User talk:Realist2/Archive 16

Removing prods

Just wanted to point out that the proposed deletion policy page allows removal of the prod tag by the article's author. Specifically it says (in the conflicts section) "If anyone, including the article's creator, removes a {{prod}} tag from an article for any reason, do not put it back, except when the removal is clearly not an objection to deletion (such as blanking the entire article). If the edit is not obviously vandalism, do not restore tag, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith. If you still believe that the article needs to be deleted, list it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Therefore your comments in the edit logs of Honorific titles in popular music were a little out of order as the were doing nothing wrong and indeed technically you were wrong to re-add the prod. Not having a go, just pointing it out so you can avoid trouble in the future. As an aside my personal POV if that page creators shouldn't be able to remove them but that's not the rules and we need to live with that. Dpmuk (talk) 10:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree, thats why I reverted myself afterwards and nominated the article for deletion. Thus I did all your above suggestions before you came to me. Thus, I wonder why you needed to bother frankly, other than to perhaps "have a go". — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 11:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. It just wasn't clear to me from the edit logs why you had reverted - to me it seemed like you went for an AfD in desperation rather than realising you'd made a mistake. I'm sorry if I was mistaken in that believe. I checked your talk page's and the article's talk pages recent history to see if anyone else had told you and that was the reason for your revert but couldn't find anything so wanted to make sure you were aware of the rules. Surely you'd prefer someone to tell you here than report you later. I also apologise if I dind't word my original message that well. Dpmuk (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Honorific titles...

Greetings Realist², I feel we should keep up this debate on our talk pages and/or article talk pages rather than at the AfD page. I agree with you in some/many of the things you point out - in fact my use of the word "crap" to describe the content is far stronger than your "gibberish". But that is beside the point - precisely the fact that someone, unilaterally and without prior debate, disagrees with the inclusion of an article goes against the whole spirit of Wikipedia and is, in itself, the epitome of POV. I mentioned somewhere that I spend a hell of a lot of my Wikipedia time tidying up, copy-editing, deleting vandalism, etc. on articles which are of no interest to me whatsoever and which I personally do not consider notable enough. My thinking is that if it's up, for the prestige of Wikipedia, it should be decently presented. I think speedy deletion is too powerful a tool to be used except for those articles which are plainly offensive or, as you say, gibberish - which this one is not. Other cases should be deleted after more than two people have expressed their opinion, surely? Look forward to your feedback. Regards, --Technopat (talk) 11:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with your comments greatly about gibberish. You should not be so critical and to say it was point of view. That was ridicilous because after everything I stated there was a link to support it.There are plenty of strong links if you look at them. At first the links didnt come out so I rtied a different approach. You shouldnt be so critical especially when i seen you make mistakes on the Michael jackson page. I think in most cases yor a good editor so you know much so getting your advice rathar then scrutiny would be good.Kelvin Martinez (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

We all make mistakes don't worry. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 20:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for removing that gibberish stuff.I can accept the talk about the page Kelvin Martinez (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

True

Its totally unnecessary and pointless. Unrelated: I've been seeing some weird kind of vandalism at Tom Cruise since yesterday, do you? indopug (talk) 14:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, i replied regarding this on my talk page yesterday (which I archived shortly afterwards lol), a vandal, probably someone from encyclopedia dramatica is messing about with templates, thus it cant be reverted or seen in the article history. It's a clever tactic. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 14:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Nominate Tom cruise. :P indopug (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

To Do

Any articles you want me to work on/help you on? I have nothing to do right now.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Not really, I'm not doing much at the moment. Why watchlist has been so dull today. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed nothing is going on. I'm just keeping an eye on some AfDs. I'll be closing one tomorrow probably. Please comment on them. Common, you must have some article that requires general tweaking.:(--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Not really, I've been doing reviews today because I got nothing else to do, I'm having a creative block (serious hang over) so haven't been article building. I nominated an article for deletion as well, something I rarely do. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

