User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2006/02

Articles for deletion/Crackahs

Obviously you didn't read the Wiki definition of a gaming clan. Right on the page it clearly states "These range from groups of a few friends to 1000-person organizations. Adinsx88 | (talk) 00:22, February 1, 2006 (UTC)

I know that, but it doesn't make them notable. Read Wikipedia:Notability for details. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:25, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Wiktionary - Foregrip

Thanks for spotting my mistake, feel free to move my entry to the Wiktionary. Just make sure it is the final one with the period at the end. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Phatpat88 (talk • contribs) 05:38, February 1, 2006 (UTC)

User:Cool Cat/Impersonators

Domo Arigato for your edits. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 20:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Untitled)

have you read the discussion page of the section the deleted section links to? The most likely explanation is that the Russian designers included the battle-damage as a bit of a joke, as they were aware they were otherwise totally copying the aircraft. _No one_ with any experience with aviation would think that a bloody patched hole was a design feature. This is just another example of anti-soviet sentiment that still pops up every so often. I will re-delete the section once you have responded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.173.92.238 (talk • contribs) 22:03, February 4, 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

For the reversion of my user page. Appreciated. Stephenb (Talk) 22:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Untitled2)

KoH, I deleted that section of cargo cults for a reason: it is both irrelevant and absurd, as it has nothing to do with a religion or social practice, and is highly unlikely to be true in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.173.92.238 (talk • contribs) 23:47, February 4, 2006

Next time, if you want to delete something, please leave an Edit summary. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vassilis Leventis (reporter)

Is this article REALLY patent nonsense? It's badly written, sure, but it does convey similar information to the Vassilis Leventis page. I'll not question the speedy since it's gonna go anyways, but it doesn't look strictly speediable to me... --Aim Here 01:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyways, it was speedied. You have to use your judgment now; if a hoax is so stupid that nobody's going to believe it, then it qualifies as nonsense. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 02:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your tag at Robert Baden-Powell's sexual orientation

I was disappointed that you chose to tag without comment, since it is impossible to refute. Please see [1] as an example of the fact that BP's sexuality is a topic of academic discourse (it is widely analyzed and debated). If you have further concerns, please express them. If not, I trust you will remove the tag (by the way, I apologize for my hasty message on the board there, I thought you were just another of the BSA people removing material they find objectionable). Haiduc 13:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's where it came from, where it was claimed that it was too extensive. You can't have it both ways. Haiduc 18:40, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by that? -- King of Hearts | (talk) 18:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article was a section of the BP page until the other day when a group of users associated with the BSA decided that it was overextensive and removed it. A small paragraph is left in its place, and the new article has been started. Anyway, your position that it is not important is untenable in light of the amount of scholarship dedicated to this issue (a number of major biographers have delved at length into the topic) and to the political importance and timeliness of the topic to a lot of people. Haiduc 19:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is a BSA? The disambiguation brings up many possible meanings. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boy Scouts of America. I am disappointed that you would get involved in this discussion without seeming to have any familiarity with the topic. I am sure you are well intentioned, and I appreciate your doing patrol work for the Wikipedia, it certainly is necessary and important, but here I am afraid that you are off the mark. The move out of the article was the result of extensive debate, and your coming in at this late date without a knowledge of the topic or of the history of the discussions is not helpful. Upon what grounds do you base your statement that the topic is un-encyclopaedic? Haiduc 20:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it's not unencyclopedic, but it still should be merged, as info on a person are usually contained in the biography. When's the last time you've seen an article called Abraham Lincoln's log cabin? -- King of Hearts | (talk) 20:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we are approaching some consensus here. The problem now is that at least on biography on the man runs to almost seven hundred pages, and probably over a hundred of those pages are devoted to discussions of his sexuality. This furthermore is a major historical figure who has created the largest youth organization in the world, as well as being important in British colonial and military history. You can have a number of articles all on Baden Powell, one on his military life, another on his personal life, another on his work with the boy scouts. It so happens that his sexuality is (obviously) of great importance to his biographers and to people interested in the scouts and their policies and politics and history. It certainly is discussed and studied and commented upon, both as part of his biography as well as for what it represents in the ongoing debate on sexuality and culture in the wider world. Does this begin to put things in perspective? And please don't introduce nonsensical examples here. I checked Articles in category "Abraham Lincoln". There are 54 articles in this section of this category. If you are going to debate please do so in good faith. Haiduc 20:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Untitled3)

this is unfair. users demand my article back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stinkydave (talk • contribs) 18:59, February 5, 2006 (UTC)

I don't think your article on Pink tube sock is very useful on the encyclopedia. It is random nonsense. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up

I went ahead and changed my "Keep and clean up" comment for the article to the word "Comment". Madangry 18:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

My admin request went up in flames. (But thanks anyways!)

Hey, King of Hearts, I wanted to thank you for your support of my (unfortunately unsuccessful) request for adminship. The final tally was 37/16/5, which fell short of the needed 75-80% for "consensus". I don't know if or when I'll go up for nomination again, but even if I don't, I will try not to betray the trust that you and 36 others were willing to place in me. Thanks for having faith in me... and happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 01:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Image:Bohratommodel.png listed for deletion

I've replied at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2006 February 7. Please be aware that answers.com is a Wikipedia mirror? But thanks for letting me know. Last time I had an image deleted, no one told me about it. enochlau (talk) 04:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Untitled3)

Ooook. Thanks for the info. Too bad it was a mistake that I tried to fix and not some horrible vandal out to destroy the best website in the world. Too bad wikipedia isnt as user friendly as it should be. Too bad someone sits around patrolling entries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.103.117.75 (talk • contribs) 18:57, February 7, 2006 (UTC)

Lancaster CITY not County

- Lancaster is NE of Baltimore, not NW

-High Steel makes beams, it doesn't manufacture bridges

-Those high schools are in the county (see my note).

