User talk:Peter M Dodge/archive oct282006/

User:Wizardry Dragon/Templates/UserTalkPageArchive

Archived Discussion

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Peter M Dodge/archive oct282006/, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Kf4bdy 22:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Merlinus:[edit]

Hi, I'm a Massachusetts resident. I've traveled all up the seaboard of Canada camping many times. Its not all too far from here. Loved Nova Scotia and up to Grosse Morne National Park in Newfundy. I read your home page and liked what you said... I added a "bold" article helping state the views of Lou Dobbs who I watch faithfully. Maybe you might take a look and get back to me. I wanted to put it in the discussion page and not on the article because it was something to be food for discussion! There is more about me and my personal opinions on my user page. I make them plain enough and do not hide from being bold. --merlinus 15:43, 18 April 2006 (UTC)Merlinus[reply]

I have added a reply to that article in the talk page with suggestions for improvement Wizardry Dragon 15:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Neutrality Project[edit]

I'm interested in the WNP, and support the general idea (in fact, I joined WP just to fix neutrality, though I do not only that and don't have a lot of time at the moment). However, I don't think removing comments, unless offensive, falls into the scope of the WNP. That probably should be discussed. Also, I'm not completely sure if a similar project doesn't exist yet. CP/M 04:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I searched Wikipedia extensively before creating the project - it's far easier to join a group than create one after all, but was unsuccessful. As to removing comments, it's offensive attack comments I'm speaking of, so I think we're on the same page there - although I'm not sure if I worded it the best on the project page. Wizardry Dragon 16:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it doesn't exist, I guess it's going to find support. However, the part about comments currently looks quite deletionist, so i guess rephrasing it would be better. CP/M 02:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletionist? Sounds like some wierd cult religion. In all seriousness, however, that's just how I thought I could best word it, if you have an idea to better word it, I encourage you to edit it. After all, remember to be bold when editing Wikipedia! :) I'll see if I can't think of something better, but I've been quite stressed with personal issues since yesterday, so if you have something, don't hesitate to add it. -- Wizardry Dragon 18:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably you've heard of them. A group of people who press on deletion of articles not meeting notability or other criteria, sometimes described as "concerned to have a paper-like encyclopedia here and now". They are quite unpopular, as in most cases their goals could be completed by merging, cleanup, and similar measures not resulting in loss of information. I've changed the description of WNP to avoid resemblance. As for cleaning comments, it's after all, a secondary goal (relating neutrality), so it would better be only stated in project pages. CP/M 21:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. By the way, just regarding symbolics. Just Wikipedia icon doesn't seem to carry much info. Why not use some neutrality symbol (say, the one used for neutral alignment if we don't come up with other ideas)? -- Wizardry Dragon 22:19, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Logo as is, is more of a placeholder than anything else. COuld you link me to the logo you're thinking of?

Well, I don't have explicit ideas. What I spoke about... I guess from your nickname and user page that you have probably played RPGs using ad&d-style alignments (or computer RPGs like PS:T)? The Neutral alignment symbol looking like a split box seems quite a possible idea for neutrality. Or it might be something else more recognizeable. CP/M 22:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps do a take on that with the Wikipedia logo? Hmm. Could work, if I could figure out how exactly. It would be nice to work the Wikipedia logo in there, somehow. -- Wizardry Dragon 22:19, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since the wikiproject is at the very least dormant, and I'm now not as overloaded in the real world, I've decided to take the initiative and mostly remake it. It might be not exactly what you intended, but I feel it to be at least the right direction, and would appreciate your input. CP/M 00:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to do much where I've been working full time, but I do keep an eye on things. I appreciate hyou taking some initiative though, and the WNP looks good thusfar. Keep it up! - Wizardry Dragon 22:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sonoma Sol Page[edit]

This request for speedly deletion is clearly contested.

If this page is going to be deleted, then delete all the Wikipedia pages devoted to minor league baseball teams throughout the U.S., as well as any other "minor league" sports team that isn't in the big leagues. At a minimum, delete all the Premier Development League team pages such as the San Francisco Bay Seals and Orange County Blue Star pages, since these teams play at the same level of soccer as does the Sonoma County Sol.

If you read the page history, I am not the one that put your article up for deletion, I am merely trying to help you in averting the deletion of your article. Wizardry Dragon 17:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admins[edit]

Yes, I'm a Wikipedia:administrator. Admins are very limited in what they can do regarding articles and users when they are engaged in a dispute. If it gets bad we can ask for the page to be protected while it is resolved. -Will Beback 22:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wondered, because I recall you being listed on the Admins list, and yet there was nothing to verify that on your user page. That said, is there anything I could do better? I'm not new to Wikipedia or it's policies as the anon user there continually seems to assert, but that is the first time I've had someone as determined as he is to get rid of those links, and never such a strongly divided dispute, and I do want to carry myself according to the accepted policies and guidelines here. -- Wizardry Dragon 22:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing fine. Problem users tend to either settle down, or grow into bigger problems. In the former case they are welcomed, and in the latter they are shown the door. Either way, we come out ahead. Just keep your cool. Cheers, -Will Beback 00:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks for the vote of support, it's very appreciated. :) I just hope the whole matter can settle down quickly, so Merlinus and us, as well as other users, can get back to editing that article. -- Wizardry Dragon 00:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sad Day[edit]

Dear Wiz Dragon: I have not been on my computer for a few days... I wrote a discussion page entry on Lou Dobbs to outline his "strongly stated opinions" about US immigration and other issues. You sort of warned warned about neutrality... at least on Wikipedia. In this case I don't see how it could be done. I share some of Lou Dobbs fears... but when tonight I read how pissed off some guy with you about defending his viewpoints I was convinced that... it just isn't worth it if its upsetting people. I guess its one thing to express my opinions to my friends, but another to express it so publicly... I'm gonna sit back and not post anything further (indefinately) ...until I think about how to express myself without hurting anyones feelings. I feel sick about how that went! --merlinus 23:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Merlinus--merlinus 23:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That actually, as far as I can tell, was not prompted by anything you had said or posted, but rather the content of links which Will Beback proposed for the article.

