User talk:True Pagan Warrior/Archive 1

License tagging for Image:Job1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Job1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Beren (political party)[edit]

Hi, do you have a source for the information you added to Beren (political party)? If you do, please add it. KazakhPol 15:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, I had not checked. Thanks for adding the info and Welcome!

Hello, Otherlleft, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! . KazakhPol 16:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption[edit]

Hello! I see your seeking adoption. If your still interested I'd me more then happy to answer your questions and help you out. You can respond back to this by leaving a message here. If you have decided that you no longer wish to be adopted, please remove the adoptee's userbox from your userpage. Thanks, hope to hear from you soon! Matthew Yeager 03:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption Program[edit]

Hello again and welcome to the adoption program!

Please take some time to think about what you would like out of this program and what you can devote to it. After you have thought about this please message me on my talk page about which areas you would like to focus on. As well, if you are completely new or you are not sure, you can let me know that and I can give you a general overview. You will get as much as you put in with this program. If you would like me to be someone that you can ask questions to every once and a while, then thats who i'll be. Yet, if you wish to be in constant contact with me and have me go over your work with you each day or so, then thats who i will be. This is your choice, just please let me know :P

Also if you could please remove the adoptee userbox from your userpage so that others know you have been adopted. If you like you can replace it with this user box:

This user has been adopted by Matthew Yeager.

Thank you for your time, Matthew Yeager 16:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

another adopter[edit]

if another adopter has offered to adopt you, you should take advantage of having TWO experienced users to help you out! i would contact the other person so that you have more resources to contact if you need some help! Matthew Yeager 01:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I can help, I think two adopters is a splendid idea! - HammerHeadHuman ^(talk)(work) 03:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, you could add {{adoptee|HammerHeadHuman}} to your userpage... - HammerHeadHuman ^(talk)(work) 03:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neat, I will give some thought on how to get the most out of this program then. Any early suggestions are quite welcome! --otherlleft 03:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm online frequently, I'd say whenever you have the slightest problem or question (or if your bored and looking for things to do on Wikipedia) just send a message! - HammerHeadHuman ^(talk)(work) 19:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoptee Help Center[edit]

So I was thinking about where I want to go on wikipedia, and you have other adoptees with good ideas. Things I like and would like more of:

I enjoy writing but don't see myself writing new articles all that much.
I'd like to learn more of the commonly used tags about stubs and wikifying and needing references and neutrality.
Also would like to be able to add those references, wikify and NPOV those entries, so that I don't feel like I'm copping out by adding those tags . . . sure, there are times when I won't have the knowledge, but if I do have a source or something I'd rather put it in.
I feel more like a gnome than a fairy. --otherlleft 00:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was the post in response to things he would like to learn. I think leaving the post on this page will be good for all three of us to work with! I'm happy to have HammerHeadHuman here and as he said, dont feel afraid to send him a message even if its just to chat (we like to just talk about non-wiki stuff every once in a while :P) as far as this goes... i think you (otherlleft) can benifit greatly by having two adopters to help you and to look through your work for you! if you like you can post on your own talk page and we can check there so that you dont have to post on each of our pages.
stuff to learn
down to the learning!!!
for all the new adoptees, i've added a new section to my talk page "things that need to be done". you will love it, as it lists a bunch of pages that need the things you want to learn, done to them. I suggest you check out the Manual of Style so that you can see then general format wikipedia articles should follow. with this when you visit the "clean-up" links (from the section on my talk page) you will be able to easily recognize errors in others articles and be able to fix them and make significant improvements. also with your interest in wikify, you should check out their project on it. once you read through those things real quick (no need to memorize everything) you can pick something you want to focus on and work at improving those aspects in an article. for example if you read through the Manual of Style and see that you arent suppose to add an internal link to a reference after you already did it once (like i just added a link to manual of style twice) then you can focus on that and start small by add links \ taking them away as needed. then when you feel comfortable with that you can read something else in teh manual of style and improve that as well and so on and so on, until you know it all :P if you have any questions feel free to contact either one of us or just post it on your talk page. good luck buddy! Matthew Yeager 06:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, hope this too will help get you off in the right direction:

1. Enjoy writing but don't see yourself writing new articles all that much?

No problem. There are plenty of articles out there that need rewriting. You can look for those articles that are in need of wikification or clean up through their categories, or, if your looking for more fun (in a nerdy kind of way) try the random article link on the left over there (under "navigation"). You'd be surprised how often you'll find mistakes in those randoms.

2. Like to learn more of the commonly used tags about stubs and wikifying and needing references and neutrality?

Then you'll love this page, it shows most of the common clean-up tags, and what they are generally used for. I use it daily.

3. Like to be able to add those references, wikify and NPOV those entries, so that you don't feel like you're copping out by adding those tags?

You probably know this already, but make sure your familiar with the Wikipedia:Guide to layout, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Citing sources. Wikifying is pretty fun, and usually there are no disputes involved in layout improvement. However, be cautious of NPOV editing (not that it isn't a good thing to do), most editors who add info that seems to others to be POV can get pretty defensive, and they can sometimes take things rather personally.

4. Feel more like a gnome than a fairy?

Gnothing wrong with gnomes. We make Wikipedia work! Find something you love to do, and work it! I, another humble gnome for example, love reverting vandalism and sorting stubs, those areas are where I spend the majority of my time here.

- HammerHeadHuman ^(talk)(work) 03:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkup[edit]

Just doing a periodic checkup of all my adoptees... How's everything going? - HammerHeadHuman ^(talk)(work) 17:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC) Shame on me for not keeping in touch, typical man that I am! I've been mixing it up a bit, actually: sometimes I'm in the mood to speedy-delete flag new pages, or I might find pages of local interest that are inaccurate, or I proofread random pages, and I'm really enjoying adding references when I can find them. Of course, that's a tricky thing, actually finding the references. I also have discovered there are several people I directly or indirectly know that claim there is inaccurate info about them here, and I intend on finding out verifiable truth so I can fix it. Seems my tech-savvy friend got herself blacklisted for spamming, so I imagine I can do a bit better than that! I recently started bookmarking resources that come in handy, like templates I often use (speedy delete, biography infoboxes, stub). Maybe I should have thought of that awhile ago, hmm? --otherlleft 15:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Gulotta[edit]

The article David Gulotta has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. J Milburn 15:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's great. Thanks a lot for not taking offence- when new page patrolling, I really don't have time to research things. J Milburn 15:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I look for references- mentions of magazine or newspaper articles, external links, that kind of thing; and if I can't find any, I run through the text to look for anything that suggests that the subject may be notable. If there is anything in the text that places the person, website or group above your average one, then I will not speedy, and instead prod or send to AfD. I guess writing style helps too, biased as it sounds. I am far more likely to let a referenced, (even if not well referenced) neutral article survive than I am to let a one line, unwikified, uncategorised vague statement survive. J Milburn 15:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Circle Sanctuary article[edit]

Hello there, I believe from the talk page at Neopaganism that you are interested in this topic. I've set up a drafting page here which will let us assemble a good-looking, well-referenced article so that we can release it into the mainspace with a chance of surviving. I'm happy to 'host' the page but have no knowledge of Circle Sanctuary myself, so will rely on others with more knowledge for material! Please come and join us if you would like to. Many thanks, Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 09:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Verdigris; Ronny Tong; Hyde Park Corner tube station; Codecision procedure; Warren and Wetmore; Irina Privalova; College Park-U of Md (Washington Metro); Nick Dean; Episcopal Diocese of Southeast Florida; Alexander Wetmore; Charlotte (ship); Jagjivan Ram; Resurrection (Stargate SG-1); Kevin Ollie; Sculpture trail; BBMak; Laira (comics); Andrew Rainsford Wetmore; Demographic profile

Cleanup: Sculpture of the United States; Odinic Rite; Left-Hand Path and Right-Hand Path
Merge: Female sexual arousal disorder; Binge eating disorder; West Ridge, Chicago
Add Sources: Joycelyn Elders; Dragon Rouge; Directional drilling
Wikify: Sound sculpture; Street magic; United States Army Chemical School
Expand: Covenstead; Artistic merit; Minako Honda

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 15:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: College Park-U of Md (Washington Metro); Ronny Tong; Laira (comics); Alexander Wetmore; BBMak; Sculpture trail; Codecision procedure; Nick Dean; Demographic profile; Resurrection (Stargate SG-1); Charlotte (ship); Andrew Rainsford Wetmore; Warren and Wetmore; Danny Wainwright; Irina Privalova; Verdigris; Hyde Park Corner tube station; Tomar-Tu; Kevin Ollie

Cleanup: Left-Hand Path and Right-Hand Path; Os Lusíadas; Sculpture of the United States
Merge: Female sexual arousal disorder; Binge eating disorder; Sex offender registration
Add Sources: List of the most popular names in the 1890s in the United States; Dragon Rouge; Joycelyn Elders
Wikify: Sound sculpture; United States Army Chemical School; Pensacola News Journal
Expand: Artistic merit; Bomberman; Ricola

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

ay, just wanted to see how you were doing and if you had any questions. been a while since we've talked, making sure you are doing well about wiki : ) MatthewYeager 08:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

userbox for you[edit]

NANO

This user has spent every November writing away for NaNoWriMo since 2007.

