User talk:DarkSaber2k/Archive 1

Luu Backstage

I just Started the Page, i appreciate you are doing your job, and the page does require some fluffing out. Most of the other socs we are associated with have pages, im just doing my part for the community.

Much Love

Barry Carlyon 11:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Other stuff existing is not a reason to allow an article with no reliable non-trivial independent third-party sources to remain. DarkSaber2k 11:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

what's up with you?

Stop removing righful information!!! There is a lot of information in the base forum I just entered. it's not spam!

Hey

Hey instead of deleting the article, Ace Combat X Super Aircraft, you could help fix it and it's problems.Sam ov the blue sand 16:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello

follow the recent discussion on a TALK page of article list of doom metal bands before you edit, please. thank you. Nothingagainst 11:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

AIV

Hi, when reporting to WP:AIV, could you please place newer requests at the bottom so the earlier ones can be dealth with first - cheers! Tellyaddict 11:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Please find something better to do

than to speedy articles two minutes after they are created. GlassFET 15:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It's disruptive. GlassFET 15:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

No it isn't. I do recent creation patrols, you'd be amazed at the amount of vanity pages people and companies try to slip into wikipedia, so please assume good faith. Removing speedy tags from articles you created yourself is what is viewed as disruptive. (By the way, I'm sure an admin will keep the article in it's current state, but it's up to the admin to remove the tag, not you or me.) DarkSaber2k 15:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I believe you can do it. That would show good faith, IMO. The company is real, known in the audiophile world, and has many more reviews in mainstream audiophile and home theater mags, the kind you can buy at the bookstore, not just online sites. GlassFET 15:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you :-) GlassFET 15:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Doc-IT

OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not exactly the right page to cite when someone is comparing their entry to the one on Microsoft. Microsoft might be crap, but our article on it certainly isn't. It's better to point to WP:CORP and WP:N. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

OTHERCRAPEXISTS is just a title of an essay describing why 'Article x exists so article y should' is not a valid excuse. As the saying goes, what's in a name? It wasn't a judgement on the article, and frankly it seems really foolish that anyone would think that in any way! DarkSaber2k 11:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

All Angels‎

Please don't misuse the {{db}} template; it just creates unnecessary work for admins. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 20:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's start again

We seem to have got off an a bad foot. Hi my name is Zeth. I am interested in Open Source software, programming and automated collation. In the Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion, it says: "Note that some Wikipedians create articles in multiple saves, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its initial creation." This is me. It takes me from 2 hours to a day to do a Wikipedia page properly. I thought about the XEmacs page for a month. I appreciate that a lot of nonsense is posted to Wikipedia, and now you have explained it I understand why you delete pages in a hurry, I think we can agree to disagree on the merits of preemptive action. Zeth 16:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

your behaviour

Given that you blanked my message with an inaccurate, abusive edit summary, you're not worth replying to. If you continue to place speedy-delete templates on articles that don't meet CSD, however, you may eventually be blocked from editing. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 17:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What is the deal with admins round here lately? They force you to explain everything in stupid amounts of detail before they'll even look at your problem, but they'll take offense at something you said in a conversation/edit summary that had nothing to do with them quicker than a flash of lightning! DarkSaber2k 08:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Coming Home Network

Thanks for the advice, however, I am not sure what else the pages needs. I openned the page through Fr C John McClosky Wikipedia page as he is an advisor for the Network. The page references EWTN as the Coming Home is advertized daily by tv and/or radio. We are mentioned in Scott Hahn's bio and Daniel Ali's page. As to our Notability these existing pages show the existence and effect of the Coming Home Network. I am continuing to develop the page, and should there be something missing please advice me. Thanks again.

speedy tags

Seems you mistook {{db-blanked}} for {{db-empty}}/{{db-blank}}. Yeah the name sucks... -- lucasbfr ^talk 11:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, your the one whos mixed up {{db-blanked}} and {{db-empty}}. The article in question had been blanked by the only contributor to it, just like the blanked tag says. Empty is for articles of like a sentence, or just a title and a weblink, NOT articles that have been blanked. It does say to this affect quite clearly on both tags, but I'm sure it's a (relatively) easy mistake to make. DarkSaber2k 11:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't mistook either but I didn't have the same assesment on the situation, sorry about that ;). I use "blanked" for pages that really were created by mistake, not disappointment blankings. I assumed you chose the wrong one. Sorry, my mistake! -- lucasbfr ^talk 11:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Addiction

Following this afternoons excitment.

