking down her activities, and accusing not only she is trying to "delete every single Furry-related page on wikipedia" and that I, Krishva and user:Stiv are the same user (it's very hard to be in America and Malaysia simultaneously). I've asked for user:Almafeta to agree to the mediation a few minutes ago, and I'm loath to request arbitration as that would be the last resort. What do you advise in this situation? Thanks! -- Grumpyhan 12:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re: Template

For an explanation on how I visioned it, see User:Inter/Mediation policy. See [[Wikipedia:Mediation (2005) and Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal on how it turned out. :> I am currently on exam leave still, things to sort out and stuff, but when I am fully back I will resume the work to change the medcom into something else (or remove it) as it is currently inactive and inefficient. Hope this answers the question. Inter\^Echo 14:57, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It didn't really fail, it just hasn't been done alot with because of people working on it, like myself, have had our exams. I haven't fully returned to Wikipedia after that onslaught so I'm not fully up to speed yet. I saw your proposal at the ArbCom RFC and I will make a comment there probably. Some of us have worked quite hard for something that didn't really come into frutition because we aren't sure if we wanted to throw out the MedCom altogether or restore it. It is a drastic measure, but since you have taken the initiative, I'll be happy to assist as I have talked with many people about a change to MedCom and have come up with some preliminary guidelines. Inter\^Echo 19:34, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry

I posted a message on user's discussion page , so whats wrong with that ? Farhansher 20:41, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Houston Chronicle

Thank you for offering mediation. If you think it can accomplish something then I won't object to your assistance. I remain dubious that Katefan0 will contribute productively to this process, having tried repeatedly to find grounds for agreement with her to little success. I believe I have been reasonably flexible to date in accomodating some of her requests and the requests of others, but the remaining issues that I outlined on the mediation page have seemingly come to a standstill.

If it helps any for background on this dispute, my own perspective is one that is critical of the Houston Chronicle, though I've attempted at all stages to thoroughly source and document the critical material. Katefan by contrast has a very strong POV in favor of the Chronicle - she claims she used to be employed with them even - but unfortunately does not seem to recognize that she writes with a bias of her own. Hence she sees everything I do - no matter how thoroughly sourced it is - as "unfair" or "biased" and POV while everything she adds has the effect of making it "neutral" even though in fact most of her changes insert strong biases in the other direction.

The dispute to date has had a couple other participants as well. Based on his edits and comments on the discussion page, User:Nobs seems to favor my side of the argument over Katefan0's. User:Johntex tends to favor Katefan & was specifically recruited by her to lend favor to her arguments. She also recruited User:Willmcw into the discussion, apparently knowing that I have sparred (albeit on mostly friendly terms) with him in the past on other articles. Given this it is also my belief that Willmcw has little genuine interest in the subject matter of this article (as well as virtually zero familiarity with any of the issues of contention) and is only attracted to it because of me. He has a bad habit of following myself and some other editors around wikipedia trying to cause trouble or undo additions we've made to various articles regardless of the subject. IOW, virtually every single time I've gotten into a conflict with another editor on wikipedia about an article's content on any issue whatsoever Willmcw's shown up in short order to espouse the side of the other guy. Normally he either misreads one of the existing sources on the article and changes the article to reflect his misreading, only to be corrected and concede the error, or he tries to make edits that make for awkward article texts such as removing acknowledged and self-evident facts, e.g. "the sky is blue," for want of a "source" (and then only a source of his liking) specifically stating that the sky is indeed blue. It's largely deconstructive and normally accomplishes nothing for the article that doesn't get restored in short order. In most of his edits on the Houston Chronicle, this seems to be another such case of what I just described. Anyway, that more or less summarizes things to date & if you have any questions or suggestions I'd be happy to hear them. Thanks. Rangerdude 22:25, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mgml, in response to your proposals, I am glad to agree. Here's to an eventual resolution. I do have one concern -- there have been several other editors who have been engaged in the disagreement on various sides, primarily (User:Nobs, User:Johntex and User:Willmcw); would the editing hiatus also apply to them? Happy Friday · Katefan0^(scribble) 18:36, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Don't mind at all if it's a public talk page. Probably easier to keep track of things that way anyway. Thanks again. · Katefan0^(scribble) 18:44, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Please note that Nobs, who I mentioned above, also edits under User:Nobs01, which he's been using today. · Katefan0^(scribble) 20:15, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Re:User:Grutness/Grutness non-article

Thanks for keeping watch for vandalism over my pages, but in this case...

I find it hilarious that I write an article about myself as part of my user pages (not as an article in Wikipedia), and it was suggested it lacks sources. Note the edit summary comment that "the quote from my cats needs sourcing"! It's a fun addition, and I don't mind it - punctures any ego build-up nicely too.

FWIW, I only wrote the page there after realising (on vfd) that I met many of the notability standards which are used to judge vfd candidates. I did it as an exercise, and have no intention of putting it in the Wikipedia article space. I am mentioned by name in one Wikipedia article (University Challenge (New Zealand)), but there's no redlink, nor do I think there should be. Grutness...wha? 01:06, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A few more newbie questions

I've been poking about, learning more, editing here and there, having fun. However, I have three questions that remain unanswered. I'd appreciate any info you can provide.

1) What is the policy for removing a cleanup or other template after you've finished an edit?

2) Aren't the cleanup templates supposed to go on the respective talk pages, not on the article itself?

3) Why are the only dated cleanups for September 2004 and May 2005?

Thanks in advance, Jekoko 20:20, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Whoa, you are one prompt person!