Is this what you've been looking for ? MatthewYeager 11:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Headless logo.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Headless logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:16, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wilderness Diarrhea Getting Killed[edit]

Other:

Dunno, but it seems remotely possible you'd be interested in this. Wilderness Diarrhea is getting merged into Travelers Diarrhea by a couple of zealots who seem to have no concept of outdoor interests.

I get around a lot in the outdoors and rarely treat water, but WD article had some good stuff.

After a couple of weeks of calm discussion, I went ballistic and no longer want to participate. Rational voices might help.

These guys have irrationally convinced themselves that WD isn't a legitimate topic for a Wikipedia article.

I've pointed out several bomb-proof arguements to no avail. I'd say the strongest is the vast number of published articles that discuss WD as a separate concern from TD. They are both environmental health topics, and obviously the context of each are far different.

They simply ignore all this.

PS: I love Hudson Valley and have hiked at least half of the Long Path. Calamitybrook (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HEROES[edit]

(101,547 bytes) is small enough. You can leave the page alone now.--ChrisisinChrist ^{comments and complaints here!} 03:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 71.174.246.27[edit]

IP has been blocked -- pb30<talk> 15:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you and where did you come from?[edit]

Some of us have been working on the HEROES page for months and now, out of the blue, you come along and start shredding up all of our work. Are you an administrator or something? You are out of order! You should have consulted with the Heroes wikiproject before just slicing and dicing the article! Look at other Television articles that are featured. We are compariable in size and content. The Heroes page has been modeled after several featured Television articles, and now you are just ruining the work. Let the editors who have made massive contribs to this page deal with it and its content. Why are you so concerned? Did you just find the Heroes page out of the blue and decide to mess with it? SOme of us have worked so hard on adding substance to this page and you walk into our page like you own wikipedia. You should have consulted the talk page before making all your little changes. I hate you! Leave our page and stop messing with it! Your contrib history doesn't even show you ever working on the Heroes page before. Why now? LEAVE!!!--207.104.74.100 (talk) 20:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you're angry. Very magnanimous of you. Maybe some of the loyal Heroes editors from Los Angeles will know which of their dedicated neighbors chose to log out of his account to trash me for good faith edits. I'll have to ask the one I know if he knows anyone who is passive-aggressive enough to hide behind an IP address because he's afraid he can't actually get consensus if a single editor disagrees with him. Poor little boy.--otherlleft (talk) 02:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response...[edit]

WOW! Funny comments...Uh, but how am I supposed to know who is related to an IP address? I don't personally know anyone from wikipedia in my personal life. That seemed like a funny question to ask me. Did you ask all Los Angeles wikieditors? Anyway, no clue man...lol...but I still think it is funny. Wipe the dust off your shoulders and let that guy or gal go...no big issue. --ChrisisinChrist ^{comments and complaints here!} 15:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

foreign language[edit]

I removed the speedy ("foreign language article that exists on another wikiproject" you placed on Emma (journal). The article is in English, not German. The enWPcovers all countries andall anguages. It's just our articles that need to be in English. DGG (talk) 16:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Halloween[edit]

I am toying with the idea of proposing a Wikiproject for Halloween. Please leave all comments in this section.--otherlleft (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scope[edit]

Wikiproject Halloween would cover celebrations and events related to Halloween, such as trick or treating, haunted attractions, parade, costume parties, and the like. Should it also include other celebrations that fall on October 31, such as Samhain?--otherlleft (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Samhain, yes, and maybe also Guy Fawkes Night, close to Halloween both on the calendar and in how it is celebrated. Perhaps also media products associated with the holiday, for example, the Halloween film series and It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown. But we would have to draw the line somewhere between "Halloween" and a general "horror" category. — Walloon (talk) 23:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have the same general sense of how much it should cover as I do. You're absolutely correct that a "horror line" should be drawn - certain dark rides might not qualify, for example. So does that mean you think the idea has merit?--otherlleft (talk) 23:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your idea absolutely has merit, and I'm a Halloween fanatic. But tell me about Wikiprojects in general; do they need approval from administrators? — Walloon (talk) 23:35, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm learning about the process myself; it's all available at WP:COUNCIL/P. It may be more reasonable to propose a task force under Wikiproject Holidays as an alternative.--otherlleft (talk) 23:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

100% agreement - there is a vast volume of misinformation on the topic of Halloween - most notably about it's origins (English protestant, Catholic Church, Celtic Paganism & more recent Irish celebrations). One thing to point out in all articles re: Celtic = Irish. This is not correct - some 65% of the UK population are of Celtic descent - with heavy concentrations in Wales, Cornwall, Devon and Scotland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.107.234.2 (talk) 01:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the 65% statement about - the following are the Celtic populations of UK & Ireland;

Ireland = approx 4,000,000 UK = approx 40,0000,0000

Hmmm.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.107.234.2 (talk) 01:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Task Force[edit]

Creating this as a task force may make more sense, especially if there aren't any editors involved that have WikiProject experience. Task forces rely upon an already existing bureaucracy. However, that would entail finding one that's perfectly suited. Is Wikiproject Holidays appropriate, or would it be too narrow in some ways?--otherlleft (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[edit]

This Wikiproject has been proposed, and with sufficient interest I will create a subpage for it.--otherlleft (talk) 12:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Suite101logo.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Suite101logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Speedy deletion of ACG Senior College[edit]

Hi there. I removed the speedy deletion tag on this article, as I didn't feel it was spam. Just to clarify, it is perfectly allowed for non-admins to remove speedy tag on articles they didn't create, the {{hangon}} tag is for creators of pages to use.

I came across this article as I was new page patrolling, as it wasn't marked as patrolled. I was wondering if you could make sure that you mark an article as patrolled before you tag it for deletion (or any other tag) as then it won't show up on the list, which will save people patrolling an article that has already been looked at by an experienced editor like yourself. Please accept my apologies if you are doing this and the software is lagging behind, or if you're just tagging articles that you're coming across from a different source that doesn't allow you to patrol them. Thanks in advance! --Ged UK (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. The trick is to try to remember to patrol first, then tag, the software isn't as helpful as it could be. I agree, it would be a great idea if speedy nominations, PRODs, XfDs and maybe some tags (notability perhaps) could signify auto-patrolling. I'll see if I can find somewhere to suggest it. --Ged UK (talk) 10:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:New_pages_patrol#Automatic_patrolling_after_a_tag_is_added. --Ged UK (talk) 11:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AUMSA[edit]

Hi there just wondering what's wrong with the AUMSA edits. Sorry I'm not sure of all the technical protocols etc with editing pages.

Student 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.100.95.39 (talk) 11:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God's Gift (TV series)[edit]

Er... if you look at the article for Anthony Morley, it's pretty much all about the fact that he's been convicted of murder. It seems a bit daft to remove it as "dubious unsourced content" when in Wikipedia terms it's exactly what makes him worth mentioning in the first place. --88.110.153.182 (talk) 10:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a source, it's always better to add it on the first go-round, even if it's only a Wikilink; if you had linked it or attributed a source to the information on that page it would have been clearer.--otherlleft (talk) 13:55, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Halloween[edit]

See our 10 day trial at Did you know? Victuallers (talk) 19:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's something you might be interested in:

This user would like to wish you a happy Halloween.

Also, you can find some images for your user page at Category:Halloween images and Commons:Category:Halloween, -- Suntag ☼ 03:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vatican in WWII[edit]

I removed the Vatican from the list of WWII participants because they were not a participant, and the entry for them is nothing more than an explicit statement that they were not a participant. It was logically equivalent to "this entry does not belong on this list". 66.60.238.85 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

It was most certainly not vandalism. Such offensive accusations constitute personal attacks in blatant violation of Wikipedia policy and common courtesy. Please stop reverting this change and refrain from making such accusations in the future. 66.60.238.85 (talk)

I did use an edit summary. However, on the first attempt I hit Enter too soon, so it was admittedly a confusing one the first time around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.60.238.85 (talk) 00:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suite101.com whitelist[edit]

Hello there. You were kind enough to agree to whitelist suite101.com/about so I could link to this site for an article about it. However, I'm still getting the blacklist message when I try to put the link in at my protopage for the article. Is there something else I need to do to make it work properly?--otherlleft (talk) 11:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't seem to get the right regular expression for this. Please report it at the technical village pump. Stifle (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What praise![edit]

Thanks so much for your praise on my work at Scary Farm. I'd really be interested in a Wikiproject Halloween - I absolutely love this time of year. I have so much fun going to the Halloween Haunt that I had to same the article from PROD. Let me know if we can collaborate. ^{XF Law}_{talk at me} 00:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went to support, but maybe I factored it wrong. I haven't been to a Project proposal section. If it doesn't take off, let's go for making it a task force, as suggested. ^{XF Law}_{talk at me} 00:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed my support, btw. ^{XF Law}_{talk at me} 00:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Day of the Dead could be included as well if the task force is Halloween Season? I mean come on, we have a million types of candy, costumes, attractions, folklore...there is so much we could do. ^Law_shoot! 17:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WikiProject Halloween[edit]

