This is an archive of past discussions about User:WarpstarRider. 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.
Hello, WarpstarRider/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.
P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)
Minor Edits
Why did you mark [1] as minor? Of course, you were right to make the revert, but please read Wikipedia:Minor edit. It states that you shouldn't mark an edit as minor if it changes any substance, and that in any case reverts should not be marked as minor. Cheers, David.Mestel18:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I've added to your comment about sources on Talk:The Game (game). I hope you don't mind. I can see the possibility for a very long and effortful conversation there about valid sources, and I was trying to pre-empt it with some links to policy. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 15:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Please have a read of this page. This is an important policy that we have to prevent on-going revert wars. You have actually violated this rule recently but because you are relatively knew here and have not been warned about it before you won't be blocked. Make sure that you are well aware of it for the future.--Konstable13:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Something funny with your block log. It shows no blocks. But I see you have indeed been blocked. Tough luck, you did violate the policy. Make sure you are aware of it in the future to avoid futher blocks.--Konstable13:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
A question about stopping spammers
I've been trying to stop the spam that the ip 70.121.189.173 has been persistantly leaving on the lonelygirl15 page. I noticed that you also deleted this person's spam once and added a spam warning to their user page. The user continued to leave the spam and eventually I got all the way up to the last spam template. My question is, does me leaving this template on someone's page actually block from editing wikipedia, or do I need to go through another service to put them on a list of blocked users? The template is on their user talk page, is that all I need to do? thanks, Criptofcorbin08:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
The templates that declare a block are only to be used by admins when they are enacting a block...Admins are the only users that can block people here. If a vandal has been given a final warning and continues to vandalize pages, take it over to WP:AIV and follow the steps to report them there. An admin will take a look at it and decide whether a block should be issued. I reported them just now. WarpstarRider08:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
your revert on the game
i understand the reason why new content is discouraged in this article due to its constestable nature but why is it that listing a country which does play it should be removed? I simply dont understand why. I DO understand that its (likely) not sourceable, is that the only reson? —(chubbstar) — talk | contrib | 05:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Essentially, yes. The only thing that's allowed in the article is information that has a reliable source behind it, and the only reliable source we have is that one newspaper article. The list of countries used comes directly from the DM article, as the start of the sentence states; you can't add a country that wasn't listed there. WarpstarRider06:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but that there is no specific mention in a german zeitung that The Game is played elsewhere does not preclude its existance there. I don't need some ivory tower scholar to tell me that the sky is blue to know that it is blue. I only need to know what the sky is and what blue is. Reasoning fills in the rest Pokowpane09:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
The whole point of this particular article is that its a point-of-view article. And what's wrong with me referencing various message boards (from actual baseball fans rather than pundits) to justify these claims? If I didn't then that would have been a problem within itself since it would all fall on my personal opinion. I dare you to do this amount of research!!! TMC1982 20 October 2006 (UTC)
A random person posting on a forum is not a reliable, verifiable source, and certainly not something to build an entire article around. Also, Wikipedia is not the place to be conducting research. That article is on very shaky ground. WarpstarRider08:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The vast majority of the article is based on forum posts. An opinion piece regarding one event isn't justification for all of the junk. WarpstarRider21:46, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
You continue to miss the point. Bringing up a newspaper article and saying "this is critical of FOX" does not change the fact that the vast majority of what is written on the Criticism of MLB on FOX page is based on stuff written on message boards and blogs. These are not reliable sources, and should not be the basis for an encyclopedia article (and a rather large article, at that).
I'm taking it to you personally, since you see fit to nominate it for deletion. And excuse me for actually being somebody who's willing to get in a debate! And unlike you, I'm a real baseball fan, who works hard to back up a point!!! In fact, I'm willing to bet that I hardly watched a minute of Baseball on FOX to understand where I'm coming from and what I'm talking about! TMC1982 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Debate over the status of the article belongs on the AfD page, that's what it's for. You'd have much better results taking your arguments to the appropriate place rather than continually badgering me here. WarpstarRider06:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm "badgering" you because it annoys me to no end whenever I work so hard and passionately on one particular subject (to give as much information and points-of-view as possible) only to have it completely disavowed! TMC1982 30 October 11:04 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I had realized my error and requested another editor revert just to avoid the 3rr. Also apologized to the anon who had been removing it. --Gregorof/(T)10:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
lonelygirl15
i put a protect on it quite simply because people where taking out the 'notable youtube members' paragraph out on their own wim, without making a point in the discussion page. that paragraph apears in all youtube personalities articles. Lonenlygirl15 should be no diffrnt. 82.39.9.19715:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Just putting up the template doesn't actually protect the article. And you can't try to protect an article just because someone removed something that you put in there. WarpstarRider22:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Deletion: Why do you care so much?