Thanks for clearing up my questions. The search I did for "CleanupDate" only gave me May 2005, not all the rest. I figured I had to be missing the rest of the year somewhere. They are all at the top of the WP:CU page you directed me to. :) Many thanks! Jekoko 20:43, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

To quote Ed Poor:

If you DON'T leave a message at my talk page or send me an e-mail, Then I am NOT going to take on a Mediation. I want the "chairman" or whatever we call him or her to assign cases. I'm not going to volunteer.

Andre (talk) 00:50, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Mgm, in case you missed my message above (apologies for posting twice if you did not!):

I think the balls in your court now really - your ideas are good, you need to move things on to the next stage now. This is a golden opportunity! Dan100 11:10, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

And if you have another look at the MC page, you'll see that your clear to become Chair :-) Dan100 09:23, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

My FPC

Thanks for your comments at the FPC page on the Medal of Honor flag. I am writing to you since you provided mostly constructive criticism on my nomination of the image. I asked before if flag images could be nominated, and I got a response saying it could, but it will be tough. The user based it on a coat of arms image that failed to be featured. I thought I give my image a shot, and well, I know that I will lose this one. I will try better next time, unless the main objection is that it is just a drawing. If so, that is what is killing me. The image, though I drew it, technically is PD-USGov, since it is an image of a flag issued by the US Government. It was going to be used at two articles, but the Medal of Honor flag article was merged to the original Medal of Honor article. Plus, the image is at the Commons, so it clears that hurdle. Though I wish to stop ranting now, thanks again for the kind remarks. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 01:54, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mediation request

Hi Mgm, thanks for your note. I don't believe that mediation would be appropriate in this case (and I also thought there was no mediation committee at present). The editor seeking it is User:Baxter2, also editing as User:Baxter3, and User:68.10.35.153. He's almost certainly Bill White, the subject of the vanity piece he created at Bill White (activist). I haven't looked at the page today, and so I don't know whether he's reverted to his old version, but if you read the introduction of my last version, you'll see who he is. In brief, White is a far-right, anti-Semitic activist, associated with Stormfront and a number of other white-supremacist groups, and he wants to exercise editorial control over his WP entry. In particular, he wants to use the page as a repository for over 100 article titles he says are about him (though many are not); and he's linking to the WP article on his own website, calling the WP article "The Bill White Article Collection". He's being opposed by several editors on the page; the only one supporting him when I last checked was Sam Spade. The aim is to re-write the page so that it's fully sourced, which will take a couple of days. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:28, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to address the removal of what he's calling sources. I'm not aware of his having provided sources for anything. When I first looked the article, it was entirely unsourced, except for this very long list of articles at the end, not linked to, and not identified as references or sources; and many of them had nothing to do with him. So either he doesn't understand what a source is, or he's playing games. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:30, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

I saw this matter on User:SlimVirgin's page. I was the editor who first complained about the lack of sources for this extensive, detailed, and favorable biography. The response was 100 sources, most of which are newspaper mentions that not available via internet. This editor has been aggressive in dealing with editors who do not share his POV. In his short editing career he has issued numerous threats and complaints: on talk pages, VfDs, and on White's website. He has created a number of articles about associates of White's, which were initially unsourced and without indication of notability. When I nominated a few of them for VfD the editor in question responded immediately by attacking my motives. (He later added more information and sources, some of which appear to be unsupportive). All of which is to say that this is not just a two-editor dispute. If there is mediation as well then I would like to be a part of it. However this may be more of an "RfC" situation (which is what we've done for the article). It seems precipitous to call for mediation after only a couple of days of editing, just on the basis of an experienced editor removing an extraordinarily long list of references. Of course your involvement is welcome in any capacity. Cheers, -Willmcw 23:11, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_White_%28activist%29&diff=14743047&oldid=14710316
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Joe_Adams&diff=prev&oldid=14704274
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bill_White_%28activist%29&diff=prev&oldid=14850336
"The response of [Wikipedia's] left-wing and Jewish biographers was to delete all of the sources...Obviously, someone who does such a thing is not pursuing truth. They are pursuing a lie...This is also what I've dedicated my life to fighting. In fact, one of he common themes that winds through all of my politics, my stances, my extreme statements, my less extreme statements, and my involvement in different movements, it is my desire to see those people who pursue lies with such passion destroyed -- along with their societies, their cultures, their religions and their races." -http://www.overthrow.com/lsn/news.asp?articleID=8156

MGM- here are some diffs and a link to a new essay/blog by White. I don't want to overplay these threats - they're certainly mild and/or indirect. My point concerned how rapidly the editor started making threats and complaints. I agree that small-"m" mediation is best as early as possible. Capital-"M" Mediation is different, in my mind. Cheers,

krill

hallo mgm! thank you for your responses and time. Sometimes the art is to make information short, with pointing to larger volumes. Where are the rules how much media should be used in a wikipedia article? Space is on the harddrives enough. "An image says more than a thousand words". The article was once longer - I could have easily dumped text from scripts I still have from the times I lectured at the universities about krill or pasted from the 150 pages from articles with my students given at wikisource, but we wanted to keep it here condensed. The images and animations are considered as additional already, nobody is forced to scroll down on the page - as far as we know, the upper part of the page is formatted ok - otherwise please help us - keep up with your fine work and hallo to the Netherlands (I am from Flensburg) and good luck with your chemistry studies Uwe Kils 15:00, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Guten Tag mgm! Danke für den Kommentar - in Allem ist persönlicher Geschmack - und wir können alles diskutieren, über alle Grenzen und Alter hinweg - ich werde Eure Hinweise hier besprechen. Ich hab schon etwas mehr Text hineingetan. Ist ja auch nur ein Versuch, und Diskussion ist immer gut - viele herzliche Grüsse über den Atlantik Uwe Kils 22:49, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Please note that most Dutchmen don't speak German particularly well. German and Dutch languages are related, but not enough for it to be mutually understandable. Mgm|^(talk) 04:50, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

sorry - but you have on your user page a tab that you do speak German - was not so important anyway, I just tried to be friendly and cooperative - I contribute much more n the Englishserverside than on the German, but I note what you wrote Uwe Kils 12:06, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