I left a comment at the proposal page. I believe that the scope might be too narrow for its own WikiProjct, but it might work as a task-force of WikiProject Holidays. In which case, I'd be happy to help out. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Task Force[edit]

I saw your support for the task force on the Halloween movies. Since that will be under Horror Films, why don't we just ask the Holiday project if we can have a Halloween task force. I think they will be OK with it. ^Law_shoot! 16:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miller–Urey experiment[edit]

When you applied a speedy to the article on 2008-10-23T22:35:05, you played straight into the hands of a vandal. Speedies are often necessary but do please try to read an article's history back a few editors before coming to such a decision. Luckily everything worked out though ^_^. :)--Thecurran (talk) 08:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recognized the problem about fifteen minutes later, but it was already resolved. Thanks for swiftly bringing it to my attention.--otherlleft (talk) 09:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know it wasn't a swift response; I just haven't logged on enough lately. I'm sorry for disturbing you. By the way that was really cool the way you left that smiley tag on my talk page. Which template did you use for that? :)--Thecurran (talk) 12:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I mean did you have to edit your talk and then go to my talk and use the talkback / tb template or is it more automated? :)--Thecurran (talk) 12:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page redesign[edit]

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, Pretzels^Talk! 10:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elting Memorial Library[edit]

Thanks for picking that for Halloween. You've given me an incentive to improve the article by putting in more info from the NRHP nom, which I'll be doing later.

Oh, I'll put up a note at WT:NRHP in case there are any more properties people have written about that are credibly believed to be haunted or have other paranormal associations. And I might add some older articles of mine about places written about by Weird NJ that have paranormal associations. Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed that (see Talk:Elting Memorial Library). I'll let Casliber know ... he's usually pretty good about these things. Daniel Case (talk) 15:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for New Paltz (village), New York[edit]

On 1 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New Paltz (village), New York, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:16, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bethel VT[edit]

I feel like I'm pushing it even editing that page, honestly. Feels self-promotor-y I lived in Bethel, Vermont from 2003-2008 and I now live in Randolph, Vermont. If you have any interest in making the edits, that would be fine. Thanks for the notification. Jessamyn (talk) 16:12, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Project Halloween[edit]

Looks like fun. Thanks for creating it. I templated a page using the new banner, but it did not automatically add it to the category. Just thought I'd let you know since you are probably ironing out bugs at this point :P ^Law_shoot! 19:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm sorry, although the project sounds interesting, I am already very busy with other stuff and WikiProjects, I'll try to pitch in every once in while though.--Music26/11 14:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm[edit]

We're you saying that I Patroll halloween articles, or you patroll them. And sorry, I cant participate. II MusLiM HyBRiD II ^{Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja} 16:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning left for CGX[edit]

I'd suggest you apologize to User:CGX for the templating here. His change was correct. See the talk page discussion. Vsmith (talk) 04:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When a revert isn't a revert[edit]

With this change you didn't actually revert the problem edit, you just moved it. One IP had added the text in a weird place, the other IP then moved it from the weird place to a higher place. You just moved it around without deleting it. I haven't seen any of the tools that allow people to not make mistakes. I am apparently "anti-toolist". :-) Shenme (talk) 04:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion template: references do not have to "assert notability".[edit]

I was rather dismayed to find that you have templated the Hugh Kearney article I created thus: "It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern: references do not assert notability."

Your own inserted critera "references do not assert notability" is simply a misunderstanding of Wikipedia: Wikipedia does not require the references to "assert notability".

Kearney's notability is clearly decernable from both the detail provided and the many reference given in the article, without a direct 'assertation' of it in a ref. I wonder how that can always be found? The British are not always given to hyperbole. Kearney is referenced by historians like Simon Schama, but so are non-notable people too. I took a while to make sure the article was passable, and it is not the first article I have created either - I do find your templating of it rude and unhelpful. I will append some quotes of praise to the line "to strong reviews in the Times Literary Supplement, History Today, The Spectator and the New York Review of Books" regarding the book 'The British Isles: A History of Four Nations' (printed by Cambridge University Press, and Canto - their popular division) book - but surely a "citation needed" tag would have been enough to encourage someone to do this? I will also remove your deletion template.

Also, are you not supposed to contact the person who created the article with a deletion proposal? At very least you could have commented on your reasoniong in the article's talk. I am taking a break from Wikipedia, and it was only by chance that I looked at my watchlist and saw it near the top. I am currently the only contributor to this (and I created a reasonable article)- if I found my work was deleted after '5 days' I would not have been happy to say the least.--Matt Lewis (talk) 18:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hm?[edit]

Hello, you must be confused, I didn't remove or "blank out" anything from Ruth Rowan's article. The reorganization of the political templates I added to Vice President Clinton's article are proper, you can look at any other notable politican to see.Thismightbezach (talk) 15:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, it did appear that content was removed. I know you were doing a lot of similar edits, but they were devoid of edit summaries that make recent change patrolling more accurate.--otherlleft (talk) 03:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The Best Of Kenny Rogers"[edit]

Someone in 2006 redirected this title to The Kenny Rogers Singles Album, which is the unique name of the album. The titles have no link to each other and should not be linked, I have seen another album under the title name. This is why I have removed the redirect and I will use the page again in the future if I find the info for the album of that name. (I think I saw it being sold on eBay and can look it up in an online discography somewhere.)

Please either leave the edit I've placed or - if I can't find the album within a week - go ahead and remove the page. Do not tag it, however...keep in touch with me and I'll let you know. I'll spend some time looking today and the page might even be constructed by the time you get this msg. =)

CycloneGU (talk) 19:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got your reply. Thanks for that. =)

CycloneGU (talk) 19:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Gee, thanks for actually paying attention to my userpage, yes I forgot to log in.--Music26/11 20:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why revert on alcohol laws in Missouri?[edit]

I explained why I did it, what was the problem? 71.30.137.43 (talk) 03:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was caught in a string of removal-of-content vandalism and I plumb missed your edit summary.--otherlleft (talk) 03:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clovis I[edit]

Not sure what happened just here [1], but i don't reckon it was what you intended? I've removed the warning you left, too, on the anon's account. Cheers, Lindsay^Hi 12:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not at all what I intended. I think the change must have happened in the moment between seeing the original problem and reverting it.--otherlleft (talk) 12:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I've been caught like that, too. Sometimes the software is good and catches you before you revert a reversion; sometimes it doesn't. But that's why we're here and back each other up, eh? Cheers, Lindsay^Hi 12:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed! Perhaps there should be a "well-intentioned-but-ultimately-harmful-vandalism-reversion-attempt-reversion" barnstar?--otherlleft (talk) 12:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survival of the Shawangunks[edit]

Seems like Julian took care of it. Making the other article a redirect won't hurt it at all on DYK. In fact, I may even go and review the hook for you right now. Daniel Case (talk) 14:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BOO Userbox[edit]

Hello! I do actually plan on helping out more with BOO! Let me know if you specifically need anything else. I have corrected the Userbox to only put people into the Members cat when it is placed on a User or User_talk page. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for your time, MatthewYeager 14:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't know where to begin asking how you did that, but I'm just scratching the templating surface. Thank you kindly!--otherlleft (talk) 15:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Survival of the Shawangunks[edit]

No problem. It's always good to see quality HV articles being created. I have User talk:Daniel Case watchlisted, which is how I found the article. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 15:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment[edit]

I saw that you wanted an assessment of Trick-or-treating, so I gave it one. I was quite surprised, it's a B-class, and getting somewhat close to GA in my opinion. RockManQ ^(talk) 23:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It still needs more sources, especially towards the bottom. RockManQ ^(talk) 23:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YOu're a Halloweenie-Demon!--otherlleft (talk) 00:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nightmare Before Christmas characters[edit]

Hello! Please be sure to indicate referencing in the AfD, as well. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing!--otherlleft (talk) 01:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic and great job helping with these articles! It is greatly appreciated. --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, regarding this, if an article can be covered elsewhere, we still merge and redirect without deletion. No pressing need has yet been presented as to why the article must be deleted and all efforts to improve it must cease. The "weight" argument is generally a subjective one, as individual members of the community disagree on what is and is not too much. Personally, I'd rather go with all of these guys and gals who believe the article is worth their volunteer time to work on the article and the over 6,000 hits the article received last month alone as evidence of what people think is "wikipedic" over three deletes in a five day discussion. Also, a claim that the article fails plot summary guidelines is rather dishonest per this section and the fact that for all of the characters listed we have a sentence that is referenced indicating the voice actor/actress, which again, is hardly "plot summary." Finally, the claim that we don't need a "a character list on a single film" is also inaccurate, as it is not a character list for a single film, but for a film, two video games, another crossover video game series, and numerous merchandising including toys (check Amazon.com for instance), which is actually indicated in the lead of the article and the marketing secion. Seriously, sometimes I wonder if the articles are actually looked at prior to these "votes" you'll see time and time again in those discussions. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 05:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't wonder, I know that folks generally either glance or just read the comments of others.--otherlleft (talk) 05:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's how you get such mind boggling "claims" as this. Yeah, this character is "just not notable"... That happens when it comes from this mentality and this closed mindedness. --A Nobody^{My talk} 05:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invite![edit]