What's the article? I'll take a look.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Honorific titles in popular music, the title says it all. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Kay, added my opinion in favor of deletion.( Not a vote...;) )--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The thing is though is that the articles for deletion process is flawed. The majority of the people who vote in those things are people who went to the relevant article and noticed it was up for deletion. I would imagine that the majority of people who go looking for an article have an interest in the subject matter. I personally don't think the notice should be visible on the article. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

True. That means we're more likely to have people who may be biased. What do you think would be a good alternative?--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh and that "some AfDs" link? Please comment on them. You're a better judge of articles than me.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the process is ok, I just don't think articles should be plastered with a sign saying "THIS ARTICLE MIGHT BE NUKED!!!", those visiting the article shouldn't know that it's considered for deletion, otherwise we are inviting people in who have a possible bias in the subject matter. If people want to get involved with deletion debates then they should go to the main Articles for deletion page and start commenting on them all. I'll take a look at the link, probably not tonight though, I'm tired now. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Good night then. R2, a guess here:You live in Spain?,Portugal?UK?:D Come on...:P--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 23:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure my user page clears this confusion up hehe. I currently live in the United Kingdom. I was born in what you would probably call South America then I moved to Spain. I now study in the UK. I'm cultured to say the least. My English is improving a lot as well, thanks to Wikipedia and some invention called a spell checker. Scary, some people think English is my first language and I'm judged by that standard, that's hard to live up to at times. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Eh...everyone is a critic.Hehe;) I was born in Vietnam,and spent nine months there before my mom and I moved over to the US to meet up with my dad who had been in the US since the 70s after the Vietnam War.(Don't ask me about the war.It's not because I'm sensitive about it;it's because it started 30 years before I was born,and ended 20 years before I was born, and I don't know a thing about it!:PI have never read the article on it,weird.:) ) My English is excellent as I use more often than Vietnamese(Which I barley know,I should also mention French use to be the second language of Vietnam before English,both of my parents know French).I should also mention I did correct some of your writing right here,;).I had better not get into an edit conflict because of this long response.....--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 23:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's Ok, it's very late, at this point instead of typing I just bash my skull against the keys and punch save. I'm happy it's even this coherent. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

Do you have that page ready so I can start trimming? WesleyDodds (talk) 03:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like to start some seriosu work on the article. The reason I need a userpage from you not to do a new draft of the article, but to place material I plan to take out of the main article so it won't get lost and you can use it for other pages. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I decided to nominate it, even the pro's grammar etc are good. If people oppose because it's "too long" i will just drag up a list of all the other FA's that are huge. God darn it, the featured article that was on the main page the other day was a painting, that was nearly 70,000 bytes. A painting, not someone who has had a 40 year career as one of earths most famous people! Besides I don't want material removed that could alter the articles neutrality in anyway, something infinitely more important to that article. — Realist² (Speak) 12:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

King of anarcho melodic death folk punk-rap

Your nomination rationale for that monarchy article is wrong; poorly formatted references and bad prose are reasons for deletion. Notability of the different artists is obvious, and I think this article is based on reliable sources... The problem is that these journalistic sensalisations shouldn't be one place in an encyclopedia; we aren't some random, "useful"/"interesting" directory. I've added that to the nom. indopug (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I still think it should be deleted per WP:SHIT, WP:CRAP, WP:GIBBERISH. :-) — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 11:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I have a bad feeling about this, I think its going to end up as a keep. indopug (talk) 13:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Its not the end of the world, remember, at one point there was an article for every pokemon character, evetually they saw sense and it was all trimmed back. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Hilary Duff FAC

thanx for ur comments....Can you pls elaborate on "Career info needs to be made into one chronological section" ???....Becos the article already is in chronological order. And each section of her career (TV,Music and Film) are in chronological order. If you feel that all of her career shd be merged into a section, then i personally feel that combining all three sections will result in too much clutter and would infact harm the readability of the article. Thats why the three sections have been separately presented. Regarding your suggestion of merging controversies section into other sections, i would like to add that a year ago "Controversies" were merged into other sections (see this)...but as the article evolved, it got its own section and it is well sourced and cited. Also for an article to be NPOV, it shd have a critical review/controversies section according to me.In the view of above information, i would request u to kindly revisit your opinion on the FAC page. Any other suggestions are welcome....Gprince007 (talk) 15:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Her career section should be merged together into a chronoligical ordering. I don't mind you using sub headings like 2003-2005, 2006-2008, thats ok to make it more readable. I disagree with all your points, also per Jimbos own words, coat racking of "controversies" isn't good. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

