User talk:MLauba/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Amaranth Games

Please make sure that if you write an article based on part on this that the history of the current article is retained for attribution. If the idea is to split one bit out and delete the rest, I suggest just stripping the article down and renaming it to not muddle the edit history. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Whether you can do that depends on the outcome of the AFD debate; if that page is kept, overwriting would indeed be a bad idea. I suggested it because of the GFDL so people are properly attributed for their contribution if you use it. If absolutely nothing of the previous article is taken, you could simply start a new page. =-Mgm|^(talk) 10:53, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mlauba, thanks for starting the cleanup. I'll stop for now to avoid any edit conflicts. Marasmusine (talk) 12:50, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, I started going haywire with the edits before realizing that you were already working on them, didn't mean to be impolite. I'm done with the trimming and cleaning now. MLauba (talk) 14:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Counterculture

Alas, I kid you not. If you dont see them its because they dont genrally want to be seen. They are VERY good at getting what they want. Watch the skies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.106.117 (talk) 08:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Aaron Gural

Hi MLauba

You should note that {{stub}} templates imply that an article should be {{expand}}ed. So since the article was created with (and continues to have) a {{bio-stub}} template, I have removed the{{expand}}.

Bongomatic 04:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

True, which shows I shouldn't be patrolling when tired. MLauba (talk) 11:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

72.95.159.226

User should have been given a 4im for launching personal attacks. Referring to editors as Nazis is completely unacceptable. MuZemike 15:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

True (and for the Afd comment before the talk page comment actually). Changed accordingly. MLauba (talk) 15:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Mansour Al Cognosji XVI

Oh, I have no real idea - I didn't look into it much. But bad redirects are no big deal, unless they're a redirect of Enormous Asshole to someone's biography or something. I just figured since someone was writing Louis' biography there, it was a sensible redirect. WilyD 14:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Caroline Gibello

Hi NielMm MLauba, hope you don't mind, but I've declined your deletion nomination for Caroline Gibello because in my view an artist whose work has been acquired by multiple national art collections is sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article.WereSpielChequers 15:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not NielMn but I don't mind, I buy the rationale. Cheers. MLauba (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Mlauba, the perils of cut and paste technology! WereSpielChequers 16:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't template the regulars

This is the only warning you will receive. Your recent template on my page will not be tolerated, as per Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars.

If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tothwolf&oldid=278629075#March_2009 is uncalled for.Tothwolf(talk) 23:28, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Your tone is way out of line, and responding in kind is probably not the smartest thing to do. Please remain WP:CIVIL in your AfD debates. MLauba (talk) 23:30, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree and you don't have all the facts so you can't judge others in this case. If the other editor feels so inclined he can discuss it with me on my talk page but it was already resolved when you decided to template my talk page. Tothwolf(talk) 23:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

An oldtimer like you may want to remember the strikeout feature and retract certain comments. Just saying. MLauba(talk) 23:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

There was a lot more going on there than was readily apparent. Check the edit history on the article and you'll get an idea what I mean. I just replied to MuZemike and mentioned that there was more going on there so hopefully that'll take care of that. I always try to WP:AGF but if you see the article's edit history as well as the edit that was made just before the nomination, there was no way that was done in good faith. Tothwolf (talk) 23:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Btw, you don't need to use the talkback template. Tothwolf (talk) 23:49, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's drop this. I have nothing against a vigorous AfD defense, to me however it read like ad hominem towards the nominator. I don't see you willing to consider this point of view. though, which means this discussion won't lead anywhere any time soon.MLauba (talk) 23:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I understand your point of view, I just don't agree with it in this particular case, and that's ok, we don't have to agree. No hard feelings or anything either way. I actually wouldn't mind discussing with you as to why I decided to take this editor to task for what I consider to be disruptive editing, although we may not agree on that either :) Tothwolf (talk) 00:11, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Here Random User

So I chose the first user I found, and lucky you. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 00:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Giambracy

Just a friendly note on Giambracy. I declined your speedy deletion request because there was definitely enough context to identify the subject, a Jason Giambi fan club. While the article is a load of crap (pardon the language) and needs to go, the only speedy deletion criteria that comes close to applying is G3, vandalism. Even A7 (org with no claim of importance) would be a bit of a stretch, because of the claim of 13K members. HTH --Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Duly noted, thanks for clarifying. MLauba (talk) 17:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

And now an IP has contested the prod, so it's off to AfD. *sigh*--Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I probably should have picked A7 to build a clearer case but in the end, we only wasted some time. MLauba (talk) 21:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

If either of us had realized the extent of the socking and vandalism issue, G3 would have been a good pick, too. But you're right, in the end only a bit of time was wasted, and hopefully a good laugh was had at the sad lives of vandals. :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5