You and another editor have really proven lately to be reasonably good at rescuing articles, as such, I invite you to join Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 03:04, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:User Layout[edit]

The MOTD Barnstar that you have no problem with seems to have a real problem with your userpage, and at least in Firefox it's a mess. It's difficult to read right down to the Civility Award. Irony aside, thought I should let you know.--otherlleft (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

LOL. Yeah, it'll do that sometimes. I'm not sure how well designed the original Barnstar template was. It could probably use a once-over. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK submission of Survival of the Shawangunks[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Survival of the Shawangunks at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 23:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

I appreciate this diff. Good looking out. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime. I'm more than happy to get rid of "cruft," as some folks call it, but this one seems to be more about defining than it is about irrelevance.--otherlleft (talk) 21:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Work.[edit]

The Barnstar o'Lantern

I hereby award this Barnstar to you for the time and effort and discussion and patience it took to create Wikiproject Halloween! ^Law_shoot! 22:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween[edit]

Sure. I have lived in Australia and New Zealand long enough to know that Halloween is not really celebrated there. I would say that other imports such as St Patrick's Day or Guy Fawkes day are. Halloween is largely an American holiday. Wallie (talk) 17:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think it is purely opinion. I agree that some might have halloween functions in Australia and New Zealand. It is much the same as Bastille Day and Valentines Day. It is misleading for Wikipedia to mention that any of these are celebrated or are holidays in Australia or New Zealand. That is highky misleading. Wallie (talk) 17:38, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Here is the intro as at present:

Halloween (or Hallowe’en) is a holiday celebrated on October 31. Halloween activities include trick-or-treating, ghost tours, bonfires, costume parties, visiting haunted attractions, carving jack-o'-lanterns, reading scary stories, and watching horror movies. Irish immigrants carried versions of the tradition to North America during Ireland's potato famine of 1846.[1] Other western countries embraced the holiday in the late twentieth century. Halloween is celebrated in several countries of the Western world, most commonly in the United States, Canada, Ireland, Puerto Rico, Japan, and the United Kingdom.

The above says that Halloween is celebrated as a holiday and lists the countries. I can defintely assure you that In Australia and New Zealand it is definitely not celebrated or a holiday. As far as your article is concerned, it is from the Daily Telegraph and questions if halloween is bceoming more popular (in Britain). I guess it is, but it is not a holiday there either. I have lived in both New Zealand and Switzerland recently I can assure you that Halloween is popular with children in Switzerland much more so than Britain, and more than it ever will be in Australia or New Zealand. It certainly has a very negative image with older people there. I note that Switzerland is not even mentioned. You may say that personal experience does not count. You are right about that. It is Wikipedia guidelines, and that is why people get entirely the wrong idea about the truth sometimes. Wallie (talk) 18:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. You are correct. The article does relate to Australia. I did make a note about children and American pop culture on the article. You are of course free to add (references also) or amend the article. However, it is best to avoid the word "celebrate" as it is not an official holiday in Australia. It is probably becoming more popular with children. I live in Switzerland, and it is more of a nuisance here. Children are acting more like Dick Turpin, if you get my meaning. Wallie (talk) 19:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just think you have to get the information in the correct place and in the correct way. If you think you can improve the article, then go ahead. I personally find discussion pages a bit of a waste of time, except when something really needs to be resolved. It is best to just alter the article and others may improve it again. If they revert you, then you can fight them, if you think you are 100% right and especially if they don't supply a reason! (check it out though). Otherwise, you can discuss things on the talk page, or change it slightly.

With Halloween, you need to explain who celebrates it (probably mainly parts of the US), who else has it as a holiday or festival (I don't know this one), where is it popular (increasingly?) with children (probably in most places), and why (probably part of the American pop/world culture). Wallie (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, although I would not call myself an expert on Halloween days. As far as edit wars are concerned, I generally try to avoid these. However, you do need to be tough sometimes. If the other person is just being silly, you can come back in a couple of weeks. By that time the silly person will have moved on to disrupt someone else, and you can then fix the article. With people like myself, I hope I am reasonable. You can always change or add to what I have said or done. I am always willing to learn too. You are also correct about personal experiences. Sometimes a country can change after you have left it. However, remember that each country is very different, and that includes New Zealand being very different to Australia. Australia tends to be more like America and New Zealand (well)... like Lord of the Rings. Wallie (talk) 19:59, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween II[edit]

Hi,

I appreciate the offer and I will accept. I regularly check out Wikipedia, but very rarely do I edit it unless I find something which I feel requires accuracy. I will gladly read over the Halloween article and the other articles associated with the Halloween Wikiproject. I have many other Internet/"real-life" duties, so I cannot guarantee that I can get started on it today... but I will get started on it as soon as possible! Thank you,

Loghead1 (talk) 22:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Survival of the Shawangunks[edit]

On 17 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Survival of the Shawangunks, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bowties[edit]

Sorry, I hadn't seen them. That page is so long now! Thanks for pointing it out. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 17:44, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war[edit]

Hi there Otherlleft, just wanted to stop by to let you know that you should probably have not reverted this edit as vandalism. It is clearly a content dispute, and in fact you violated WP:3RR. Please be more careful in the future. Tiptoety ^talk 00:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly try to be very careful with Huggle, but I think you can agree that with the profanity in the edit summaries immediately before and after, that although I was mistaken, it was an easy mistake to make. When one sees the same revision being made with profane edit summaries several times over from an anonymous user, it's rather easy to assume the worst. Thanks for advising me of my error.--otherlleft (talk) 01:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and that is what I assumed (hence why you are just getting a warning instead of a block). Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 01:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's appreciated. Thank you for reviewing before blocking - I'll do my part and avoid giving you the need to do so again!--otherlleft (talk) 01:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: You are absolutely deserving of this[edit]

Thank you for the barnstar. I'm pretty sure I know what it's in reference to. Again, thanks. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 20:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Your actions in that situation serve as a model for how one should behave.--otherlleft (talk) 20:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issues?[edit]

I love your fear of commitment on your userpage, bippity-boo. LOL. ^Law_shoot! 01:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe thanks, if I ever make a hash I'm sure to forget it long before I need it!--otherlleft (talk) 03:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. I've read the committed id page 6 times and feel stupider for having read it. I still don't get it and I consider myself sort of smart :P For now, I'll just stick to the number the asylum gave to me. ^Law_shoot! 03:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it would be helpful if it started with lorem ipsum?--otherlleft (talk) 03:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I try to save latin for when I badger people on article talk pages :P I stole your identity idea and pledged my own. Thanks! ^Law_shoot! 04:10, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I hope the counter-conspiracy nondentity crisis spreads. My contribution to Operation Mindfuck.--otherlleft (talk) 04:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To do the Chess Board[edit]

Hi, I'm the one that was conversing with J. Deloney and I just thought to show you how to accomplish this...

The codes (With J.D.'s name on it) is [here] but you can make a move almost anytime on my page here ;-)

To change to your name, just do a quick little personal search for any existance of her name, then switch it to hers.

--Ciscokid21 (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether this is about a new chessboard, but if you want one, I'll create one for you (I made User:Ciscokid21/chess). Thanks. Ollie Fury _Contribs 21:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusionism[edit]

Hey there Nutiketaiel, I see you're an avowed inclusionist. I'm curious if you've participated in any AfDs, and if so, what your impression of the process is, overall.--otherlleft (talk) 17:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have participated in a few. To be honest, I think that the process works fairly well, as long as there are enough participants. As an inclusionist, I am a little biased since I think that Wikipedia's rules on Notability need to be alot looser, but even with them as they are, it usually isn't too difficult to steer a deletion discussion away from outright deletion and towards a more productive merger of whatever the topic is with a larger article that IS notable, even by these standards. Does that answer your question? Nutiketaiel (talk) 20:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does. I'm finding in the few I've participated in that the field is frequently populated by editors who don't know policy or don't care to think about their reasons, which I suppose falls into WP:IDONTLIKEIT thinking.--otherlleft (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome![edit]

I've been playing chess for several years now and have come to love it (and not to mention, totally skilled at it :P) but yeah, I just thought that this could be very useful in the future (are you going to set up the board???)