As a trial basis, i have merged the television and film section together in a chronological order. Pls take a look at it and let me know whether i shd merge the music section into it or not. If yes, then dont you think merging music and acting career will result in a long section which would be tedious to read?? Its just a thought and do let me know if merging music into her acting career section is needed...thanx Gprince007 (talk) 18:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes I do thing you should. If you have concerns about a section being too long then why not give every year or every two years its own sub section rather than putting 3 years worth of info together. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 18:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I have merged her film and music career section into a single section in a chronological order. Can you now go thru the article and let me know if anything else needs to be done....thnx Gprince007 (talk) 09:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It's looking better, sorry it wasn't listed as featured, it's very hard. You still need to disperse the controversies into their relevant sections. Notice not even the Michael Jackson article has a controversies section. It's all integrated as it should be. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 13:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, now i have dispersed the controversies into their main sections.....Can you go thru the article now and let know if anything else needs to be done b4 renominatiing it for FA....thanx Gprince007 (talk) 17:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, the next big issue is that awards section at the bottom, to start none of it sourced, it should be written into pro's and dispersed. If its already sourced and dispersed within the article then just delete that table. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

GLAAD 2008

File:Comic-GlaadAwards copy.jpg

Odd Days by Aubrey Miranda featuring main character Ace and supporting character Skyler at the 2008 GLAAD Media Awards

As President of Mt. San Antonio College LAMBDA Student Association, I was lucky enough to receive free tickets to the 2008 GLAAD Media Awards. Our VP, Comic artist Aubrey Miranda was also in attendance. Here's what would have happened had I decided to take the plunge. Hope you find it amusing. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh wow!!! Hehe that looks cool. :-) — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 13:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

FAR

I take on the chin the fact that I was a bit off in replying to you there. Hopefully no hard feelings and you might give me a hand working to bring to the page back to standard. Best. ( Ceoil ^sláinte 15:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

My olive branch is here. and good faith there. ( Ceoil ^sláinte 15:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

CopyEdit

In re to your request on Kodster's talk: I'll take care of it R2.I've asked Kodster though to do a more in depth review. Michael Jackson is not my specialty.I'll add hidden comments as to where I believe revisions are necessary.I don't know about MJ so I can't revise them myself.Cheers!--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, I'm taking note, hope your OK reading that though, it's not a nice subject. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Nah. I'm fine. My main concerns were over WP:BLP and WP:NPOV but you seemed to have done a good job.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay I'm done.I don't guarantee I got every error or mistake though. You must have spent a lot of time on that.Wow,it's huge.Now we wait till Kodster checks it,revises it,etc. Do you have a title for it yet? It's pretty much guaranteed B class . But more refs(You'll need a lot of refs in the molestation sections to prevent edit wars),some revisions,rewordings perhaps,maybe 1-2 more pictures,some more links to other articles,etc and I'm pretty sure it could become a Good Article .Featured though,I won't even give an estimate for that.Highly controversial,FAs need stability not edit wars. Still, good work R2!:D--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers buddy. Yeah, I have to find more sources to back up some of the info. Actually I don't think there will be much edit warring. The article on People v. Jackson hardly gets edited anymore and I think this is less controversial as it didn't go to court. I haven't though of a title yet, it will be really wordy, something like "1993 child molestation accusations against Michael Jackson". I will take it to GA at some point but not FA, it's far too controversial. The only articles that get through an FA review these days are articles on flowers and colors. Also, remember, the Barack Obama article is featured, that has more edit wars than ANY article I know. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL.(FA review)That's true but don't give up hope. And I've decided to ditch Huggle for the rest of my vacation (4-5 weeks) and help you with this article and any other articles you need help with. I'll do some Google searches later today. And R2 it's 12 am over there!(Foxclocks,extension for Firefox,displays time for other countries/cities).I've got church in about 20-30 min so I'll be offline for 1½ hours. Remember though I'll be busy this summer and towards the end of this month will be in Las Vegas(Where RyRy lives!:P) and so may be unexpectedly gone for a few days intermittently during this month. Also I have hyperwords(another extension) which can translate the text on a page to a multitude of languages so if you need to say something spanish,no prob.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 23:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