Honestly, I'm not personally that interested in every celebrity to come out of YouTube, although I was browsing those articles because I was a bit curious about them. But I don't understand why you are crusading so hard for deletion. It's one thing if an article isn't factual, or is badly written. But if the article is OK, and people want to have one, why should it bother you? Some of the objections you raise seem like very minor quibbling over the exact letter of the rules. I think your real objection is that they aren't notable, right? But why do you care so much? JudahH17:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
There are plenty of other people you can ask the same thing; these recent couple of debates haven't really drawn much of the usual crowd, though. There are policies here for a reason, and every article has to adhere to them; we can't just ignore them and allow articles for every minor fad just because a small group of people wants to write about them. We're supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a dumping ground for internet fads. (And I wouldn't call the entire verifiability policy, one of the core policies of Wikipedia, "minor quibbling.") WarpstarRider18:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for checking this out. I'm not an editor of the article but something did seem a tad thick on that entry. I did not want to be penialized for editing out something that might have been substantial but glad to see you reviewed it and spotted it as possible vanity. Nice work.¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk)23:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
NRSNVNA
So remember that whole Flash Flash Revolution debacle a few weeks ago? I was on the side of "keep." I was an inclusionist then. After reading a bunch of Wikipedia policy trying to find arguments and counter-arguments, it became clear to me why the whole verifiability policy exists. I've since become a deletionist. I remembered one of your sayings, "No sources means no verifiability. No verifiability means no article." I liked it and I thought it was catchy, so I wrote an essay on it. You're welcome to comment (and, of course, edit.) It's at WP:NRSNVNA. Thanks! (Also, if you don't mind, could you tell me how to add formatting to four-tilde signatures? It's something I've been curious about for a while now.) - Chardish08:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Why did you remove the list of aliases? I think they are probably there for a reason. They are mentioned elsewhere in the article, but I think having them there makes it easier to read as a list of nicknames. They're not allone-time nicknames, as some have been used frequently. I have not reverted your edit, but is there a good reason why it should not be there? Thanks. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)14:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Ys III
Nice job on starting the article. This page is super old and I haven't even looked at it in ages, but if you happen to find anything useful in there, feel free to nab it. - Ojaxis12:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
William Sledd
OK, it is time We Tubers had our own wiki. I am starting a wiki just on YouTube guys with more than 100 subscribers. I need ten good sysops. I've seen your contributions and that you realise there is a problem here on WP with too many mems being added in. We need to broaden the idea of wikis. I would like to appoint you as admin 2. Please let me know by emailing me. frummer08:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Mark Zuckerberg page and others
Hi,
Curious to know why you removed an external link from the Mark Zuckerberg page that led directly to a profile article on him. It was clearly of value and relevant. A couple of less valuable article links remain on that page.
This also goes for a couple of other entries on different pages with links to relevant information. A lot of this info is of great interest to users who come to the respective pages.
Hey! I noticed you deleted the segment about 300 from the Internet Phenomenon list. Just wondering why you felt to do this when a simple citation tag would have been more suitable. Just as a matter of civility it's the better way to go. Unless you've hidden under a rock for the last 9 months, you'll know that the information in the article was true, it cimple lacked sources confirming it in the encyclopedic sense. They are now there in all their glory. The page is certainly subject to some questionable memes and such, but this is certainly one that cannot be overlooked due to its social impact for its short time. --lincalinca03:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot03:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot09:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot08:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot08:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot08:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot20:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot07:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot00:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot09:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot21:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot06:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot07:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I have no idea where to talk on this thing, so I'll just put it here. Please stop deleting the sections on Snake Rattle and Roll. Despite the fact that I'll never get any credit for creating the concept behind the game, I do know the information there is acurate, and if you would really, truly, positivily like me to provide you with the letter from Nintendo, and a couple copies of my concept art, I'm sure I can dig them out of storage. Otherwise, don't assume that because you think a statement sounds false, it actually is. Nintendo ripped me off, but what can I do about it? Nothing, except maybe mention the truth on this site. Thanks for your understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfenzer (talk • contribs) 07:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot10:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot15:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot06:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot10:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ys SMS Box.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Ys SMS Box.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I have restored the talk page. However, I do not want to move the article without a sure indication of consensus to do so. —Kurykh02:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Image copyright problem with Image:Ys III Genesis.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Ys III Genesis.JPG. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Smosh. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smosh (4th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