P.S. if your really interested, we could play a "live" game some time

P.S.S. you should make a move at my game here

--Ciscokid21 (talk) 21:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the story[edit]

userpage? blank edit summary (that wasn't blank, btw). You OK? ^Law_shoot! 23:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I am. I'm pondering what I want there, and a white space gives much room to create! And the edit summary accomplished its task ;)--otherlleft (talk) 23:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiprogects[edit]

I was just wondering, if possible to post games that could be played, using Wikipedia... (preferably some kick arse games ;-) but anything will do)

--Ciscokid21 (talk) 23:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, though I'm not sure, that the chess game is probably pushing the envelope there, but no more than the various humor pages like WP:EFD. Wikipedia isn't allowed to forget that it's an encyclopedia, so full-out playing games here would almost definitely be frowned upon. I find other outlets for that, like various apps on Facebook and MySpace, and for a long time Neopets. ;)--otherlleft (talk) 23:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just thought it would be very interesting to have such a thing on here (are you the one who forked my queen and bishop?) also I posted something on the Shogi, wondering if we could do something similar (like wiki did with the chess) except with Shogi (japanese version of chess, yet almost comletly different)

--Ciscokid21 (talk) 16:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could take credit for that. No, I just updated whose move it was. I'm actually pretty bad.--otherlleft (talk) 20:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, are you going to post a game on your talk page??? and do you think someone could start a progect in shogi? --Ciscokid21 (talk) 21:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-[edit]

Saw your name on J.delanoy's user talk... could you supply me with a sample of your writing so I can review you? I'm a writer, as well. —Ceran ♦ (talk) 03:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I put myself "on the block" at Wikipedia:Editor_review (and, come to think of it, didn't put a link on J.delanoy's page) . . . I know what a writing sample is normally, but how would that be characterized on Wikipedia? Do you want to see some diffs I think I did well with?--otherlleft (talk) 13:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, whatever you want. —Ceran ♦ (talk) 13:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

review[edit]

alas, I dont really have time. Too busy with the WP:FICT rewrite, whichis also important :) DGG (talk) 05:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not everyone has time for everything, so no worries there. I see you went so far as to pop into Elting Memorial Library which I worked on for a bit, but that might have been a coincidence of your occupation. That particular library is driving me nuts! It's got a wonderful historical collection that I would like to use to expand the article about the library, but it's only open when I'm at work!--otherl left^{I can take the heat} 11:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unwatched[edit]

John Reaves 02:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

note[edit]

I just wanted to let you know I (finally) left you a review on your Editor Review page. Cheers! J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 05:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you! I'll look straightaway, since sleep evades me and that's never a good time to work on actual articles.--otherl left^{No, really, other way . . .} 05:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving![edit]

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, A Nobody^{My talk} 02:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle[edit]

Yes I noticed that, it is getting quite annoying. Prodego ^talk 03:44, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loudly complaining in #wikipedia-userscripts may help. Prodego ^talk 03:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is old though... I think this guy deserves a chance, he basically came in and immediately got mobbed. Then he was upset, started yelling, didn't know not to, his response to me was reasonable after that. Prodego ^talk 04:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very well said. Not enough people understand that. Prodego ^talk 04:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Editor review[edit]

Yeah, I watch Iridescent's talkpage (along with a slew of others), and I'm flattered that he/she would consider me one of the best reviewers. As for the review, I'm glad to be of service and I hope that it will be found useful (once I've finished it). Useight (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed your editor review. Useight (talk) 01:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elting Library[edit]

Sure, go ahead. Funny you should ask that ... I've been in several protests up there, but purposely chose a weekend when there wasn't one to take the pic. Daniel Case (talk) 01:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To save you the trouble of looking through my lengthy edit history both here and on Commons :-), I haven't taken many more New Paltz pics than I've processed and uploaded. Daniel Case (talk) 01:26, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot the Taconic and Route 22, too. Or is that what you were referring to? Daniel Case (talk) 01:43, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They have the nicer buildings, but we have the better scenery. Daniel Case (talk) 01:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween around the world[edit]

I assessed it. It's just barely C-class. It's missing a lot of citations, and the lead really needs to be expanded. BTW, a lot of template substitutions are showing up, i.e. they're not working properly. RockManQ ^(talk) 20:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot[edit]

Thanks for your compliment on my Sleepy Hollow template...I'm glad you noticed my work. :) Artichoke-Boy (talk) 20:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sandbox edit[edit]

Hi,

The edit in question was not in the sandbox. The user in question placed offensive language on the Sandbox instructions/directions. Also, if you would like to learn how to look up past edits, I would be happy to teach you. Peace Eclectic hippie ^{talk to me} 17:00, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meta SBL request[edit]

Replied. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:23, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure![edit]

Sure, Otherlleft, I'll be happy to make it. However, I probably won't get to it till later today due to homework I have to do. I'll check the proposal page to see when it gets approved, but if you can inform me on my talk page when it does, that'll be great (just in case). Great template idea, by the way. I'm surprised it hasn't already been done! Artichoke-Boy (talk) 18:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ASSESS[edit]

I cleared out the rest of the unassessed category in Halloween project articles. RockManQ ^(talk) 19:36, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words in your review of me. I am quite flattered. I'll try and get to a review of you later. RockManQ^{Review me} 21:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2008/November[edit]

Hi Otherlleft - "FWIW" is standard internet shorthand for "For what it's worth". Grutness...wha? 00:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you. I tend to type full words faster than most folks can abbreviate, so I'm pretty slow up learning the shorthand. Thanks!--otherl left^{No, really, other way . . .} 02:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Is Halloween[edit]

Not a problem- stray YouTube links in articles will always make me jump into action... J Milburn (talk) 17:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wha?[edit]

your kidding right? did you see it before i removed that little chucnk? informal junk in the first person...no disrespectД narchistPig (talk) 20:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A Danish Christmas tree illuminated with burning candles, adorned with homemade Christmas decorations such as red hearts, white paper snowflakes, a golden star at the top, and gifts stacked underneath.

TheCiscoKid _{Talk to me} wishes you a Merry Christmas. Hopefully this has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and raise the holiday spirit!

TheCiscoKid _{Talk to me} 21:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I started this page of a chess tounament Here! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ciscokid21 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

A Nobody^{My talk} is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--A Nobody^{My talk} 02:28, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day![edit]

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread Wikipedia:WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Date_formatting_and_linking_poll/Autoformatting_responses[edit]

Regarding your comments in opposition to date autoformatting, I'd like to point out that both the current system and most (though not all) proposed replacement systems use link-style formatting around dates. Some people oppose this particular format because they feel it's confusing (especially if, as some replacement systems allow, date linking preferences are allowed that would result in some "linked" dates not actually producing links) but in any event, the syntax can be literally anything that the community decides. --Sapphic (talk) 01:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And some users may not like having their vote questioned like this, Sapphic. I'm sure this user read the statements perfectly well and made an informed decision. Tony (talk) 07:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter![edit]

On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 07:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween WikiProject[edit]

Hi, you contacted me a while back asking me to contribute to Halloween WikiProject pages and I agreed to it. I'd like to apologize for the fact that I haven't done a thing to contribute to this WikiProject and it's only because I have been occupied with real life and other things. I hope that once I get more time in the near future that I'll be able to help out more with the page. Please accept my apology.

Loghead1 (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suite101.com conflict of interest[edit]

Hi. I see you're working on a Suite101.com article in your user space. From your user name, I'd say it's a conflict of interest for you to work on any Suite101.com material in our actual "article space" (a.k.a. "main namespace").

Reference:

www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/otherlleft
http:// business-writing.suite101.com/article.cfm/writing_effectively_for_wikipedia

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Calysto Communications[edit]

Hi, the above article has been created three times, all by single pupose accounts. I have restored its history to User:Otherlleft/Calysto Communications- the content is extremely spammy, and I doubt you could use much of it, but good luck anyway! J Milburn (talk) 21:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's pretty awful! Probably no useful content here, but I've my success rate with pages this page is not zero. --otherl left 22:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smile![edit]

A Nobody^{My talk} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

otherl left 16:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Bastille Day![edit]

Dear fellow Wikipedian, on behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just want to wish you a Happy Bastille Day, whether you are French, Republican or not! :) Happy Editing! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Labor Day![edit]

Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A Nobody^{My talk} 05:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Howl-O-Scream (Tampa Bay)[edit]

I believe that the descriptions of attractions at each event proves an insight into the history of each event. The summaries written for the attractions do seem too advertisement-like, but should be fine after a rewrite. Reliable sources can be found within archive.com's archive of the past websites for the events, as well as by performing a Google search for news stories on the topic. Thanks.--Snowman Guy (talk) 01:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with User:Snowman Guy that attraction descriptions, after rewriting, are a good look at the history of each event, but the event websites are not a good source of information, as they are designed primarily to sell the event, not to provide information. There is a place for Howl-O-Scream info on Wikipedia, but it must be information, not infotainment. I also agree that there's no reason not to merge HOS Tampa Bay with other HOS articles. It's the same event with variations at different parks. --Boomshadow (talk), 20:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the Discordian wiki[edit]

Hadn't come across that before, thanks! Ian.thomson (talk) 18:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note[edit]