German

Don't worry about it. I do understand German myself, but I prefer English or Dutch communication. So you don't need to talk German unless it's easier for yourself. Mgm|^(talk) 12:17, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

thank you, I was invited into the USA because our works on the hatching web, so I do speak some English - would you be willing to serve as student on a board for our Virtual_University proposals? We plan it to be within wikipedia (priority if wanted) or as fork in wikinfo or a new wiki forking off Uwe Kils 13:02, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

can you protect for us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_krill/ice for a demo please Uwe Kils 14:50, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

thank you, that is ok with us. We changed it to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kils/Antarctic_krill/frozen can you protect that please Uwe Kils 18:07, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Houston Chronicle Mediation

I've heard you were involved in a content dispute on this page, so I'm asking you if you'd be willing to talk about your views on the matter to help mediation. Please indicate if you are willing to do so and promise the follow these rules.

You won't edit the article while mediation is ongoing. Suspected sockpuppeting should be reported to me personally for investigation.
No comments aimed at the other party or their edits should contain loaded language that can be construed as offensive or otherwise hurtful.
Mediation should be done in good faith without regard for previous editing behavior.
Comments should be made about the other person's edits and not them as a person. If possible you should try to bring sources to the table which I can review.
If, somewhere along the way, you think there's a possibility to reach an agreement on any of the disputed points, let it be known as soon as you can.

Please respond on my talk page as soon as you can. -- Mgm|^(talk) 18:49, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

I'd be happy to participate in Mediation (capital "M" this time) if the other key editors participate too. Thanks for getting involved. Cheers, -Willmcw 22:44, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

I'm somewhat agreeable to mediation with a couple caveats. I do not agree that the article should be closed from edits during mediation 'as long as 3RR violations and other "revert war" situations do not arise. Halting all edits entirely IMO constrains the use of the editing mechanism towards a working solution and restricts the debate to two stagnant previous versions. Furthermore, while I am open to outside or public participation in this dispute, I would prefer that it focus primarily upon the differences between myself and Katefan0 regarding the section in question. As I detailed to you previously, I have strong reasons to doubt the motives of certain participants in this particular dispute and believe that their immediate involvement would be generally deconstructive to any attempt at resolving the primary disputes between myself and Katefan. Thanks again. Rangerdude 02:18, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

- I would prefer to have editors agree not to tinker with disputed sections in question while we work on an agreement in the talk pages. That's the standard way of proceeding with dispute resolution. Otherwise we'll just end up edit warring. · Katefan0^(scribble) 14:02, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
  - I disagree. Wikipedia already has policies such as 3RR to inhibit edit wars. If these are violated then a basis for halting changes may exist, but so far they have been followed. Furthermore, I am of the belief that halting edits will restrict the discussion to two previous stagnant versions of the text. Since Katefan0 is espousing a fairly absolutist position that her version should be substituted in full, halting the editing process could restrict our options and unduly advantage that substitution. Rangerdude 14:33, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    - That's what mediation is for. We can work toward a resolution in a talk page, modifying text until we both agree. There's no reason to, while we are working on disputed text, simply paste something into the live version that we all perhaps can't agree on. This seems imminently sensible to me. · Katefan0^(scribble) 14:55, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
      - I don't object to developing a working version in the mediation page. I simply don't see anything to be gained from restricting the regular page as well beyond what already exists under 3RR and other related "revert war" policies, which have not been an issue despite the dispute. I will voluntarily agree to keep my edits to existing texts to a minimum during mediation excepting extraordinary unforseen circumstances, but I do not believe a bar on edits should be firmly imposed for the reasons mentioned previously. Rangerdude 19:39, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Is this mediation going to happen or have some editors vetoed it? I see that the article is being very actively edited. Thanks, -Willmcw 21:12, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

krill

Dear mgm, I addressed the objections that were raised, thank you very much for the advice - it would be nice if you would take another look at Antarctic krill - best greetings Uwe Kils 03:55, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Edit war on Zanskar

Hi Mgm, was wondering if you could do us a favor. Mr Tan is trying to copyedit Zanskar even though there is no problem with the article. I, along with another user, have tried to talk him out of this, showing that Zanskar has no apparent or immediate problems in grammar, spelling, or style, and also that this editing spree of his might only introduce errors into the document, as his previous edits on the article have proven. We suggested that he make a draft of his version, but he refused, saying that he saw the need for a draft unnecessary, and proceeded to put up the cleanup tag on the article. Moreover, he has not listened to our requests, and now is accusing us of not listening to his requests. To give him time to understand the situation, I have broken off communication with him until he can comprehend the situation. Alas, it seems that he is also ready to participate in an edit war:

"You want edit war? Go ahead."; "But if you do not co-operate, I have to indulge in an edit war, ..."

He wants to act like the Godhead here:

"We have already come to a stage where you have to obey me, not the reverse in this article."

We have, however, never forced him to do or not do anything. If you want a small sampling of his edits, I'll refer you here.

For the sake of our poor readers, I'd like this page to be protected. Thanks. JM Bell ° 15:49, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Some help with Mr Tan would be appreciated too, if you have the time and patience. :)

User name

Hi Mgm! Thanks for your quick reply at Help desk. I'll really ask a developer if anything can be done as to this unfortunate name (Eleassar). But now I see that different developers have different accesses. Whom do you suggest me asking? If for example I asked Angela, do you think she would be able to help? Thanks and happy wiki-ing! --Eleassar Missing image
Slovenia_flag_300.png

my talk 20:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Zanskar

Firstly, I am here to thank you for your page protection. While I am already very angry for Bell treating me like a dirt on his last comment on Talk:Zanskar, I would be very grateful if you can give me your attention to let me elaborate on my reasons:

Although technically there is no problem with the grammar, I am not satisfied with the styling in contrast to average Wikipedia articles in retrospect to Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles.