What you said in spanish:Anima a compinche. Sí, tengo que encontrar más fuentes para sostener algo del Info. No pienso realmente que habrá mucho corrige guerrear. El artículo sobre la gente v. Jackson consigue apenas corregida más y pienso que esto es menos polémica pues no fue a cortejar. No tengo sin embargo de un título todavía, él seré realmente wordy, algo como “las acusaciones 1993 del molestation del niño contra Michael Jackson”. Lo llevaré GA en un cierto punto pero no FA, es demasiado polémico lejano. Los únicos artículos que consiguen con una revisión del FA actualmente son artículos sobre las flores y los colores. También, recuerde, el artículo de Barack Obama se ofrece, que hace que más corrijan guerras que CUALQUIER artículo que sepa.It doesn't recognize Wiki-syntax.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 23:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL, that was hilarious, apparently there is a rule against communicating in any other language than English on this wikipedia. Hehe, your blocked :-). There is no need to look for web links Xp, I have ton's of books on Jackson which are considered more reliable on wikipedia. Besides the article already has a number of web links and I'm trying to avoid using them because they always seem to go dead after a while. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Very well.:P Offline now.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 23:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Later buddy. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm using a new signature now. What do people think? — Realist² (Speak) 00:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The blue is softer on the eyes. I like it. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 00:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't expect a response that quickly, hehe. I think it brings out my softer side, hopefully. — Realist² (Speak) 00:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

<deep voice>Well I'll stick with my "manly"(I'm 13) signature.:P</deep voice> But yeah nice signature.Maybe I should change mine to have green?Green is my second favorite color,blue is my first.:)--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 01:36, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Dunno, I like yours, it suits your character as a vandal killer. — Realist² (Speak) 01:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hehehe.LOL.<continues flexing puny muscles>Still like I said I'm ditching Huggle(Goodbye my love!) for the rest of...I don't know..;).So yes I'd like a nice shade of green.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 01:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Where would you like the green? What shade of green, lighter or darker than mine? I'm sure you will manage without huggle just fine. — Realist² (Speak) 02:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like my blue a little lighter,closer to yours, and the green would be for the "hello" and "contribs" part.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 02:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, i will sort it for you tomorrow, I'm off to bed now, I will leave a format on your talk page tomorrow. Night night. — Realist² (Speak) 02:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let's not get too crazy about signatures here. Stick with one all the time, that's what I do. ;) -- RyRy (talk) 02:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

You're only now getting to sleep?!It's 3 AM over there!--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 02:09, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Good morning R2!Or good evening across the Atlantic!:P It's around 5:30 pm where you are right now. So, what's on the schedule today?(articles to copyedit,etc)--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 16:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm currently reading my Jackson books, making notes. I have to send you that code for your user name, I'll send it to your talk page now. — Realist² (Speak) 16:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Better, the blue is easier to see on screens. — Becksguy (talk) 17:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Racism thing

R2 sorry to bring up bad memories but on your sandbox talkpage I found the link to the ANI archive concerning the racism attacks against you. You went through that hell?! Wow..... If I had been there at the time I would have supported you all the way. The racist vandal was a friend? Hmmm...no wonder. I'm not going to offended if some stranger starts hurling racist terms at me but if a friend did, I'd completely break down...Are you over all of that?--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 17:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, i'm over it, it was very difficult at the time. They recently allowed him back onto wikipedia after a very long block, bumping back into him was an experience. I read the link now and again just so that it reminds be that i have grown as an editor. — Realist² (Speak) 17:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Indeed you have grown!:D I do the same with my talk archives and 1st RfA. Can you find the archive link to my ANI episode?--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:00, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Which one, there have been so many? :-) — Realist² (Speak) 18:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Really....? Well all of them then.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