[2] There aren't any controversial differences between the article in my userspace and the original and to the best of my knowledge, there are no WP:BLP violations involved. The Manson article is probably one of the best and most reliably sourced B-class articles on the encyclopedia because the goal has been GA or FA for a very long time. The only issues holding it back have been the length of the article itself and the reluctance of those of us who have worked on it to cut it down, thus the userspace article attempt at containing the size while retaining the content. This is from something else entirely, and unrelated to the article itself. The real problems there are buried in the comments between myself and that editor and are, for the most part, related to someone else who has been banned. I am both shocked and regretful that it was brought into the MfD at all. What really annoys me is that I am fundamentally someone who could be characterized as overly strict regarding adhering to WP:BLP especially on crime articles. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, indeed you don't. I think the death of Susan Atkins has brought a lot more attention to the "family" of articles, which is why the article version on my userspace was noticed - someone was removing links to mansonfamilytoday.info and happened upon it. It wouldn't have been controversial except for the one comment. Thanks again! Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harold H. Saunders[edit]

I added a reference to Harold H. Saunders, but the article is still a stub. http://www.washington-report.org/archives/175.html seems to indicate notability for him. -- Eastmain (talk) 04:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seem okay to me!--otherl left 09:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of PROD from Al-Buraq mosque[edit]

Hello Otherlleft, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Al-Buraq mosque has been removed. It was removed by DGG with the following edit summary '(probably will meet notability -- needs check for refs)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with DGG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 21:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Paltx and NYC[edit]

I know it's a bit of a trip, but I want to invite you to attend the meetings of the NYC Wikimedia chapter, every other month on a Sunday, usually at Columbia University. See [3] for our general activities, and to add your name, and Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC for the meetings. You can join our mailing list at [4]. You can count on finding me there. DGG ( talk ) 02:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of the trivia section template from Jumping the shark[edit]

Hello for yourself. You're probably right in asking for more of an explanation. The only part of the article that could be the reason for the template is the "common methods" section, and that seems to contain nothing that WP:TRIVIA would prohibit. TRIVIA - the link used in the template, no less - prohibits grouping isolated information into a list in a disorganized and unselective manner. The "common methods" section, meanwhile, addresses only one subject, uses an outside authority (a flimsy one, as authorities go, but appropriate enough for its purpose) to confirm a common thread, and uses the examples that authority provides selectively. It does quite a good job at describing the subject of the article, too.

WP:NOT doesn't really enter into it. Hope that helps. --130.232.106.75 (talk) 20:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Otherlleft/Suite101.com[edit]

Per your request, I've undeleted User:Otherlleft/Suite101.com. Good luck. Will Beback talk 00:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're a mind reader[edit]

My explanation of 18c.—Kww(talk) 18:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it doesn't take a mind reader to see that well-intentioned questions can still leave you with no way out! I hope the editor reconsiders based on your response - it appears that was the only issue, and it would be a shame if an oppose came out of unclear wording.--otherl left 19:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA spam[edit]

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3

Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 19:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

suite101.com[edit]

Hi, please read over my response to you at Talk:New Paltz (village), New York as well as the thread I started at the reliable sources noticeboard. Them From Space 23:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Otherlleft, here's a saved version of the article: Psb (talk) 01:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have a userfied copy here that I hope may be able to be developed with reliable sources at some point down the road.--otherl left 01:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween![edit]

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:59, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving![edit]

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 06:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IFMCA[edit]

Next time you do a nomination like this could you please "bundle" the nomination? Having separate nominations for each page makes it more time consuming for people to respond to it and it increases the loadtime of the main AFD page. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen some debate about whether bundling is better or worse, but if you'd take the time to help me learn how to do so with Twinkle I'm definitely open to it.--otherl left 12:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Patrollbot[edit]

Hey there, I thought (because of your participation in the conversation here) that you would like to know that I coded a bot to mark CSDed AFDed and PRODed new-pages as patrolled. See the bot's discussion for approval here. I would appreciate your comment. NOTE: I am not trying to canvas you, I just wanted some input. Tim1357 (talk) 02:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mr. Snuffleupagus[edit]

A vampire snuffleupagus, that is. [opens mouth wide with fangs showing] RARRRGGHH! --Vampire Snuffleupagus (talk) 15:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the restof us[edit]

Hi, nice work on Festivus. Two items rem. from external links seem viable, the New York Times article and the site on the Illiois Capitol Building pole (an important event in the holiday's history and the site contains video from the Seinfeld show, news reports on the event, etc.). The one link left has pop-up ads, etc. The other two, mind if I return them to the fold? Thanks, a halloween fan, Randy Kryn (talk) 03:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick answer, I was just about to sign-off. Will study the policy soon. Thanks again, Randy Kryn (talk) 04:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. take a quick look at my user page for a halloween reference. Your halloween group sounds interesting, will look at that too. Over and out, Randy Kryn (talk) 04:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rossati[edit]

There is a thread opened regarding recent edits at the Rossini article at the WP:BLPN , thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 23:54, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Technology in Stargate AfD[edit]

Can you help integrate some of the sources I've found and added to the AfD? There's every indication that there are lots of high quality sources, but it's going to be a challenge for me to devote the time needed to adding them all. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 19:40, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rossati AFD[edit]

Your nomination does not appear to be formed correctly, could you repair it, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It look fine now, regards, lets see what happens. Off2riorob (talk) 15:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for looking outside the media. As I told X! every media source links back to one editor. I have had other credible websites agree to remove this information after speaking to them on the phone. I was told. "their source was not credible enough to keep the article posted". I do agree the wikipedia article "John Rosatti" needs to be deleted and protected along with "John Staluppi". Otherwise, their name will be targeted and slandered. I have never found solid evidence that support the claims written about both John Rosatti and john staluppi. I have personally called the NY Federal courts and supreme courts looking for evidence backing these claims and only one file was found, which was never used in court. There was NOT several witness's as these news articles claim. The smoking gun article was ironically written or posted during the "Bush Google Bomb" which caused me to wonder about the editors motives. This has been a nightmare and my purpose in writing the wikipedia was to finally offer the world the truth and expand on John Rosatti's life. However, it seems people are too focused on one editors claims, than the truth. I hope you understand. BTW, i did post all the main CCC investigations and never found john staluppi or john rosatti's name mentioned in one report. Crackofdawn (talk) 01:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overlook Mountain[edit]

You mean the one near Woodstock, right ? :-) While someone went and created articles on all the High Peaks, other notable Catskill peaks have been sort of piecemeal (I created North Mountain only because I'd recently hiked it at the time). If you got pics, upload them to Commons; I can certainly have a try at editing them. We may also want to look at Flickr's streams.

Be sure they're Overlook, too ... a lot of times people think Plattekill is Overlook. Daniel Case (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know. I have it set so I get emailed when I have messages. Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the brain :-)? Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a view from Overlook, of Ashokan Reservoir. And it's not acceptably licensed ... it's CC-BY-NC-SA. We can only use CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. Daniel Case (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one is acceptably licensed but I can't quite tell whether it's Overlook or another peak.

Overlook is at rear and to the right here (I might want the whole thing for the Devil's Path article, as well).

From the other photos in the stream, this was probably shot from Overlook (we gotta have it!). Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's the public domain. Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Review[edit]

Thank you for reviewing my DYK from Jan 5th. Miracle’s Boys (novel)
I have edited it a bit and hope you have a minute to re-review it.
Thanks. Sabiona (talk) 20:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Rodan; Pumpkin (color); Stellar atmosphere; Gamera vs. Gyaos; Gojirasaurus; Submediant; Manda; Henshin; The Why Why Family; Kadokawa Pictures; Uinen; Rebirth of Mothra II; Bambi Meets Godzilla; Kiko; Gojiro; Deputy mayor; Ilmarë; Upwords; National Intercollegiate Women's Fencing Association

Cleanup: Rodan (film); Flare gun; Highest-income counties in the United States
Merge: Ultraman; Ordered ring; Feathers McGraw
Add Sources: Kumonga; Heisei era (daikaiju eiga); North Fork, Suffolk County, New York
Wikify: Frozone; Reckoning of Hell; Lullaby (novel)
Expand: Large Marge; Psychedelic rock; Sweets and Sour Marge

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Rodan; Deputy mayor; Pumpkin (color); Manda; Kiko; Uinen; Bambi Meets Godzilla; Godzilla Island; Ilmarë; Gamera vs. Gyaos; The Why Why Family; Upwords; Gojirasaurus; Rebirth of Mothra II; Stellar atmosphere; Henshin; National Intercollegiate Women's Fencing Association; Submediant; Kadokawa Pictures

Cleanup: Flare gun; Rodan (film); Highest-income counties in the United States
Merge: Generations (book); George Hurley and Mike Watt; Ultraman
Add Sources: Kumonga; Gorosaurus; Heisei era (daikaiju eiga)
Wikify: Lullaby (novel); Frozone; Reckoning of Hell
Expand: Large Marge; Sweets and Sour Marge; Friday night death slot

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My DYK[edit]

It doesn't appear to me that you are an admin, and I don't know if you can do this (I know very little regarding DYK) but can you check my DYK nomination of Suite Vollard again and see if it meets the criteria? I have done what you have suggested. smithers - talk 01:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States politicians who admit to cannabis use/archive1[edit]

Hi, can you follow up on your comment at the above FLC? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hiram Blanchard[edit]