However, to my horror, they told me in "retaliation" by saying that it is perfect; so I ask if it is fit enough for Featured article candidate, but they did not respond. If you notice, much of the facts, didtantly related, are clumped into one, large, single paragraph which wasn't their style on copyediting Kinnaur.

I have also suggested a draft; but on consideration a draft may not work well because I am doing content restructuring. Coming to the reason of why I said that "We have already come to a stage where you have to obey me, not the reverse in this article.", I need their co-opeeration to let me do whatever I like to the article for the time being, because as you can see, both parties; while JMBell has suggested that I should not edit; I objected; and we fought.

So, I came to this conclusion that I need their co-operation for them to listen to me; not the reverse; otherwise everything will get stalled up, and this is what happened.

Also, as you can see, Bell stated that "And if you don't want to start an edit war, don't revise anymore. Fair warning again.". To me, this is a way that Bell is trying to threaten-dictate me, and I do not like that, for I myself already know that we have reached a stage where things can only work where I need their attention. However, I stated "You want edit war? Go ahead."; "But if you do not co-operate, I have to indulge in an edit war, ...", for I do not want the article to be in such a state. I really want things to work as they are, so I have to reassert them mentally, for I realise that have been forced to the only way out.

MGM, I would appreciate that we can go through a person-to-person discussion concerning Zanskar. Thanks.

Mr Tan 05:40, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

G'bye, everyone. And for the record, I am very particular about human rights and equal justice so what he's saying is rubbish. JM Bell ° 06:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You better shut up, Bell, for I am not a doll which you can treat me or scold me in anyway you like. I am serious on the article, and I want a civil discussion.

Mr Tan 11:41, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am very happy and grateful at your attitude in contrast to the article. However, I would like to inquire how should I give you the list of edits that I would like to made, for I apologise I do not know how to do it. Or I suggest a draft which is less troublesome---but I do not trust it for the intereptation level is lower but more convinent, which is the source of our poor misunderstandings--I am sorry for my comprehensive skills are not very good.

Or I directly edit on the page itself, without interruptions within a scheduled period of time and that was what I proposed to do. But Bell and Mel misinterpreted it as me trying to take control of the article, firmly stating that my English skills three months ago proved to be very poor. But a person three months ago need not necessarily be the same as of today!

Also, I would be very happy if you can fix a scheduled dateline somewhere within a week from now, for I really needs this batch of time to sort things out.

Mr Tan 12:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

JMBell

Now, now, that isn't very nice, you know. You could get banned for such language. And why do you think I'm treating you like a doll? Am I doing anything inconsiderate, because if I am, I am not at all aware of it. In fact, I have always made use of civility and good nature in my dealings with you, and now you're telling me this?

And how did you ever come to the conclusion that I take this matter as a joke? How? I am and have given you perfectly reasonable and civilized answers, unlike you; your statements sometimes come very close to sounding like orders. I, being responsible for the outcome of your (your and Mel Etitis') debate and the article, cannot allow you to carry out so drastic a change without first allowing other editors to view your intentions. Your refusal to make a draft is outright preposterous - you only need to right a draft, which will end this whole war, and not persist in editing something which you cannot edit - yet!

I have always been very level-headed and reasonable with you, but now, my patience is running out. Please do this for all of us so that we can get this over and done with. And please don't say that I should cooperate because I am cooperating. You are, in fact, not.

I will ask for mediation, if you don't mind. Now I must go. JM Bell ° 12:13, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Can you please look through the last two comments you posted? I have no time to quarell over this trival matter. Also, your hard-headed nature (shown in refusals to edit) the Zanskar page lack co-operation. I apologise if there is a contradicting policy in retrospect to my above statement. Goodbye.

Mr Tan 03:08, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:Humanbot update 13 June 2005

The spelling2 project (to work on secondary namespaces) was opened and finished. Progress charts will be available soon.

Version six-three tracks who made the edits, and rankings are available. Much of the work was done while I was asleep, explaining my low place (http://humanbot.joeyday.net/enwiki/stats.php) ;).

The next project, which may even be released today, will probably fix incorrectly capitalised headings, particularly "See Also" and "External Links".

The mailing list has grown to 24 people and while that is very nice for my ego, it is rather difficult to send out updates. This is why I did not send out a notice that the spelling2 project had opened. From now on, then, you must watch User:Humanbot/announce for updates. r3m0t ^talk 12:04, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

King Rising Levitation

Hey Mac :)

creative work by an individual, yes, should be protected. if you take a look at the history of the page, you'll see the anon, which I presume is User:Ilovemagic, cited this (http://www.ellusionist.com/order/king.htm) link as the copyright violation, which is a promotional dvd on sale for the King Rising Levitation trick. It seems to me that the anon is trying to make his sales not suffer. Unless, the anon IS Cory King, which the article cites as the original creator. Furthermore, the copyright law does not apply when someone, who has understood the mechanics of the subject in question, discloses or discusses those mechanics, ie, the copyright law is not a Non-disclosure agreement.

Now, I understand that there's a fair amount of competition between illusionists and each illusionist is trying to keep his or her secrets, well, secret, but this is not a violation of copyright law, mostly because the original author does give credit to the man that created it.

Thanks for replying :)

Project2501a 12:32, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

To me it seems unfair, to make a product freely available when people should actually pay for the secret.