There needs to be some flexibility here to protect 'minority interests' such as Browser based games. You effectivly treid to wipe out an entire category, and wasted at least two hours of my life. The matter is not yet dropped. You managed to wipe out 25 Articles this afternoon, Ferion especially has a large user base and that article was a year old. I prefer to contribute than get bogged down in all this, i can't compete with those who whack on Speedy Delete tags, i dont have the time to go through and defend them all. 25!!! And the process for undeletion is near to impossible. These articles will now be speedy deleted if re-made under cat 2 (i think). So in effect they are gone forever. Bjrobinson 17:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No, they will be speedily deleted under that if they are identical versions, but someone who takes the time to prepare it privately on their user space and provide it with adequate sourcing before submitting it to mainspace will have no problem getting it kept. DarkSaber2k 17:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Kots

Could you please answer the discussion questions under the "Kots" article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heatherlynn 611 (talk • contribs)

Could you please bother to check if I have or not before hassling me? DarkSaber2k 13:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Your proposal of deletion of Travian article

Dear user DarkSaber2k: first I must tell you that I am vivid player of Travian MMORTS, so I should reveal to you that Travian article is also made in other languages Wikipedias such as Català Dansk Español Français Galego Italiano Lëtzebuergesch Nederlands Polski Português Русский Suomi Svenska Türkçe 粵語 中文, -so dear user DarkSaber2k will you also propose deletion of those other sites so that any mention of Travian is completely erased from Wikipedia and people worldwide are gratefuly saved from reading that insignificant articles? IMHO the discussion about deletion of some article should be placed on that articles discussion page and not on some users talk page. And by the way you as a notable deletionst should above all consider deletion parts of your own Wikipedia user page, because information that "The Internet - Where Men are Men...and so are most of the Women" has nothing to do with your activity as Wikipedia editor. --Bluewind 08:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Nor does it have to. WP:USER states that excessive use of a user page for non-wikipedia information is not allowed. One sentence is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination. WP:USER also states: You might want to add quotations that you like, as acceptable, so I did. Next time you want to try and lecture somebody, it might be advisible to actually read up on the subject beforehand. DarkSaber2k 16:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Turk rock

The reasons to gave for the speedy deletion of this article are not valid criteria for speedy deletion. Indeed, unless this article is a copyright violation, it is not eligible for speedy deletion. Please pursue the articles for deletion process if you feel the article is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Natalie 13:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Righto, have moved it to AfD. DarkSaber2k 12:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Free Toast

hi umm... sorry but free toast is a page that is not going to be removed it was fine there it had been there for about a week and was fine to be left. please don't remove it again this is a page that has been discust and shall not be removed No.why?123 10:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

A week? Try 10 minutes. I think you meant that the page has been consistently deleted for a week now. DarkSaber2k 10:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

no befor you came it was up after a lengthy debate and lot's of sock puppet it was there permanantly!!!! thank you No.why?123 12:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh really. Can you provide a link to this so-called debate, since I checked here, which is the only place that a debate to restore an article would be held, and there is nothing. DarkSaber2k 12:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedians

ooo scary wikipidians i scard oooo.. there comeing to remove free toast oooo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Will.shall.not.stop (talk • contribs).

About Kingdom of Loathing

I wasn't the person who removed your "question of notability" template from the KoL article, but I believe that he or she was right in doing so. Given that the game and its authors have been featured by the likes of TechTV, Game Informer, and Wired Magazine (among others), that's plenty to satisfy anyone's standards of notability (see Wikipedia:Notability (web)#Criteria

1. 1). --Crazysunshine 02:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I don't think I was actually mistaken in placing the tag, since none of that is mentioned in the article. DarkSaber2k 08:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Starships!

I thought we did well on Gothador. Could I possibly get you to take another look at Starships! and change your vote? Matt Brennen 18:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello people from the Gothador forum. You may want to note I haven't changed my vote for Starships. Go to the articles debate, see for youselves. DarkSaber2k 18:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Fallen Sword‎

Hi, I have a question why you are doing so hard to delete my article? Please do one thing for me, take a look at this List of multiplayer browser games and try to find more then 5 game articles with reliable sources, because I couldn't. Wozniakg 20:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

That's right you couldn't. I already tagged over 40 of them for deletion (of which 38 were agreed by admins to meet the speedy delete criteria). With about 10 more articles that are not-quite speedy criteria, but of borderline notability under review. And none of this is relevent to your article, because I can only give my attention to so many articles at a time. (I do suggest you read both those pages.) And all except 2 of them have what I would call reliable sources. Hell, a quarter of those games are award-winning. And certainly none of them try to pass off a listing in a games directory as there chief claim to fame. Hattrick for example has been featured in numerous football related publications. DarkSaber2k 20:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm really disappointed then about the wikipedia. I always thought that it's a place where everyone can write an article about a topic of his interests and add some value information for others readers. Now I see you honor only 'reliable sources' and you don't respect people free mind. For me the real power of Internet is a freedom and unfettered and you guys back to nineties to introduce censorship. Thank you for your explanation and good luck in fighting people. Wozniakg 20:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Poll