Hello, I fixed the issue that you pointed out on my DYK nomination for Hiram Blanchard. Could you please take another look? Thanks, JulieSpaulding (talk) 00:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arteaga and Etches DYK[edit]

Hi, thanks for that DYK. Nice combining the two pages into one DYK. Made me smile. Pfly (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Air Mali DYK[edit]

In response to Template_talk:Did_you_know#Air_Mali_.281960.E2.80.931985.29, I have made a few adjustments to the hook. Hope this helps make it verifiable for DYK. Cheers, --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 09:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the hook is for the 1974, crash not the 1985 crash, which is what the links you link to discuss. My hook initially said 1985, but I have changed this to 1974...it was an error on my part...the part in the article reads "On 11 August 1974, an Il-18 on a charter flight from Bamako to Mecca via Niamey and Kano, was forced to divert to Ouagadougou due to bad weather in Niamey. An apparent navigational error occurred, and the flight crew circled the wrong city, leading the aircraft to run out of fuel. An attempted emergency nighttime landing was attempted on the road from Ouagadougou to Niamey, near the village of Linoghin, however, the aircraft crashed killing 47 of the 60 occupants on board." Hope this helps verification. --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 14:17, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK problem[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Sound Ideas at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Joe Chill (talk) 16:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sound Ideas[edit]

On January 26, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sound Ideas, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Renato M.E. Sabbatini[edit]

I'm asking everyone to take another look at [5] based on recent changes to the article. And remember: you can't spell Renato M.E. Sabbatini without the "ME". 13:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC) Upsala (talk)

Hi again. I'd like to point you to this edit by User_talk:Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz: [6] (check out HW's edit summary). I left that message on the Talk of everyone who had already contributed to the delete discussion, and think it was entirely appropriate given that the article had changed so much. I don't give a whit personally about his nasty attitude, but is there some way to bring to the attention of whoever makes the final delete decision (is that you?) that H.W. refused to evaluate the article its revised form (nor did he care to improve the article, if he thought that possible)? If deletes really are evaluated by ideas and arguments rather than headcounts, then deletion should be a no-brainer here (and H.W.'s comments contributed nothing, unless you count something unitelligible about sources, which he didn't bother to act on, plus the sockpuppet accusation). But since (let's be realistic) headcounts can matter, I'd rather someone know about the situation. Should I say some thing on the delete discussion page? I don't want to stir up this unpleasant person any more than necessary.

BTW, H.W. also removed prods I had placed in several article, giving no reason other than that I had placed them. [7] [8] Again, I don't care personally but it highlights his confusion between arguments or proposals (which matter) and the party making them (which doesn't matter).

I hope you noticed my comments to you at [9] re Sabbatini's self-description quote. I did take that out in the end, per your preference. Upsala (talk) 20:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm puzzled by the "relisting" of this issue. It seems clear to me that the only intelligible arguments, from policy, clearly justify deletion. What do we do now? Upsala (talk) 04:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I didn't take your advice, I'm sorry to say, and I'm getting mobbed. [10] Upsala (talk) 00:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, guess what? Apparently you and I are engaged in a "campaign against an established editor." [11] Upsala (talk) 02:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping[edit]

Juliancolton would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Example2 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Otherlleft. If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

–Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Essex Street DYK[edit]

I read your hook and made one change according to the way I tried to state the original hook. The former Hackensack station (now Essex Street) was once the HQ of the railroad, and that's what I tried stating. I've added "and headquarters" to the hook you proposed.Mitch32^{(We the people in order to form a more perfect union.)} 13:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, True Pagan Warrior. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Otherlleft.
Message added 22:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Unioneagle (talk) 22:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Stuff[edit]

Thanks for the feedback. But I don't know if I want to spend much time on AfDs. A lot of the subjects are sort of marginal, and there are all sorts of interesting subjects with no articles or very sketchy ones. I much prefer to add or expand articles. When I do get interested in an AfD, I check the web for sources. If found, I add them and their content into the article before commenting. There are only two possibilities: sources are available, and the nominator should have done what I just did rather than waste everyone's time, or there are no sources, so why are the editors wasting so much time debating the subject? I am sounding really negative. Time to find a lake or river or that needs a map and an article. Soothing, satisfying and no controversy at all! :~) Aymatth2 (talk) 17:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sallie Gardner DYK[edit]

An editor had conflicts with the article you reviewed for DYK, I just wanted to ask what your opinion was regarding the matter? --TitanOne (talk) 17:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tb[edit]

Hello, True Pagan Warrior. You have new messages just for you from Smithers7. Go over to his talkpage and check it out!

Once you have read and/or replied to the message, you can take this template down by simply removing the {{user:Smithers7/tb}} from your talkpage.

You have another message... smithers - talk 01:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My website[edit]

You said it was only a minor concern at my RfA, but I took a look at the text on my site referencing "Wikipedia research" and can see where you're coming from. I expanded and modified it some to give a clearer understanding of what it is I do. Since I think you can find it easily enough should you wish to, I see no need to use this as an opportunity to add another "nofollow" link that points to it here. ;) --otherl left 21:00, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just took a look, and the relevant part now talks about additional services include monitoring company persona via monitoring of Wikipedia entries. I'm still not entirely sure what that entails. Does this mean that you offer a professional service ensuring that company information on Wikipedia is not derogatory? SilkTork *^YES! 18:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I offer them updates on what the entries say, but I also coach them on how to appropriately effect changes via {{edit request}} to avoid COI issues, and why properly-sourced unflattering information isn't likely to go away. Generally once the bad stuff makes it to Wikipedia it's too late to fix it (notable stuff is easy enough to find even if they try to keep it out of here), so I try to help them find out when it's non-notable (via Twitter and blogs and such), since it's possible for good PR writing to have an impact at that point. If you're wondering in general how I approach promotional business articles, take a look at the history of Ebsco Publishing.--otherl left 18:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are your views on Wikipedia:Paid editing (policy)? SilkTork *^YES! 20:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this response would be helpful to my RfA, please feel free to copy it there. I think it's a miserable state of affairs. I researched that question when I was studying the conflict of interest policy before providing a notice to an editor at Ebsco Publishing - that policy makes a very vague assertion about not being "paid to edit a Wikipedia article with the sole intent of improving that organization's image." With that information I wrote an article which can be found at [http://business-writing.suite101.com/article.cfm/wikipedian_editor_for_hire (with apologies, I cannot provide these external links directly due to the site in question being blacklisted) which explains the principles I had researched at WP:COI. Thereafter I did some Googling and encountered the tale of User:Thekohser. I reviewed the debate on paid editing and interviewed Gregory Kohser, writing another article, http://business-writing.suite101.com/article.cfm/dangers_of_hired_wikipedia_editing. (Interestingly, during that period another article I wrote, "Using Wikipedia as an SEO Strategy is a Bad Idea," was temporarily removed from the Suite101 site because I quoted from CEO Peter Berger's contributions here about Suite101 being blacklisted. Not all sites are as tolerant of criticism as this one!) What I found interesting is that I followed a similar research path to Kohser, although I didn't make the entrepreneurial leap he did, and initially reached the same conclusions - that it's not exactly disallowed, but it's a waste of time to put POV info into articles whether you're paid to or just doing it for free. The weird truth is that it still isn't disallowed, but Jimbo will nuke your account if he finds out you're doing it. The policy discussions have halted, I think, because barring finding an offsite advertisement there really isn't any way to enforce it. Where this leaves the situation now is completely untenable, because there might be editors out there accepting payment because they legitimately believe it's permitted. There has been no consensus for either the policy or guideline proposals to limit paid editing, and I expect no proposal that would specifically allow it. I have not had anything constructive to contribute to those discussions, the above being rant not being any more than a statement of the obvious, so I haven't weighed in there. I tend to trust that holding all edits to the principles of WP:V, WP:N, and WP:RS protect this encyclopedia more effectively than any new policy could, but I understand that Jimbo needs to take pains to defend against any perceived credibility problems from a marketing standpoint. I won't accept payment for editing articles.--otherl left 22:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your full response. I think that some people get slightly over concerned about paid editing, as they feel there would be too much possibility for bias to creep in. My experience has been that we should be rather more concerned about fans writing articles about their favourite rock star. We have a good number of apparently well written and well sourced articles which on closer examination are actually distorted puff pieces. I am engaged in a GA review at the moment which has disturbed me by the choice of material used to exaggerate the status of the subject of the article. Highly favourable comments from positive reviews have been used, while negative comments have been ignored, and those sources which give a balanced view were not merely ignored, but removed from the article! But, hey, Wikipedia is not perfect. We are still getting there.

I have done as you suggest and moved the question to your RfA. The RfA is in the balance at the moment, and if it remains at 72% will need a closing decision from a crat. I would suggest you think carefully about your response as it could decide matters. There are people on both sides of the fence on the paid editing issue, and I think you would need to show understanding of the concerns of both camps in your response.