Bill agrees with you :) So, let's close down wikipedia and let's all move to Encarta, so we can have the privilledge of paying for editing their articles :D And while we're at it, let's conjure fireballs against the evils of Linux, because, you know, it's Free as in beer and Free as in freedom! you know, there's this commercial operating system called Windows and we should all run it and we should all pay for the priviledge of running it because it's a recent commercial product that does a lot of magic - poorly. :). I'm not trying to be cynical here, I'm just just trying to show you the computer analogy.

I deduct from your username that you are an illusionist yourself, or deal with magic trics one way or the other and trust me, I do sympathise, because I do know what it feels like when someone steals your work and presents it as his/hers. That's why I develop Free software and not Closed source software: No secrets, no worries, no bull like this to work with, open market and meritocracy at its best. If you got the skill to pull of wizardry, go ahead, nobody is going to stop you, but if you try to copy somebody else without giving him proper credit, you're SOL and someone will call you on your bull :)

furthermore, the magician's oath is a guild oath. Much like Masonic oath, it has no binding legal value. Thanks for replying :)

Project2501a 16:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Operas by title

Since you participated in discussion on Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Opera, I thought I should let you know that the category is now up for deletion on WP:CfD#Category:Operas by title. Cheers. --BaronLarf 12:44, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Sneaky user...

Hi there, I see you're an admin and you're online at the minute, so could you have a look at User:SIimVirgin (note the captial i), I don't know what they're doing, but I don't think it's very good... Anilocra 18:05, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Good stuff. You might also want to look at User:AniIocra :) (I've never been impersonated before). Anilocra 18:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Anilocra 18:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm about to call it a night, but thought I should also point out User:MacGvyerMagic...! Anilocra 18:23, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vanessa Blue

Thanks for the note. I wasn't too concerned about it being speedied -- though I would have voted "expand or delete" instead. I'm not exactly an expert on the subject so I'm not really qualified to write an article. I just wanted to note in the VFD that actors in her profession have articles so I wanted to make sure the speedy didn't occur simply because of the subject matter. Deleting (even speedy) due to lack of content, plus there was POV in what little content there was, is fine by me. Cheers! 23skidoo 23:19, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Zanskar

Having forced to no other way out by time and social circumstances, I think the draft is the most viable solution. Just to inform you about my new plan, please take a look at it again when I finish. I will tell you then and there. Thanks.

Mr Tan 07:19, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Magic trick

I'm no expert at IP law, but here's my best shot:

I find it unlikely that you could copyright a magic trick. "Methods" and "procedures" are the sorts of things covered by patents primarily. There are some possible exceptions to this: you can trademark your very-individual personality if you are a celebrity (in a sense), and I bet you can claim copyright on certain types of performance art, but I don't know how strong the claim would be. Or, put more strictly in the way copyrights work: if you performed a trick, and somebody else watched you do it, and then goes on to perform the trick and their own show, could you sue them for infringement? Maybe, but I'm doubting it would hold water. If you wrote it down, and then sued them for following your directions? Most definitely not.
Could you patent a magic trick under U.S. IP law? It probably depends on the trick. You can patent business methods, you can even patent general concepts (there is a famous "bad patent" called "Method for swinging on a swing", which is a way to use a swing, a not very original one at that). If you called it, "Method for producing an illusion of X and Y", would it be too different from the fellow who (no doubt) patented the method of producing 3-D comic books by interspersing different layers of red and blue? I doubt it. If you called it, "A wonderful magic trick," I bet it would get rejected. A lot rides on the language.
You'd have a much better time if it involved some sort of apparatus, I think. There are patents for magic tricks of this sort, such as this one (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=3&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1='magic+trick'&OS=%22magic+trick%22&RS=%22magic+trick%22) for some sort of "vanishing effect" trick. Look at the way the "claims" are presented -- I can easily imagine something worded in this fashion for even a card trick. Of course, you'd have to prove that nobody else came up with it first ("prior art"), but assuming you've done your research that shouldn't be hard, if it is truly original and not too similar to other tricks.
One could interpret most magic tricks of the past as having fallen under the domain of IP law known as trade secrets -- which is to say, you don't get any monopoly on them, but you also never have to tell anybody how they are done! Filing a patent on a magic trick would require full disclosure of the trick.. and what's the fun in that? ;-)
It is worth wondering how many magic tricks would be around today, though, if magicians had to wait 17 years before building on the trick of another -- would we have had Houdini if he had to pay royalties for his escape tricks? I'm not sure I think patenting magic tricks is necessarily the best way to "encourage innovation" in magic, which is the stated purpose of IP law.

Hope that is of some use to you in thinking about this. IP law is a murky area—most of it comes down to "what will hold up in court?" than it does any sort of rule-based ("what is allowed?") system. So I don't have a definite answer. It comes down to whether or not it would hold in court (could go either way, depends on how persuasive your lawyer is!), or whether the USPTO would grant the patent (which again is hard to predict, would depend on how you worded it most likely; they grant patents for some pretty silly things). --Fastfission 21:19, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Houston Chronicle/Mediation

Mediation requested. -Willmcw 01:01, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

user:Rangerdude has given an indication that he is willing to participate in mediation with me. Can you, in your capacity as Mediation Committee chair-presumptive, recommend some potential mediators? Thanks, -Willmcw 09:16, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Houston Chronicle Mediation

MGM - greetings and thank you again for your willingness to mediate this dispute. A problem has emerged on the mediation page between myself and User:willmcw. As I mentioned previously, this poster and I have a long history including a pattern of behavior he has engaged in that I consider to be harassment and wiki-stalking in which he conciously follows me around wikipedia for the purpose of disrupting and deconstructing my edits and to lend his assistance to other editors whenever I am involved in an editing disagreement and dispute. It was for this reason that I am leery of his participation in this mediation at all, and that I explicitly requested separating the mediation between myself and Katefan from mediation discussions involving other editors. Since the mediation began, Willmcw has unilaterally added himself into the main discussion between myself and Katefan, including an alteration to the mediation header that included him and the creation of a new section for himself within this section rather than the section designated for other editors. I restored the original formatting and moved his comments to the appropriate section, however he seems to be reverting them at the present.