Take a look at the talk page, Talk:List of Virtual Console games (North America)#Do you wish to KEEP the "Wii Points" column or DELETE it?. It was NOT a "9 hour poll". Someone just posted what the current consensus at that point was, and people just stopped replying. The poll was never closed, and it's not my fault if people chose not to reply again. The poll has been open for over a MONTH. TJ Spyke 23:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Not very widely advertised for something so obviously controversial though was it. Especially considering the opposition it's currently facing as soon as it was opened to the wider VG project. DarkSaber2k 23:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It was not (and still isn't) controversial. ONE person objected to it, and he was the first person to object since the article was created in November. So far, the discussion at WP:VG is in favor of keeping them. Rob has admitted that he is just gonna continue trying to get it removed, what does that tell you about him? Not that it looks like his oppositiong will be shot down again, he wants to get an admin. TJ Spyke 23:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Asfor your comment about the poll being moot. I bet you wouldn't be saying that if the situation was reversed. If the vote had been 10-1 in favor of removing it, would you still be saying the poll doesn't matter? TJ Spyke 23:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't do straw polls, I go with discussion. If the result of the discussion is to keep it fine. But as I said, as soon as it was mentioned to the CVG project more than one person objected. I also think we need an admins final word on the discussion, because at the moment the only person trying to claim there is a consensus in the discussion is you, and your hardly neutral on this matter. DarkSaber2k 11:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Cash prize to the person who can figure out what this guy is on.

Where can I find a good can of silverbeet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themending (talk • contribs)

User:Bjrobinson

Thanks for speaking up for me. Bjrobinson really has it in for me since I followed his suggestion of looking at the non-notable articles in the MMO Broswer game section, which lead to the deletion of some 40 articles. Look on his talk page to see that he apparantly flipped out when I thanked him for bringing all the articles to my attention. DarkSaber2k 10:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Woah, your enforcement of Wikipedia policy is a "wiki-crime"? Reminds me of when I got called a "wikiterrorist" :> Marasmusine 11:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so bothered by the name calling, I've been called worse by nicer people. But I am concerned about the fact that he seems hell bent on taking this to ArbCom, even though he A) Doesn't know anything about ArbCom and B) Hasn't followed the dispute process through to ArbCom (which it quite clearly states you have to have done before they will consider the case.) I think he's pretty fed up with me pulling up policies and guidelines to reference my answers to his accusations, he always spends the time arguing that things like WP:RS, WP:N and WP:V shouldn't apply to what he calls 'minority interests' (Which, from my experience so far, means 'Broswer-based MMOs that don't have a single reliable source to their name'). DarkSaber2k 11:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

'Hell bent' is a little harsh, it’s an idea floated only this morning. And as we have discussed, all this wiki nonsense is all so horribly complicated and time consuming... dunno.

As i have said I don't even play any of these games I would feel as strongly about many other subjects, but haven’t 'ended up' getting involved.

Hmm. Well you see, I have been quietly contributing for over two years, and I have never had a problem like this, with anyone else. At all.

I feel we should leave it for the time being and move on. We have dragged our petty arguments over 3 - 4 other users talk pages now and spammed both mine and yours to death with it... Bjrobinson 14:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing petty about this. You have publicly attempted to defame me in an AfD, you have made numerous personal attacks, you have implied I am mentally ill, you have threatened to take me to the highest level of disciplinary available, you consistently assume policies don't apply to what you call 'minority interests', you have essentially said you are a better person than me because you edit/improve existing articles whereas I patrol and remove tag inappropriate pages, you have refused to assume good faith on the flimsiest of pretexts (my contributions list, hardly the evidence of intentional malice that is required.) And all this is because of consequences to something YOU suggested. And unlike your assertions of malice, I can provide evidence for each and every one of the above points. Not to mention that you seem to think this is in some way funny. Does this quote sound familiar? Anyway I'm off to actually contribute to articles now. After all I have a funny feeling that's the point? There's an article on urban renewal that needs a good going over. Although i will admit this is more fun. (Bold word was already like that in original post, italics added by me to emphasise the point I'm making.) DarkSaber2k 15:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Maramusine, sorry this happened on your talk page, but I been taking a lot of crap from this guy for the last week or 2. DarkSaber2k 15:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem, just try and keep your cool. Marasmusine 15:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Believe me I am. That's nothing compared to how I wanted to word it. DarkSaber2k 15:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think Bjrobinson is the person who would benefit more from reading WP:COOL. Especially point 2. Despite all this, I'm quite willing to let the matter end here, just as long as Bjrobinson can see how his actions and statements are out of line, especially considering that my 'malicious' actions were a direct result of a suggestion he made. DarkSaber2k 15:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

