User talk:LFaraone/Archive/2007/January

I suggest using the above template for new articles especially when it was created by a no0b. Cheers. frummer 17:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you for your support

Thank you for your support in the RfA on my behalf. It is an honor to have received your expression of confidence. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. It is my wish that I will continue to deserve your confidence. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 20:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IRC cloak request

I am firefoxman on freenode and I would like the cloak wikimedia/firefoxman. Thanks. --FirefoxMan 01:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the Firefoxman page error

Hi, sorry for the error I've made with Firefoxman page. I'm really really sorry. I don't mean that. It looks like I edit the wrong page. Actually I want to edit my own page. I'm really sorry about that. (Maxcor)

Signing RFA comments

You should go back and sign this edit; looks like you forgot. Regards, Cyde Weys 17:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hebewebe

I removed your speedy deletion tag from Hebewebe (and replaced it with a prod tag) because I felt it wasn't an appropriate use per non-criteria for speedy deletion. If you think I did this in error, please replace it. Thanks :) ::mikm t 01:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Risk AfD

Don't worry about it, the page looked very messy and I would have done the same if I were you. Thanks for understanding. b_cubed 09:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Andrew Morawski page

Thank you for your help today and moving my page! Esimones 04:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

A7

I think your CSD A7 on Guy Marchant is quite wrong. 170 early printed books before 1500 is a lot. The Danse Macabre book alone gets learned articles about it. What do you want? Charles Matthews 17:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I'm confused

You put a {prod} tag on Daftar Al-Taliban less than two minutes after it was created. Isn't this a violation of policy? Aren't you supposed to give editors a grace period, when they start an article, in case they are going to start the article in stages?

Now, in this particular case, I didn't have very much to add. But I would prefer those who patrol new articles to follow procedure. And, unless I am mistaken, nominating an article for deletion without giving the editor a grace period is a violation of procedure.

If I am not mistaken the proper way to challenge a prod is to delete the tag, and put an explanation on the article's talk page. I've done that. Looking up the rules, and composing my explanation for the talk page, and this note to you has taken me almost forty minutes. Now I can get back to real work.

Do you think if you kept in mind how long it takes the editors who start the articles you tag to properly respond to your {prod} tags, you would exercise a little more caution in how generously you sprinkled them?

I noticed a link to Wikipedia:Editor review/Firefoxman2 on your talk page. What is that? Are you applying to be an administrator?

Cheers -- Geo Swan 23:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You marked] Simonetti with {db-bio} about six minutes after it was created. May I suggest that six minutes is not a long enough grace period? What do you think about its state 24 hours later? -- Geo Swan 23:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geo Swan - in my experience, there isn't such a grace period between the creation of an article and its tagging for deletion. A prod tag gives you 5 days grace automatically, with free reign to remove the tag with a short explanation in your edit summary. Speedy deletions are designed to quickly catch attack pages and those which harm the emcyclopedia, and having a page reading "John smells" for 24 hours or something would truly defeat the purpose of speedy deletion. New page patrolers often don't have the gift of being able to see how a page might progress, but we (they?) have to make an informed judgement within policy at the time. I'm sorry that you have felt this way about this issue, but I assure you that, to the best of my knowledge, Firefoxman is free to add tags as little as 0.5 seconds after a page is created. Mart inp23 00:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Before nominating an AfD says:

"Before nominating a recently created article, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, mentioning your concerns on the article's discussion page, and/or adding a "cleanup" template, instead of bringing the article to AfD."

The second paragraph of Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion says:

"Note that some Wikipedians create articles in multiple saves, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its initial creation."

I spent some time looking, and I didn't find a similar recommendation for {{prod}}. That the {{prod}} guidelines lacks such a recommendation is a serious oversight, in my opinion. I found Firefoxman tagging the article I had just created with a {{prod}} was highly disruptive, jarring. And, if the two of you are central to the {{prod}} cabal I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to revise the procedure to show greater consideration to wikipedia contributors who don't focus on deletion. -- Geo Swan 01:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk main page header

LOL it's mostly an in joke as people constantly keep adding new talk to the top for some reason. It's a bit like the in joke a while ago when we changed the header to read "Talk:Moan page" for a half hour. Due to the amazing amount of complaints that day. ;) --Monotonehell 13:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Self reference

What did you mean with this [1]? Happy Editing by Snowolf^(talk) on 01:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It now reads "This template is a self-reference and so is part of the Wikipedia project rather than the encyclopaedic content.". I hope that is acceptable. See WP:DEFCON for another template example. If I am in error, please revert it to your revision.. FirefoxMan 01:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you're right ;-) Happy Editing by Snowolf^(talk) on 01:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion tag

Please see Talk:The Dandelion Girl and The Dandelion Girl--æn↓þæµß¶-ŧ-¢ 20:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{new}}