Given the aforementioned history between this poster and myself I very strongly object to his addition to the top section's mediation between myself and Katefan and will withdraw from the mediation if he persists. My general experience with Willmcw is that he intentionally tries to fuel controversy and inflame disputes where he knows I am involved, thus his participation in the manner he presently desires will likely have the effect of widening the already severe rift between myself and katefan on this article. Thank you Rangerdude 01:10, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

thank you everybody

I would like to express my thanks to everybody helping in the nomination of Antarctic krill. I think 3 1/2 supports and a long long discussion are an unexpected and great outcome for a critter so remote and unknown - you should see how little and poor Antarctic krill is represented in Encarta and Britannica - this is the best reviewed and resourced general article of krill we know of - it is impossible to fullfill all wishes at the same time - this is what we did with our all product peer review stamp (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antarctic_krill&oldid=15197713) to qualify this stage of the article for academic exercises, especially for our dreams of a Virtual university within Wikiversity - good luck to you all Uwe Kils 21:48, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

huh?

I have created no gallery of images. What are you talking about? Eyeon 11:38, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I Dream

I didn't really like I Dream (and have never been mad on S Club 8), so that's why I didn't write too much on it. But, by all means, feel free to improve it yourself if you want to (a lot of the article was originally written by you, after all!). You can find episode guides at TV.com (http://www.tv.com/I_Dream/show/30333/summary.html), although the main cast list on that site is inaccurate: as you probably know, the members of S Club 8 weren't playing themselves. For that, I'd suggest consulting the IMDb entry (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0426721/), which I am working to improve (but ignore the "lead writer" writing credit for Paul Dornan, he only received episode-specific credits). Extraordinary Machine 17:01, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for editing my talk page with Wikipedia help links, I have been scrambling to find information on how to do things, and your links help a ton. Srcrowl 20:35, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
Template:Unsigned

Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Marilu_mercalina

Hey there, thanks for the edit. I totally forgot to sign my comment; that is fixed now. See you around. -- claviola (talk to me) 20:44, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I forgot to do so, too. It is listed now. Thanks again. -- claviola (talk to me) 20:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:Tverbeek mediation request

I've notified the other parties, but User:Stevietheman (the one I'm in dispute with, and previously expressed a willingness to go through mediation) has blanked that message - and then our entire discussion - from his Talk page. {shrug} Tverbeek 21:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have the right to remove personal attacks (and really anything!) from my own talk page. I am refusing mediation with Tverbeek due to incessant personal attacks from him and RobotWisdom. The weblog article is now theirs to play without any interference from "egomaniacal, ignorant" me. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk | Work</span>} 14:55, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

User:Guy who changed benedicts pic mediation request

Im sorry for doing this, i wont do it again. Actually I just created the entry for Morichro with real information. If you require proof, I will get it for you. Template:Unsigned

Active members of the Med com

I actually mailed everyone on the Med com page asking if they were still active and if I could update the list - the result is what you see! I should've have cc'ed you really, but I forgot. D'oh. Anyway, yeah, there's only four left and iirc they've all already stated support for you to take the chair. (PS If you've ever wondered what my motivation is, it's just that I see mediation as being 'nicer' than ArbCom cases, and I'd like to see mediation happening again!) Dan100 (Talk) 18:54, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

HELP ME

please can you tell me how to get the link to your talk page in your append? I know the one with 4 of these ~ gets your username, time and date, but not the talk page. HELP! - Supersaiyanplough 09:11, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm having a real problem with Ed Poor and have formally requested mediation

See also his talk page and the administrator's noticeboard for details.

Really need some help here, serious disruption by means of multiple page moves at Qur'an desecration controversy of 2005. Talk page there will make for interesting reading, as well. BrandonYusufToropov 19:30, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Me, You, Mr Tan, and Zanskar

Hi MGM, nope, I'm not leaving for good, though I did get rather irritated by Mr Tan and his stubbornness, but I've seen a couple of good movies since then, and had time to cool off, so I'm back to wreck a few articles in whatever dismal way I can :) and to try get this whole Mr.-Tan's-editing-dispute to an end in whatever way I can. Thanks for your message, btw. :) Cheers - JM Bell ° 21:45, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sig help

Thanks, to use the sig do i just put the 4 ~s again? Ill try it now, so if it works dont bother replying. - Supersaiyanplough|^(talk) 03:02, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

accusations of sock puppets and minority scientific views

Thanks for your comments on my User talk:Ray Tomes page. The problem is a little moot now as the Harmonics Theory pages were deleted. All the same, I would appreciate your advice. It is quite clear to me that there are many people that are threatened by information that undermines their belief systems. They think that they are scientific but in fact act very emotionally when they are unable to defend arguements against them. This is a particular problem with minority scientific views. It applies equally as well outside wikipedia as in it, and has lead a nobel lauriate, Josephson, to speak out on the difficulty of getting new views aired.

In the case of Harmonics theory, the people voting for deletion were almost all uninformed of the subject matter but found it objectionable. Those that were informed (in some cases invited by me because they were) spoke in favour of keeping the article. It seems to me that the present procedure is rather daft in this case - the invited experts votes were ignored because they were not regular wikipedians. The ignorant people's votes were counted becaue they were regular - many only took a quick scan, voted and never returned to read the discussion. There really ought to be some better method than this, don't you think?