(reset tab) Oh my, I had forgotten about this. Erm well I don’t know what to say except at some point this must stop, because I very much doubt your name is ' Dark Saber 2K' , and in 40 years time when this crap is still sitting on a server somewhere it will be exceedingly embarrassing.
You have modified your behaviour a little, I see more notability tags rather than speedy deletes. The problem with speedy deletes and even AfDs is that many don’t check into WP to be able to add "hangon" or whatever, and there are enough trigger happy admins only happy to oblige without considering it properly.
I will apologise for any offence caused for ‘personal attacks’ (poor show from me). I don’t think the matter is dropped just yet, its just a matter of working out how properly tackle the situation in a proper manner. I also note that you still insist on censoring your talk page including removing a civility warning. Bjrobinson 13:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

You can't help doing it can you. I picked up the sly dig in the topic below, and making fun of my choice of username, why should I care, at 40, what username I had 27 years ago? Of course I've stopped adding speedy tags. All the articles that obviously met speedy criteria have now been deleted. Next are the articles where the editors have asserted notability, but failed to provide sources. As for 'censoring' my talk page, as usual your presenting one fact of the circumstances as a damning defamation of me. Both me and the other editor involved in the 'incivility' agree that there was no incivility involved, and that the Admin was wrong to assume there was. We had already reached a state of Ad Infinitum in our discussion and left it at that. And as I said the LAST time you tried to use quarter-facts and half-truths to make me look bad, anyone can check the history of a page, anyone with more than 10 minutes wiki experience knows how to check a history and I know full well removing comments on my talk page isn't going to do anything to stop people like you who are desperate to stir trouble and defame people, even going so far as to do so when they are apologising for the last time they defamed me. I don't accept your apology. Comments in the above post and conversation below show you to be insincere. DarkSaber2k 14:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I think my policy and guideline hating friend would benefit from reading Wikipedia:No personal attacks. DarkSaber2k 14:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I wasn't having a dig at your username, I was saying this will embarrassing for me. Yeah your right about the incivility thing, bad example. The comment below... well that was one of my points to you weeks ago... this is a WIKI. If you see something wrong try and fix it before going for the meat cleaver, if you can't then fine. Bjrobinson 14:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

And as I said to you at the same time, the burden of proof is on the person wishing for an article or information to be included, not the person who thinks it should be removed. If I don't believe the article passes inclusion criteria, then I will mark the article as such. It is then up to the person wishing for the article to be kept to find the proof of notability. Now that the articles of non-notability are gone, proper attention can be paid to those articles that assert notability, but don't provide sources to back it up. Since I'm not the person who insists it belongs on wikipedia, it doesn't fall to me to provide the sources to prove it belongs here. I place notability and sources tags, leave a notice in the talk page, and give them some time to produce the sources. Hard as this may seem to believe, your way isn't any better than my way. Your way would have Wikipedia crammed full of 'minority interest' articles that are unable to prove their notability in even the slightest way. My way calls them on their non-notability. Your way is burying your head in the sand, my way confronts the problem head-on. DarkSaber2k 14:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

That is a really backwards way of looking at it matey. This is a collaborative project, something people are menat to work together on. When i find a crappy page, I try and improve it before tagging it. Time and time and time again I see you take the most confrontational route possible. You enjoy this, you enjoy deleting, you enjoy tagging, you love to warn people, you actively seek confrontation, yet you never actually contribute anything. Again I will use the Gaia online example, a site with a billion forum posts, 300,000 daily visitors, 9 million dollar annual profit... deleting such a page would make WP a laughing stock, 10 minutes with google and decent sources are there to find. My point is thus; you are acting like a bull in a china shop, aggravating and being confrontational at every opportunity he can find. And I still have yet to find a substantial encyclopaedic edit. I have nothing more to say to you. :-) Bjrobinson 15:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, lets take the Gaia article as an example. I place a maintenace tag saying it needs sources, and what happens? Sources for it turn up within the day. Would they have appeared if a reminder hadn't been placed? Probably not. You complain about my contributions, but I've actually done as much to save browser game articles as you. Your argument is always that we should let the articles stay because no sources exist. I have been advising people who have actually been able to provide sources on which ones are better than others, and helping them put those into the article, just like you did when you finally got what I've been talking about with regards to sources. I'm also going to stop this conversation after this, but I ask that you stop the smug little edit summaries and the annoying little comments directed at me. You edit your way, I'll edit mine. If we end up at odds over an article we talk like grown-ups, not make personal comments and attempt to discredit the other. If I genuinely do something wrong, I fully expect an admin to call me on it. This is my final word. DarkSaber2k 18:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I invite everyone to participate with my suggestion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games#Sources resources. Marasmusine 19:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)