This or this I assume are the ones you mean; they're the only ones where you were the main subject of discussion rather than a participant. (You can find them via "What links here" in the toolbox; limit it to Wikipedia-space only). – iridescent 18:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, why the hell was I not informed about the "rollback removal"thread?--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

And thanks Iri!:D--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

No idea why you weren't told – you should have been (someone even told Prom to in the thread). I only found it when I was looking in "What links here" for the other one. – iridescent 18:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't tell you about all this. See ANI.See the bottom.See "emergency"...--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 19:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Loose protection

Thanks for letting me know; reprotected for a week (by the way, nice sig! :)). Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, cheers for the protection and comment. — Realist² (Speak) 14:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia

I haven't been here in a while. Things are really confusing at Bionictest. I'll look over your MJ thing, and no, I have no problem reading it. BTW, I like your signature. You and Xp always have similar signatures. It's funny, in the "awwww, isn't that cute!" sort of way. LOL Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 19:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Damn I deleted it. (I kept telling myself that I would need it, but in recycle bin it went.) Anyway, I can DEFINITELY make you a new one. I'm going to look over the MJ thing first, if you don't mind. I'm really busy. Check out ANI. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 19:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem I'm just relaxing, reading my MJ books lol, mean while all hell breaks loose for you guys. Please take your time. — Realist² (Speak) 19:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you there R2? What happened?--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm here, I don't know what happened, nothing yet I think. You might find that your experience on wikipedia is a little more uncomfortable if it's ever proven that he did nothing wrong. I can't comment because I don't understand the thread, to many terms and names have been abbreviated in that ANI post for me to understand it. We wait and see. :-/ — Realist² (Speak) 00:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh...you don't understand the abbreviations.

• BT = BionicTest
• WP = Wikipedia
• Bg7/BG7 = Bluegoblin7
• Chem = Chemistrygeek
• Chris = Chris19910

That should be it.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, I will be setting up that new article I have been working on tomorrow. I saw you doing some article building of your own today :-) — Realist² (Speak) 00:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Now it has "Quick facts" sections, so you know its worthy of an encyclopedia.

Well, Andreas can't demand only one reviewer so that his work is simpler; that's not in the encyclopedia's best interests is it? His idea that I don't review his article—even when I just made one minor, and entirely justified point anyway—smacks of WP:OWN too. I don't see why you should feel down, either way.

Changing the topic: what's Bionic Test? indopug (talk) 14:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm down just because he thinks my review wasn't neutral, he thinks I like Heather mills or something so I can't be impartial. I hate to say it but it looks more like he's being a typical Beatles fan who just wants to ram a stake through her gut, lol. Bionic test is a new wiki whereby admin wannabes get to test out all the extra buttons. I think it's actually a really good idea for two reasons. Firstly, you make all the trial errors over their not here. I'm sure every new admin at wikipedia makes slip ups with the buttons when they first get access to them. Secondly it does make you realize that being an admin isn't that special. Seriously, the extra button's aren't worth the extra hassle lol. I'm a crat over at bionic test but I haven't edited very much because a lot of wierd stuff has been happening over there. — Realist² (Speak) 14:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

AR-15

Can you take a look at it and tell me what it needs? I added a ref(After searching for 15 min!) and would like to improve it further.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 20:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I will take a loo soon, one thing I noticed, you used a forum that must be removed, fan sites and forums are not allowed on wikipedia. I'm busy today but I will give it a strong read tomorrow I promise. — Realist² (Speak) 21:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Ugh...

