User talk:VanishedUser sdu8asdasd/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
On "Personal Attacks"
Hi, Luke. I'm getting a bit tired of baseless accusations, so would you care to clarify how exactly my "hidden" comment was a "personal attack"? Thank you. ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
- The fact you've deliberately hidden it is inappropriate, and the edit itself was inappropriate. It may be borderline, but for me, anything walking the tightrope of a personal attack should be classified as one - as the intent is clearly there, but the words may be carefully manipulated to stop it being a blatant one. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- Are we talking about the same thing here? My comment was:
- I didn't know that a topic ban was an effective way to deal with sock puppetry.<! --Hint: those are separate issues--> Silly me.
- So I ask you again. How exactly is that comment a personal attack? ~ DanielTom (talk) 16:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- By implying the admin had no idea about rules/guidelines in a very snarky way. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- No. At best it implies that he mixed up two different issues. Apparently, you don't even understand what a personal attack is. Please think about the consequences of your actions before making other baseless accusations. ~ DanielTom (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- The irony here is strong, given your stance. But whatever, if you're going to be like this, I advise you don't return to my talk page. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:22, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- No. At best it implies that he mixed up two different issues. Apparently, you don't even understand what a personal attack is. Please think about the consequences of your actions before making other baseless accusations. ~ DanielTom (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- Are we talking about the same thing here? My comment was:
Jesus! (If that's a personal attack, then I'm a green toad.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
ANI discusssion
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.This is related to the disputes at the Barelvi article.Dil e Muslim talk 17:25, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- Wait, you're inviting me to a thread I started? Logic? xD Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- Careful, Luke. One behavior I've noticed with Msoamu and Shabiha on ANI threads and AfDs in the past, and in which Am Not New is currently engaging, is flooding the thread with lots of...well, walls of text. Eventually, it will get so long that no outside observers will want to get involved due to all the reading. Everything you're saying is true, just don't get baited. MezzoMezzo (talk) 09:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Mark Lundy
Hi I see you voted to keep the article about Teina Pora. Would you like to vote on a similar discussion about whether an article titled the Murders of Christine and Amber Lundy should be renamed "Mark Lundy". Discussion and voting is on the Talk page.. Offender9000 (talk) 19:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invite, but I'll pass on that one, I've got too many other things to do at present! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low 
to High 
, while for quality the scale goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Bluenose
I have that misfortune. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:49, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Zytek history
I noticed your creation of the Ginetta-Zytek GZ09S article from your adding links to various other articles, and I think I have a slight problem with the article as it stands now. You have the racing history of the 09S covered fairly well, but I think you might be missing a part of the larger picture when it comes to these cars. I'll try not to ramble on and keep this simple. Zytek's race car naming and numbering is a bit complicated, a bit like Lola's.
The original Zyteks were of course the Reynard 02S, bought by IRM as the BA 03S, then bought by Zytek to become the 04S. This design continued as additional chassis were built as the 05S and 06S. In 2006, new regulations came into effect that required a chassis redesign for all LMPs by the start of the 2007 season. Zytek adapted by developing the 07S and 07S/2, of which they built three (Chassis 01 for Barazi-Epsilon, Chassis 02 for Arena, and Chassis 03 for Team LNT). These three cars continued into 2008, with Arena's car sold to Corsa Motorsports in the US, and LNT's car going to Karim Ojjeh, for use by Race Performance.