That said, I do have to agree with one sentiment in a way, it's just not worth continually fighting with that guy. If it becomes worse, I will probably have someone run checkuser on the anon user, as I'm not entirely unconvinced he's a sock puppet. In the meantime, I'm going to re-post a request for protection. Please do continue to contribute to Wikipedia, and remember to be bold - just let the dust settle there before you post proposed changes to Lou Dobbs again. -- Wizardry Dragon 23:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merlinus[edit]

I read what you wrote, But its not just that, I tend to have strong opinions and I need to spend a few weeks thinking about how to express myself better... so far I've been more interested in expressing my opinions than anything else... even than being a good contributer... ive read wikipedia's rules and it is not the format to editorialize... except under some cicumstances where opinion is asked for. I'm new to using the internet... and looking for outlets to express myself in various ways. It seems there are rules to "polite internet culture" just like in real life. I was not aware of this. Some behavoirs are not acceptable. I am like a child not really knowing what the rules are until someone says: "Bad" or "Good" I found there are chat rooms out there that I can access with my AOL that can talk about the US immigration issue with both sides giving opinions. That seems interesting to me right now. I wanted to let you know that I erasind the provocative..."BOLD?" Discussion I put about Lou Dobbs and erased other contributions I put about contriversial topics until I can figure out how to better express myself in this context. Maybe I should start over new. --merlinus 12:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)Merlinus[reply]

You can always use your user page as a soapbox that way; it is your own personal space on Wikipedia, after all :) -- Wizardry Dragon 20:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, don't feel like it's a crime tpo state your opinions - it's not. So long as you don't change articles in violation of the NPOV policies, you're good. I think you're doing fine, and you did yourself good to stand up and take responsibility on that talk page, which is something that anon user still hasnt done. -- Wizardry Dragon 23:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LAST AND FINAL WARNING[edit]

Please stay off of my talk page Wizardy Dragon. This is my last and final warning to you, thank you. Redwolfb14 20:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He has every right to be on your talk page. That's what it is there for.--Here T oHelp 21:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't have the right to revert changes i've made to my talk page. He's vandalizing, and not adhering to Wikipedia guideline yet again.

You don't own your talk page. You can't just delete stuff you don't like, especially warning for vandalism. You can edit your page to be whatever you want it to be in a technical sense, but not in the sense of what is allowed.--Here T oHelp 21:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the guidelines in FULL on what a user is and isn't allowed to do with their talk page before continue to comment. Thanks --Redwolfb14 17:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want me to find some minor clause that saves you, give up. My way is the spirit of the policy and that's what counts. (Besides, I doubt even the letter would support your argument). The point of talk pages is to talk. You being a dick.--Here T oHelp 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one following the rules AND spirit of what I can do with my talk page. On the other hand your behavior exhibits that of a child who can't get what he or she wants. Then to say i'm being a dick? It's beneath me to continue this conversation with someone who obviously wishes to remain ignorant. Not only that but as much as I dislike Wizardy Dragon and consider him to be just as you ignorant as you. This is his talk page and for me to continue a discussion with you; would clearly not be following the spirit of the guidelines and rules set forth here at Wikipedia. It always surprises me that the majority of people who don't follow the rules and guidelines here at Wikipedia are administrators. With that said, I consider this discussion complete and will summarily ignore anything else you have to say, have a good one. --Redwolfb14 00:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you hate it when people accuse you of what your accusing them of? I'm the one playing around with you. Provide me with a specific link—[[target page]]—or be quite. You know your the one faking it.--Here T oHelp 00:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, if you have an issue with HereToHelp, post to HIS talk page and not mine. Blanking your talk page is vandalism. This is accepted by Wikipedia administrators and editors as policy. If you do not agree with this policy, then do not edit Wikipedia. - Wizardry Dragon 23:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Well said.--Here T oHelp 01:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subst[edit]

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. --Cyde Weys 01:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this is an issue on any of the pages I've modified? If it is, then I can fix it. - Wizardry Dragon 20:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging articles for deletion[edit]

I note that you recently tagged the article Spaced Out for deletion on the grounds that it was a non-notable group. As the first paragraph of the article clearly indicated, it was about a cartoon; the only way that I can see "nn group" would be applicable, would be if you only read the character descriptions and completely skipped over the part about it being a cartoon.

Is this in fact what happened? DS 15:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was the closesed AfD tag that was in the templates. The main thrust of the argument is that it is non-notable as per WP:NOTABILITY. - Wizardry Dragon 17:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:45px wikipedia neutrality.png)[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:45px wikipedia neutrality.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sue Anne 20:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:45x wikipedia neutrality.png)[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:45x wikipedia neutrality.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sue Anne 20:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub sorting Barnstar[edit]

Greetings. There is a Barnstar for stub-sorting up for proposal here. If you'd like to participate in the discussion, we'd much appreciate it. Thanks, and have a great days. :) SynergeticMaggot 18:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm blind, but I don't see it? ^_^; -- User:Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 17:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]