R2 I really wanted this in the past but BG7(Or more likely his impostor) won't. See Recent Changes at BionicTest. He hacked me and then created socks in my name! He then banned me...R2 is there anything you can do? Actually go over there, and do the same to BG7. Who ever he/"she?" is we can't trust them to have that much power. Don't bother unblocking me or anything I'm quiting BT.:(--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 21:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Me, to, everyone has lol. — Realist² (Speak) 22:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I left this morning, I can't stand that bloody mess LOL. BTW, why do you want those bolded citations? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 22:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Basically I like to bunch reference together into blocks of about 5 pages. Say the quote is specifically on p 19, often my reference will say p 17-21. If you can bunch stuff together it means you can have a smaller reference section at the bottom. I leave it all the end and work out cut off lines etc on paper (sad I know). I'm trying not to read the article too much lol, it's such a depressing subject, no matter which way you look at it. I still have to add a few anti jackson things tonight/tomorrow. I think Bionic Test was doomed. — Realist² (Speak) 22:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree about Bionictest, though I do believe that the preferred way to do it is to do a reference for every page (unless you are referring to one quote that takes up multiple pages). Five pages for one reference might be stretching it a bit. I prefer one reference to a page, but to each his own. All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 23:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm done with the MJ thing. Is it for a new article? I'll work on your new name thing now. All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 23:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is, I should have it up and running tomorrow afternoon hopefully (say 18 hours from now). I still have a few additions to make and I need to change the lead as the article has changed a a lot since I wrote that. Hopefully will be a GA in a week, hehe. Cheers buddy. At first I was just trying to bulk up the details for the MJ article, then all of a sudden I was writing a full article. Are you working on anything these days? You been quite at wiki recently? — Realist² (Speak) 23:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming you mean quiet at wiki, and the answer is yes. :P I've been on BT, but I retired this morning like I said, so I'm going on wiki full-time (or just about as much as I can get). I did your picture, I hope you like it. The blue looks darker, but it's exactly the same color (I copied the html code of the color). Thankfully, it only took two minutes. Anyway, if you look at my to-do list, I'm working on Strawberry Fields Forever to GA, and of course, the eternal struggle of The Beatles FA (LOL). And that's it, so I'll be glad to help with whatever you're working on. You know how I am, here to help! :-) All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 23:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want a peer review of anything you do before you take it to GA/FA I can do that, just give me a bell, please do. Odd, the template you made hasn't changed for me, it's only when I click on it that I see the new one you made (maybe it will come into contact after I save this message). The picture it took me to when I clicked on it looks really cool though :-) — Realist² (Speak) 23:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it's not showing because you gave it the exact same name as the old one. :-/ — Realist² (Speak) 23:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thats really odd, I can see the new template when I'm on standard AOL, but when I'm on firefox I see the old one. — Realist² (Speak) 00:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Clear your Firefox cache (ctrl-r) – iridescent 00:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, cheers Irid, dunno what I'd do without you. :-) — Realist² (Speak) 00:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL, sorry I couldn't tell you that earlier. I use Opera, it showed up right after I put it on. Go figure. Anyway, I'll be sure to call you up (if your line's not engaged ;-)) if I need a PR. There's a PR open on Strawberry Fields Forever, if you'd like to contribute there. And The Beatles, well, you know how it is.... :PAll the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 02:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

So, you deleted my welcome. I'm terribly disappointed. I thought you could use a welcome. Apparently, some people are too busy to appreciate the work that we folks put into making our welcomes. ;) All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 01:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I'm done with that MJ thing, so if you want to put it on an article, go right ahead. All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 01:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

1993 child sexual abuse accusations against Michael Jackson. DONE. :-) — Realist² (Speak) 12:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank you

		Thank you!
		Realist2, it is with deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust that I am honored to report that in part to your support, my request for adminship passed (87/14/6). I deeply value the trust you and the Wikipedia community have in me, and I will embark on a new segment of my Wikipedia career by putting my new tools to work to benefit the entire community. My best to you, Happyme22 (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

A special thank you to you, Realist, for your very kind words not only on my RfA page, but at my talk page and many other places. I truly do appreciate them. :) Best, Happyme22 (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem, nice to see a good guy with the mop. :-) — Realist² (Speak) 11:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Strawberry Fields Forever#Recording