I really don't know where to go to make these thoughts known. I know of a number of other similar articles deleted which I have nothing to do with. Of course alternative views should be clearly labelled as such. However for the majority view to say that all other views are to crushed is more like the inquisition or communist china than the modern free world. As a further example, Halton Arp, a very much acliamed astronomer left the US because he was stopped from having access to telescopes because he kept finding evidence against so-called "standard" cosmology. Any thoughts? Ray Tomes 04:46, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mediation User:NoPuzzleStranger vs. User:Tobias Conradi

thanks for comming in. The prob is I do not want lies about me going around. I asked him to provide stats for his claims, I myself did a lot of work to provide them. I had long talk he stopped talking. I even would have liked Arbitration, but it says I need mediation first. Now at least he did some work to provide stats, maybe because of your post at his page (thanks a lot!!) and he corrected one of his statements, but added new false claims. BTW: I have no problem that he says I moved pages unilaterally. This is right, I did it. I was bold in beginning, but after complaints came in, I started to try to talk with relevant contributers first. best regards and thanks for your work in Mediation Commitee Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:05, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A question in response to your kind HelpDesk remark

I recently authored two articles. Say that the article is titled "A B". Oddly, when I search for "A" or "B" separately, it doesn't show my page for "A B". Only when I search for "A B" will it find the page.

Shouldn't this be immediately updated or am I doing something wrong in my page?

Or is there a delay time before some index gets updated?

  1. There is a delay in the updating of the indexes
  2. If you want to find something, by not using the full title of the page, you should click "search" instead of "go". The "Go" button will look for a page with the exact same name as the string you typed. - Mgm|(talk) 07:37, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

...

Thanks for your reply.

It does work on GO, but it's been nearly four days since I entered the article. Using search doesn't find it or anything in it. Say the article is entitled "FIRSTNAME LASTNAME". If I put in 'FIRSTNAME LASTNAME' (no quotes) and hit enter or click GO, it finds the page. But if I enter simply 'LASTNAME', or 'FIRSTNAME LASTNAME' (no quotes), and hit SEARCH it doesn't find the pages or anything within them at all.

One would think that after four days the searching would work.

Help!

This is really critical.

Many Thanks in advance.

Wikiklrsc 23:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletes

I am sorry. I have only come across "Template:Delete because" when trolling the code pages. Prior to that, and searching for the delete protocols, I had only come across the "delete" template. Given that you feel that my behaviour is inappropriate, I will, of course, cease-and-desist from proposing deletions forthwith. Simon Cursitor 11:53, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that – I'll supply a reason in future. BTW Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion states that {{d}} or {{db|Reason}} may be used:

"Non-admins can ask for an admin to delete such a page … by adding either a {{delete}} or {{deletebecause|Reason}} header."

Perhaps Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion should be updated to state that only {{db|Reason}} must be used. --Bruce1ee (Talk) 13:21, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jean Benoît hasty speedy

You are correct. I saw the four word Newpage and rushed to judgment. Had I followed the link or reviewed this user's contributions I wouldn't have been so speedy to speedy. Also, I (almost) always use Template:Tl so, double fault on this one. Thanks for fixing it up and for calling it to my attention. hydnjo talk 20:19, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

More on searching

Searching

"I've added another note anonymously on the help desk. Basically, some things are delayed more than we want to. Updating indexes requires some manual actions on the part of developers, I believe and I'm not sure how often it's done. You could try searching Wikipedia using Google or Yahoo! - they usually update sooner. But I wouldn't worry about this. It may take some time, but eventually your article is gonna be found. with a "search" query too. Can you find it using WikiWax (http://www.wikiwax.com)? - Mgm|(talk) 08:15, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)"

Thanks for your kind response. I did try to look the articles up on WikiWax, as you suggested, but they didn't show up. The article is linked to an existing known and indexed article. Using Google doesn't find the entry on Wikipedia. Is there some way else you meant? Thanks for your help. Any further ideas would be appreciated! I hadn't expected the article not to be indexed after nearly five days! It appears to be in the right namespace. BTW, I am not sure how to send messages in Wiki, so pardon the re-posting here. Wikiklrsc 20:47, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC) (talk)

"You might not know how to post messages in wikipedia, but that last one reached me fine. I think your best shot is asking one of the developers why it's so slow. - Mgm|(talk) 20:54, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)"

Again, many thanks. One just chooses a random developer? BTW, has it been your experience that it takes so long to update the indexes? Nearly five days and counting? Wikiklrsc 21:02, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC) (Talk)

response from Japan?

Uwe wants to share this with you (from his talk page):

Hello Kils

Just would like to state that i have very much enjoyed being involved in a project of this nature. To see the speed of co-operation between various people was (Uwe, Lupo and Salleman and all others) fantastic. It was a complete buzz to go off researching about a scientific subject and coming to some understanding and appreciation of a creature that i would have no knowledge or interest in otherwise. I would like to say that it takes a damn good teacher to get others interested in what they teach and i for one, if only in a rudimentary and general way have found the subject of Krill and sorrounding issues of ecology and environment fascinating. I think that says a lot about your willingness to let others participate in something which you obviously have great knowledge in and could easily have been a lot less humble with. At some point i will put up some informtion on my home page so at least people know a little more about me. Am going to try to extend the article on Ice-algae so any info you may have would be good. I hope the article on Antartic Krill gets featured as i think it is now very good.

Wikiversity sounds like a good idea but will need more time to go through the proposal (not too sure what help i could be).