In 2008 Lawrence Tomlinson, founder of the LNT Group, became a shareholder in the Zytek Group. LNT were also the owners of the Ginetta brand. Through this connection, Zytek became sponsored by Ginetta. The first fruit of this partnership was 2008 Petit Le Mans, where LNT entered a brand new Chassis 04 as Ginetta-Zytek 07S. This was followed by the start of the 2009 season with the construction of two more chassis, Chassis 05 for ASM and Chassis 06 for LNT to replace 04 which they sold off to Strakka. Now, all three of these cars were branded as Ginetta-Zytek 09S and 09S/2 (or GZ09S and GZ09S/2, both styles have been used). However, all three 07S's also continued to be used into 2009: Barazi kept Chassis 01, Corsa upgraded their Chassis 02 to the Hybrid and rebadged it as a Ginetta-Zytek, and Ojjeh kept his Chassis 03, now under the GAC banner. There is however nothing fundamentally different about the 07S and the 09S, they are simply evolutions of the same design with minor differences underneath, but completely identical in terms of bodywork. Note that even in 2009, the Ginetta badge was not applied to most of the old 07S. (ACO press release mentioning "Zytek" and "Ginetta-Zytek" as seperate entities in the LMP2 category)
For 2010, Chassis 01 and 02 were no longer in use. Ojjeh's 03 now moved to Greaves, where it finally picked up the Ginetta moniker. 04 went from Strakka to Beechdean-Mansell, 05 stayed with ASM, and 06 stayed at LNT. In 2011, the LMP regulations were changed once more, specifically in regards to the engine sizes, forcing everyone to redevelop their cars for smaller or larger engines in time for 2012. Zytek partnered with Nismo to develop the Nissan V8, and thus that engine became the sole powerplant for the redesigned Zytek chassis, the Z11SN (N for Nissan). Due to the partnership with Nissan, the Ginetta badging was dropped from the new batch of cars. ASM continued to run their 09S for 2011, while MIK Corse used the old 07S Chassis 01 for their Hybrid, however note that both of them dropped the Ginetta badging. MIK's car is now Zytek 09S Hybrid, and ASM's car now becomes Zytek 09SC. After 2011, the 07S and 09S chassis were no longer legal, so everyone now is running the Z11SN.
So, in short, there are three generations of chassis from Zytek. The Reynard 02S-based cars from 2002 to 2006, the 07S-based cars from 2007 to 2011, and the Z11SN from 2011 onward. So my problem with your article, as it stands now, is that it ignores the fact that the "Ginetta-Zytek GZ09S" has in fact been in use since 2007. This is akin to the Acura ARX-01 article, which covers all evolutions of the same basic chassis from the ARX-01a to the ARX-01g, or the Lola B08/60 which continues on to this day as the B12/60. The359 (Talk) 05:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
- It's a fair point, but I had the intention of creating the 07S article somewhere down the line. You're correct that I've not done much about the chassis history; this is due to the fact I've not seen a lot of sources on this matter (it may well be I'm looking in the wrong place, but I digress). I think the Acura setup is appropriate, but in this case, the Ginetta-Zytek is just about independent enough of the 07S to warrant its own article; although this is an OTHERSTUFF argument, it's no different to the procedure with a lot of F1 car articles (which may not be the Prototype group's SOP, but nor is it a bad thing). I had spotted the Ginetta-Zytek 07S, as it caught me out when I first did the article. When I get chance, I'll add information on the chassis evolution, and will eventually get around to doing the 07S (and Z11SN, for that matter) articles. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
- I've now added some information about the 07S and the Z11SN in the article, which has had the bonus of making the lead much better as well. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
- My point wasn't that the article didn't include chassis history, my point was more the fact that some 09S's are in fact just 07S's with new titles. Therefore some of these cars existed before 2009. Although most modern Formula One articles do have an individual page for each year, many past cars, such as the Ferrari 412T and McLaren MP4/1, have all evolutions based on the same basic architecture in a single article. This is mainly due to modern cars carrying almost no parts over from the previous years. My argument is just that there doesn't seem to be enough difference between the 07S and 09S to warrant splitting the two up, at least that I am aware of off-hand. The359 (Talk) 19:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
- I'm going to be anal and say that it's because the 07S was designed for a different version of regs than the 09S (and that it wasn't just engine variations or whatever). I wouldn't have any real issue if a general consensus came about that the 07S and 09S should be in one article, although I would prefer it to be formatted like my style, rather than the B08/60 format, which is rather messy (as in, the different models being distinctly visible on their own, not merging together all over the place.) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
For now, it's over
Just so you know, per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Msoamu/Archive Shabiha, Sunnibarelvi and Am Not New have been banned just like Child Start Grown Up and Trust on ALLAH, along with a two-week block for Msoamu. You remember, that SPI about someone unrelated in which I first suggested that Msoamu and Shabiha were somehow connected via MSO AMU and you suggested I remove it from that other SPI because it seemed paranoid and could boomerang onto me? Well, now what I suspected about them since at least 2009 has been confirmed, and I will have to fight being paranoid all the time. See you again in two weeks, or when the next sock puppet account pops up. MezzoMezzo (talk) 02:56, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
- I've been watching it, and I was more suggesting that there was no link between Child Star Grown Up and Shabiha/Msoamu/whatever - which I was right about. I told you to withdraw that allegation as some may have tried to use it as a bad-faith suggestion, and because if there was a link, that CU would've turned it up. 6 years of successful sockpuppetry, before being blocked, must be some kind of record. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:20, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
- Also, I was the one who first made the link between Am Not New and CSGU, even though I wasn't convinced by it. ;) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:23, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
What do you think? I might concede I was wrong on this one :D Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- That's fantastic work! The fact that you have done all of this work, having been solidly of the view point that he wasn't notable, is a credit to yourself and Wikipedia, and I wish we had ten more like you. We might've clashed a bit in that AfD, but you've earned a lot of respect with this. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:54, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Apparent unconstructive comment