Thanks for the help (I noticed, don't worry. ;-))Would you mind checking this section out. I just finished a MAJOR revamp, so I'd like to see how it is. The article does need some cleaning up before any GA reviews, but I just want to make sure this section is okay generally. Thanks. All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that section is great. :-) — Realist² (Speak) 16:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Thanks also for the PR help, I really appreciate it. Any other suggestions? (If you're busy, then please don't mind me. I'm still on vacation, so I have plenty of time.) :-) All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 17:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm still working on it don't worry, I usually find that if I spend some time away from things, when I come back I can spot other things. I'll keep reading it and adding. I could citation tag it if you like, don't saying it needs it but I could look if there are any glaring lack of sources. I'm not busy, I'm just reading, hehe. — Realist² (Speak) 17:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

You like MJ, so I think you'll like this. :-) All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 18:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hint: Thriller. ;-) All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 18:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

He lol. I actually don't like the Thriller song that much (the video rocks though). I'm actually a much bigger fan of his 90's work, the videos and sound production was better polished and his 90's stuff is a lot darker, moody. Singing about imaginery zombies is good but not the most mature topic. — Realist² (Speak) 19:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The video was good (as far as music videos go). Still, I couldn't help but laugh when the girl screamed at seeing Michael change into the mutant cat thing monster (?). :-) All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 20:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

PR of Strawberry Fields Forever

I'll just put it in a subsection. In your peer review, you said "When Lennon returned to London, he had revised the verse[...] Is it me maybe, I just can't quite understand what this area[...] is saying". What do you mean "this area"? Do you mean that sentence, or the whole paragraph, or the whole section? All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 14:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I meant that one line, I couldn't make sense of it, I'm not really into all that musical terminology though so that doesn't help. Hehe. — Realist² (Speak) 15:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I've been reading Alan Pollack's analyses on the Beatles's songs, so I have a somewhat firm grasp on musical terms (although sometimes it sounds like he's just making it up). :-) Anyway, I added more wikilinks, and made the sentence clearer. And I did everything else in the PR, so you may want to check it out if you have the chance. (Ruhrfich is going to give me a detailed PR today or tomorrow, so by the time I'm done with that, I'm going to put it up for GA.) How's MJ going? All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I was wanting you do it, it's fine but I promise to give it another sweep for you :-). Hmm, MJ isn't going brilliant. I resolved someone comments and I have one weak oppose with very little suggestion on how to resolve their concern. :-/. — Realist² (Speak) 15:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Check out the review page now. Get someone to copyedit the article. Hmmmm.... All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I'm not asking you to do it again, each trip takes two damn hours. — Realist² (Speak) 15:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I can if you want. It was around 8 when I finished last night, and I had had a long day. I could do it again for redundant words and such. All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Man, but that's so unfair, it takes ages, I'm gunna owe you like 5 peer reviews. — Realist² (Speak) 15:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

All clean

If the refs are broken the article will show up in [:Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting] provided its been edited since April. I ran manually on each article but found nothing. --AdultSwim (talk) 22:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, thats a weight off my shoulders, with so many refs, its so easy to trip up somewhere. Cheers. :-) — Realist² (Speak) 22:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Code

R2,I should tell you I copied the code for your barnstars and and applied them to my barnstars [[1]]. Did I do it right?--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes it looks spot on to me, if you have concerns about those sorts of things RyRy is a lot better than me, still I think thats worked fine. — Realist² (Speak) 22:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

MJ

You're welcome. Now your good links aren't so diluted. I'll have a proper look at the article in a little while. Sandy's driving me hard to review, phewee.

Liberal values? Thank heavens. TONY (talk) 13:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, god, if sandy needs you it's best you do, I have all the time in the world. Cheers again. — Realist² (Speak) 14:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I looked at the FA review, and I noticed that the guy has a problem with "the entertainer". What does he mean by consistency? Should we always just call him Jackson, because then "the prose is not 'brilliant'". "The entertainer" is used a lot in the article, as is "the singer". All the best, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Email incoming R2.--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 16:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)