My personal view is that I have welcomed your openness in this matter, and your willingness to discuss matters, and that if I felt you were more committed to Wikipedia I would be happy to support your request. But at this stage I still remain concerned about your lack of involvement. With such low levels of Wikipedia activity I don't see much need for you to have the tools - there are still plenty of useful areas in which you can get involved (and gain experience). I would be more prepared to support you after another 6 months of solid involvement - with perhaps some dispute resolution experience. regards SilkTork *^YES! 11:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that paid editing is a contentious issue. The sort of cherry-picking of information you describe is something I've not yet encountered, but I haven't reviewed a GA candidate. There's a credible argument that paid editing cheapens Wikipedia's image, but it's undermined by the existence of the reward board, where payment is acceptable. I am not aware of any suggestion to modify or remove the Reward Board, but it seems central to the issue. As I hope I have demonstrated at my RfA, I do my darndest to apply policy to a question first, and only my own opinion when it's appropriate. My opinion on the process to reach a consensus on paid editing isn't favorable, but I would rely on whatever policy or guideline results. Overall the way we make decisions works very well; this is a very unusual circumstance in which people could get punished for doing something that they thought was acceptable, and that troubles me.

I appreciate your caution about how I worded my response, and did consider it carefully. If I had simply come out against paid editing it would have been easy to see that I've written articles which pretty specifically lay out that it's not forbidden, so I thought laying out how my understanding of the issue evolved would be more helpful. I may add a note to that effect.

I respect your view that my level of involvement falls short of your standards - the minimums established by various editors vary quite a bit, but at least they all can be met easily enough with additional time and effort. Regardless of the outcome of this RfA, I've received feedback from other editors which will give me some clear focus as I try to meet the bar you've set. The question of "needing" the tools is a standard I see often but profess I don't understand - no individual needs the tools. That some editors should not have the admin tools goes without question, but the need for the tools rests with the community and the site, not the individual. For example, no editor could possibly demonstrate a need to see Special:Unwatchedpages, but the community needs to have people with access to that list. Your interest in admins having dispute resolution experience is understandable, since an admin is more likely than another editor to be asked to settle a dispute, and I will consider offering some third opinions - but as this process has reminded me of my withered interest in reviewing editors and inspired a new one in articles for creation, I'm developing quite a list of areas that I can help out in, with or without tools.--otherl left 12:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mt. Tremper map[edit]

It occurred to me while I was writing the article that a map would be nice, and that the USGS version would of course be PD. It further occurred to me that I could go into Photoshop and trace over the trails already shown on the map in the blaze color (adding the northern extension, which isn't on the USGS map but which I was one of the first people other than those who built it to hike on) and then add the appropriate NPS map symbols. It was a lot less harder than it might have been a few years ago. Daniel Case (talk) 15:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA[edit]

Sorry I had to close your RfA as unsuccessful. While some of the opposing arguments were stronger than others, there was a multiplicity of relevant oppose bases cited and I did not find that there was consensus that you should be given the admin tools.

Reading the opposes carefully, it struck me that a thoughtful response by you over the next few months would make another RfA in the near-future very likely to succeed. You're clearly a valuable contributor and 44 Wikipedians already supported your unsuccessful RfA. I look forward to seeing you pass next time.

Good luck, --Dweller (talk) 10:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. --Dweller (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry about this. I thought your responses to my oppose were measured, intelligent and demonstrated capability, which is why I moved my !vote to neutral (I don't really ever support candidates I haven't experienced outside of RFA). I wish you the best in your future endeavors. Hipocrite (talk) 13:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - I offered to help out in a different way, and that offer was declined. I have a clearer idea of what the community would expect of me should I decide to try again. Happy editing!--otherl left 13:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I originally misread your comment, which made it look "worse" (for lack of a better word) than it actually was, and I agree very much with the sentiment expressed by you on my talk page. In retrospect, while I still disagree with the manner you presented your thoughts on uncivil and/or unpleasant administrators, I was probably wrong in seeing this as irrefutable evidence of your unsuitability for the role. Maybe the project would be better of having an outspoken admin who would not be afraid to speak out against what is definitely a problem, if not as large as some editors make it out to be. In my own experience, nine out of ten editors that I've interacted with, admins or not, are in fact very civil. One more thing: You may have already noticed by the time I've finished writing this, but you did not properly close the kitten table you placed on my and others' talk pages, resulting in subsequent text being enclosed in the table. Regards, decltype (talk) 13:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry for creating even more work for you. Like those above, I hope you will give adminship another try at some point. All the best, decltype (talk) 13:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see this. Oh, well. I never had much faith in the RfA process anyways. :) I don't blame you if you never want to think about running again, but I'm confident you can pass in a few more months. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This sucks. You're a great candidate. Though it probably wouldn't have affected the outcome, I wish I had reaffirmed my support near the end. JamieS93 19:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - and that's a good way of viewing the situation. As much as I may disagree with the oppose reasons, the opposers themselves were considerate and offered good advice. :-) If you run again in a few months, it will probably be a different result. Cheers, JamieS93 19:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, that although your RFA failed and I have contributed to that, you have a lot of my respect. I sense in you a strong editor and hope to cross with you (collaboratively) not once in the future. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 22:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kitten! I'm sorry your RfA didn't get you a mop and bucket this time, but I agree with Dweller who said "...it struck me that a thoughtful response by you over the next few months would make another RfA in the near-future very likely to succeed." I look forward to seeing your name appear again in the non-too-distant future. -- Boing! said Zebedee 03:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to you for going through RfA and keeping calm through the whole debacle - it's obviously a very tough experience. It's great to see you're not discouraged, and I encourage you to keep it up in the direction in which you are going and I can almost guarantee you'll pass next time. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 07:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, True Pagan Warrior. You have new messages at MWOAP's talk page.
Message added 22:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

-- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 22:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

jmcw[edit]

Thank you for your concern. I agree that "it's all about John", not me, and confirm that I do not wish to create a distraction. However ... , Cheers, and thanks for your concern, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Administration[edit]

Can you help me with this concept?Thank You.Nascar1996 (talk) 20:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for your help.Nascar1996 (talk) 20:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Nascar1996 (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't hesitate to comment on my essay[edit]

User:Mike Cline/Conquerng the Dilemma-Creating a Better List--Mike Cline (talk) 18:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: High Schools essay[edit]

Hello, True Pagan Warrior. You have new messages at Jerry's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 04:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:True Pagan Warrior/RfA[edit]

Some good observations that I agree with. SilkTork *^YES! 21:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm trying to incorporate the best of what others use to measure but at the same time keep it simple. Do people often invoke the duck at RfA?--~TPW (trade passing words?) TPW is the editor formerly known as otherlleft 21:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tank Magazine[edit]

Would you please explain this edit of yours? This little stub is already well-cited with multiple, third-party WP:RS such as Huffington Post, The Independent, Softpedia, CBS Network and Hypebeast. Thanks. Scieberking (talk) 03:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You see many reliable sources. I see a blog, a very new paper with no track record yet for or against reliability, a software indexing site that also collects news, a major television network, and an online magazine also untested for reliability. Only one of those am I sure is reliable, so I think the article could stand to have a few more reliable sources. Do you think that more sources would be deleterious?--~TPW (trade passing words?) TPW is the editor formerly known as otherlleft 04:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, of course, the article should include more WP:RS but IMO Tank easily passes WP:GNG and WP:NMEDIA. The Independent is considerably an authoritative newspaper and Huffington Post is a news website, not an ordinary personal weblog (however one of the most famous weblogs on the internet). Plus the cover models of the magazine include big-name fashions models and famous actresses. With that said, I've recently added more third-party references from Daily Mirror, Guardian.co.uk, Times Online and BBC, and removed the tag. Thank you. Best, Scieberking (talk) 06:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please fix this infobox thing if you have time. It's showing unnecessary code with the image for no apparent reason. Thanks in advance. Scieberking (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not sure how I managed that, but I will tidy it up!--~TPW (trade passing words?) TPW is the editor formerly known as otherlleft 14:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

		The Guidance Barnstar
		I think you deserve this for your help, co-operation and guidance. You may display this on your userpage if you wish. Sincerely, Scieberking (talk) 16:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will do so proudly, thank you so much!--~TPW (trade passing words?) TPW is the editor formerly known as otherlleft 20:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

User:IBen/TB iBen (talk) 05:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, True Pagan Warrior. You have new messages at WT:EAR.
Message added 13:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jezhotwells (talk) 13:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CU disambig[edit]

Thank you. Given my current involvement in discussions at Talk:Concordia University (Montreal)#Move?, I've been somewhat distracted and diverted, but it remains a worthy task - I'll accept any and all help offered with greatful thanks. (My modus operandi has been to go to here, click on "What links here", and start "dab"ing!) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. I've been ignoring User pages, Talk pages, WP pages - just concentrating on articles. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, True Pagan Warrior. You have new messages at Template talk:Service awards.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Set Sail For The Seven Seas 13° 52' 30" NET 00:55, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eleventh Doctor image[edit]

Where is this debate taking place? Anyway, as I understand the image-use and fair-use policies, they are controlling whatever the Ninthe Circuit says. If he really thinks the image is important to the article but can't find a fair-use justification, then he should use {{external image}}. Daniel Case (talk) 15:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]