I have been told that my edit to Mavado is unconstructive and classed as vandalism. It is quite well know in Jamaica that Mavado is the only person to have announced and proven that he has a micropenis. Therefore I do not believe my edit should have been removed. If you are not going to put it back then I'll have to make my own page and include ALL the correct information about him. Regards
- Well, you've got guts, I'll give you that, but unless you can provide multiple reliable sources that mention this "fact", then all that will end up happening is that you will be blocked for vandalism and for violating WP:BLP. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Fahey
Player contracts run until 30 June, so until it expires or he signs elsewhere, he's contracted to BCFC. What I've done in the past with the club article squad section, is mark released players with a * and add a note below the squad list, as at this version, so it's clear who's going, but the squad list still reflects the fact that those players are under contract. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:11, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- He looked as good as ever when he came back. Was a little surprised the finances allowed the option on Burke to be taken up. What's concerning is how many of the saleable players, not that there are very many, will have to go as well. The AGM on Friday might be interesting. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- No, I didn't. You undid these two edits as "unsourced hoax", but left these three, which I removed as "remaining vandalism". cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
| Congrats Bobherry talk 13:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks, may I ask what this is for? :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:28, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Reply to Why a Barnstar
Hmm... Random Acts and I just gave Revert to Artcle you edited recently for vandilism to yours. Bobherry talk 17:28, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- Well, thank you. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
ANI
In an ANI discussion, you wrote
I don't see any issue with the close either. Sure, it's a tight decision, but I'm glad we have admins who have the guts to do those, and they shouldn't be abused by people whom lost out as a result.)
Why do you feel that the concerns I mentioned there are invalid? Or do you agree with me that my concerns are legitimate? And yes, I do appreciate the hard work of judging consensus, but that doesn't give admins permission to do what ever they want regardless of policy. -- Ypnypn (talk) 01:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
- Give it a rest, will you? How many people need to tell you that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the close, other than it didn't go your way? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Winner winner, chicken dinner
God this is hilarious. I'm actually happy he's doing this, the boomerang effect could end a lot of this mess. Wait I just read your comments, you said the exact same thing...so *I* must be a sockpuppet of *you*! MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- Yep! The highly amusing thing is that it is so blatantly obvious that this user is a sock, cos they're a brand new editor. Brilliant. I think everyone that disagreed with CSGU appears to be a sock, based on that SPI... *rolls eyes* Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:44, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- Wait, was Pass a Method even involved in that SPI? I thought he just got sucked into this now. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- Fuck knows, but I doubt it. You're a Scottish Muslim, and I'm English and not a Muslim, so we're clearly the same person *nods* Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedia should add a "like" function for talk pages comments. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- Wait, was Pass a Method even involved in that SPI? I thought he just got sucked into this now. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Martinez
Haha, no worries! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.9.142.252 (talk) 22:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Out-of-sequence comment
Luke, I just wanted to let you know that we had an edit conflict just now at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/FC_Ridings. You made your comment first but I decided to add mine above yours so that it was clear that when I said "you", I meant the editor we were both replying to (Markreeves94), rather than you. I hope you don't feel that was inappropriate. Dricherby (talk) 13:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- I appreciate the heads-up, and I wonder if the IP and the account are linked to one person, or just linked to the club. I don't plan on running an SPI, though. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think it's quite likely that they're the same person but, at this stage, I'm happy to accept that the user doesn't stay logged into his account. I agree that it's probably not worth SPIing, though it might be worth it if they both !vote. Also, I note that there are two Mark Reeveses who play for the club so I'll flag that COI at the AfD. Dricherby (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- Unless I'm very much mistaken (Murray Walker ftw), they have both voted. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think it's quite likely that they're the same person but, at this stage, I'm happy to accept that the user doesn't stay logged into his account. I agree that it's probably not worth SPIing, though it might be worth it if they both !vote. Also, I note that there are two Mark Reeveses who play for the club so I'll flag that COI at the AfD. Dricherby (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
|
Here's a plate full of cookies to share! |
| Hi VanishedUser sdu8asdasd/Archive 5, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! AutomaticStrikeout ? 16:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC) |
- Muchas gracias, as they say in Spain. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
- You're welcome, as they as in the United States. :) AutomaticStrikeout ? 16:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
- Loving the edit summary :D Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
- Good! AutomaticStrikeout ? 18:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect data Australian Touring Car Racing
Hi Luke!,
A colleague of mine recently forwarded a Wikipedia reference (copy below) showing that he had changed my name from my 'Nick' name to my correct birth name within all references for Australian Sports car and Touring car racing!.