Once again thanks Uwe! Yakuzai 22:50, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

that feels good

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Antarctic_krill

did you see who gave the picture of the day (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_of_the_day/June_20%2C_2005)? take care Uwe Kils Missing image
Heringmini.jpg
Image:heringmini.jpg

23:58, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Gmail screenshot

Do you mind if this image is deleted ? -- Sundar (talk • contribs) 12:10, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

I've deleted the image and added a note in reference desk. -- Sundar 12:20, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Template talk:Did you know

Are you done yet? Can this be unprotected? Lupo 08:03, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

NavBoxes

I'm sorry, but I don't quite see the point in asking on a template talk page if it should be deleted, before TFD'ing it. I've actually done this some time in the past. But first, nobody much reads template talk pages. Second, if someone reads that talk page, it'd likely be someone who uses it, so he's going to argue against deleting it. And third, the discussion you're asking for is exactly what TFD is for.

However, I have noticed that consensus tends to like navboxes, so I would certainly think twice or thrice before proposing any such for deletion again. Yours, R adiant _>|< 10:14, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

You are of course right that those people should be notified. The question is, however, which people to notify (someone recently got angry at me because I nominated his favorite category for deletion, but of course I had no way of knowing that it was his favorite cat...) Notifying the creator of a template would be easy, but not relevant if it's an old template. Notifying recent editors sounds fair, but those are likely to have it on their watchlist in the first place. I suppose the best solution is checking whatlinkshere, following every link, and seeing whether the link actually means the template is added there and whether it was done recently, and if so, contact that user. But that's a lot of work and prone to mistakes. In other words I agree with you in principle but I don't really see a practical way about it. Suggestions welcome. R adiant _>|< 10:22, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Template:Spoiler-about

Radiant misunderstood and misstated the template's intended application. I've attempted to clarify this matter on both the templates for deletion page and the spoiler warning page, and I would sincerely appreciate it if you would reassess the template's validity. Thanks for your time! —Lifeisunfair 10:40, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks again for following up on this! —Lifeisunfair 12:45, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Monofibre has been undeleted

Hi Mgm. Just to let you know, monofibre, an article you speedy deleted on 12:41, 22 Jun 2005 has been undeleted and placed on VfD here. --Death phoenix 17:31, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Template:Rfmchat

Good job!

Hello! I just wanted to say good job on keeping an eye on VfD votes you've made. A lot of people vote immediately and then don't bother going back to see changes in the article- it's encouraging to see people take the time to follow up on their votes. --Scimitar 19:27, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gametalk

That was a previous article written by someone else. What's wrong with this one? Template:Unsigned

newbie questions

Thank you for your welcome. But after more closely exploring Wiki, I've decided I want to disassociate myself from it. However the instructions to do so are convoluted enough that I can't make sense of them. I'd like my pages removed and perhaps the name switched to an anonymous one. (ie, Formeruser etc) If you can help me with this, please leave a message. Thanks. -disastrophique Disastrophique 21:40, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

recent help desk change

Hi - Just an FYI. The change you made to wikipedia:help desk (adding some usage instructions) added some sections with html h2 headers. At least with my browser and classic skin, this caused the section edit links to not edit the correct section. Just on a hunch, I changed the h2 headers to use == headers instead and this seems to have fixed the issue. This sounds to me like a mediawiki bug (I suppose I'll make sure this shows up on bugzilla), but thought I'd let you know in case you're wondering why the h2's were changed. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:25, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

There was already a bug report on this, see [1] (http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2128). -- Rick Block (talk) 23:29, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ashley Penney

As you say, "blatant vanity" isn't a speedy deletion criterion. You might be interested to learn that I'm currently performing a study on a hypothetical speedy deletion criterion. Whilst the criterion is not "vanity" or "not asserting notability", it does appear so far (partway through the study) to qualify for speedy deletion many of the "vanity" articles that receive unanimous deletion consensus on VFD (whilst also safely excluding those that end up as a keep consensus). This article would qualify for speedy deletion under the criterion, for example. User:Uncle G/Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Unsourced biographies. See the talk page for the study in progress. Uncle G 10:31, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)

WP:FAC

Thanks for catching and fixing my SNAFU. I will ~~write out~~ copy and paste 100 times "be careful when copying and pasting" Here we go ... be careful when copying and pasting ... be careful when copying and pasting ... -- ALoan (Talk) 12:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/User_talk:MacGyverMagic"

User talk:MacGyverMagic

Welcome

Archives and links

glycosylation vs glycation: a humble request

Cricket pages

Mediation

Register account first

Mr Tan

Mediation reforms

Re: Furry / Furry fandom mediation request

Re: Template

Sorry

Houston Chronicle

Re:User:Grutness/Grutness non-article

A few more newbie questions

Mediation

My FPC

Mediation request

krill

German

Houston Chronicle Mediation

krill

Edit war on Zanskar

User name

Zanskar

JMBell

User:Humanbot update 13 June 2005

Operas by title

Sneaky user...

Vanessa Blue

Zanskar

Magic trick

Houston Chronicle Mediation

thank you everybody

huh?

I Dream

Thank you

User:Tverbeek mediation request

User:Guy who changed benedicts pic mediation request

Active members of the Med com

HELP ME

I'm having a real problem with Ed Poor and have formally requested mediation

Me, You, Mr Tan, and Zanskar

Sig help

accusations of sock puppets and minority scientific views

Mediation User:NoPuzzleStranger vs. User:Tobias Conradi

A question in response to your kind HelpDesk remark

Speedy deletes

Jean Benoît hasty speedy

More on searching

response from Japan?

Hello Kils

Gmail screenshot

NavBoxes

Monofibre has been undeleted

Good job!

Gametalk

newbie questions

recent help desk change

Navigation

Search

Toolbox

Personal tools