"An unregistered user is habitually changing all Denis Horley entries to James (Denis) Horley. I have reverted most of these and added references to support the use of “Denis Horley”, but I have nothing on the 1987 Pepsi 250 results on this page. Can anyone help please? GTHO (talk) 09:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)"
As such, I would like to chat with you regarding changing the reference to my correct name of James (Denis) Horley (the name on my birth certificate, CAMS Licence etc.)
I understand that various programs and results were printed using James(Denis)Horley as it was the name used by various people at that time perhapes in the same way of Ian(Pete)Geoghegan.
I would be happy to forward you copies of the above and then correct the Wikipedia pages accordingly.
I look forward to hearing from you
James Horley
Contact details james.horley@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandprixeng (talk • contribs) 06:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
- Whilst I am fully inclined to believe you, unfortunately, I'm really struggling to find much in the way of sources at all. [1] This uses the Denis Horley name, but is obviously far from complete. [2] is a little more complete, but still seems to have the "Denis Horley" name, as does this list here: [3]. Have you got any online links to 1980s ATCC race-day programs/entry lists, or any more sources? If you do, and there's enough of them, I'll consider writing your article as well (although I would strongly suggest that you don't edit it yourself, other than to correct any spelling mistakes. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Randolph
Randolph is coming, in July when his contract expires, though I imagine he'll still be playing for Motherwell on Sunday :-) But the only reliable sources for a current transfer being completed are the clubs involved: media organisations do tend to announce an expected transfer as complete before it is, to avoid the risk of being pre-empted by other media organisations, or to prove how up-to-the-minute and well-informed they are. There was a discussion about that here. When I checked the club sites before reverting, they hadn't confirmed, although they did shortly afterwards. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for fixing this. Not sure what happened there but presume a mis-click on rollback. - Sitush (talk) 18:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure either. I'm glad it was a mistake, as I had no idea why you did that, and it freaked me out a tad. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, really. AE is on my watchlist but I've not actually been watching it these last few days, if you see what I mean. I don't use rollback particularly often, so making a mistake like that will at least bump up my usage stats! - Sitush (talk) 18:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- I've wandered around AE before, but can't think of any time I've actually posted there (which is partially why I freaked out a bit xD) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:20, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Why do you revert my Changes
Hy may I ask why do you change my changes? Cretman121 (talk) 08:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- Firstly, welcome to Wikipedia, and I hope this experience doesn't put you off! Secondly, I reverted your changes because they appeared to violate one of our policies, which prohibits the use of original research - edits made that are either unsourced, or use sources in an incorrect manner. Please read WP:OR, and if you have any further questions, feel free to ask. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:20, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks and now I get it but still may I ask another question. As I really cant find a source that software scheduling is not affecting compute performances in Geforce 600, How can I proceed? And Thanks again for being so polite and nice for my mistake.
- Not a problem, and if you can't find any WP:RS compliant sources, then you can't make the edit. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay Thanks. I gonna try to dig some more source including at Nvidia's but if I cant find any reliable sources then I will revert my own chances. Cretman121 (talk) 08:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)