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.173.203.140 (talk • contribs) 01:00, February 8, 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support on my request for adminship. It ultimately succeeded with votes of 52/1/2, so I am now an administrator. Should you have any questions, comments, complaints, or requests at any point in the future, please do not hesitate to let me know on my talk page or via e-mail.

—bbatsell ¿? 05:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grasshopper Takeover

Please be careful when tagging articles for speedy deletion and take into account WP:CSD. Articles about groups of people can only deleted if they don't make an assertion of notability and as WP:NMG says charting bands deserve an article, making the charts is certainly such an assertion. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If they say the band is charting but doesn't give any name or evidence, then it can be dismissed as speculation per Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 16:23, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Untitled4)

I edited the marijuana page with important information. Why did you change it back? I don't understand. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.212.49.27 (talk • contribs) 00:38, February 10, 2006 (UTC)

Your edits were considered vandalism, because you blanked the page and replaced it with a POV remark. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you the barnstar you gave me a few days ago. Much appreciated. I didn't see it before. :-) RexNL 00:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invasion

I just want to let you know that Invasion which you voted for as a COTW is now being considered for a featured article. Leave your input at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Invasion. RENTA^{FOR LET?} 03:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jasenovac

The reason is valid to delete the passage about Peter Brzica (or peter quick) because he is a ficticious character and there is no mention in the article about this, it is stated as fact. To kill that many people in 12 hours, is impossible by a human being. Unless the Ustashi buit a Terminator type robot.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.227.0.250 (talk • contribs) 00:27, February 14, 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't see that. But you should tell why you are deleting something in the edit summary, or people may think it is vandalism. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:31, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I really am sorry to of delete your files my bad was just messing around... Sorry —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.186.196.186 (talk • contribs) 01:39, February 14, 2006 (UTC)

Math Of Quran

The information on Math Of Quran Article page was general knowledge about the Qurans Mathematical Structure, as is know one can claim it as there own creation, actually the same information can be found on this link as well http://pathtoheaven.blogspot.com and there are so many other sources that the same information can be found. I am new to wikipedia please tell me how do I publish common knowledge on the site without violating copyright laws. As far as I know religious knowledge cannot be copyrighted by anyone.

Thank you king of hearts

regards (Arsath 17:26, 14 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Re: Math of Quran

Hi King of Hearts Just now I got full authorization from the author of the above article to re-publish it. Now how do I prove it to you? I sent an email to him and he has replied back. Would this be sufficient?

Regards (Arsath 17:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Re: Re: Math of Quran

Unfortunately, a Wikipedia article wouldn't be of much use if you just mirror another site; you should only quote a small section from another website (giving attribution of course) if it helps you explain the subject better. You could paraphrase an external article and give a source. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Untitled5)

Okay, sorry. I've never edited before and I was just making a joke about a rival school to show my friend online. I was planning on changing it back. However, my edit to the Oklahoma City article was correct. People around the rest of OK do not call OKC "the City", that is localized solely to the surrounding suburbs, the rest of us take offense to calling it "the City", The City has always, and will always, mean New York City. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.13.254.98 (talk • contribs) 00:30, February 15, 2006 (UTC)

Re: Math of Quran

Hi King of Hearts

Thanks for your previous reply, But still you haven't answered my question, now I have permission from the owner of the information to re-publish it. According wikipedia rules I am allowed to publish information if I have the rights or the permission to do so? Paraphrasing and taking just a part of the article wouldn't help understand the entire subject, because everything in the article is needed and all of it is useful information. Oh king of hearts please dont break my heart!!

Regards (Mystic 02:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Regarding a Vandalism Warning

Hello! Earlier today you added a vandalism warning to my IP for editing my user page. I had opened a new window to test my user page (which uses some markup that I needed to try out) and forgot to log in. Those two edits were done by me; both Webdinger and the IP you warned. Next time I will be sure to log in and add any associated edit summaries. Sorry for causing you any trouble!

Thank you, Webdinger 02:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFA/Quarl

Hi King of Hearts, thanks for your support in my RFA, which succeeded. If I can ever improve or help in any way, please let me know! :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-02-16 11:45Z

(Untitled6)

Hi King of Hearts,

With regards to the Bakhtiari page you wrote to me about, I understand there is a problem with copyright.

However, the website www.latifrugs.com is mine and as such I am happy to allow wiki to have the contents on their site?

Or am I misunderstanding the issue?

Look forward to your reply,

Warm Regards

Ali

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Latifrugs (talk • contribs) 15:57, February 16, 2006 (UTC)

RFA Thanks!

Thank you!
Hello King of Hearts/Archive/2006/02, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 98/2/0. If there is anything I can do to help you, please leave me a message on my talk page! -- xaosflux ^Talk

What?

I used to work at orange julius, its instant pudding mix. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.249.45.145 (talk • contribs) 06:26, February 17, 2006 (UTC)

Hayes Forest Services Ltd.

Quite right, it wasn't vandalism at all. Thanks for correcting me. For some reason, some people around here seem to have an obsession with revising CSD -- last time I looked, CSD G3 included in its definition "...articles that consist solely of external links...", which would have fitted this article perfectly. But now the template seems to have been revised to just mean "vandalism", which I tend to put under CSD G1 anyway, but there we go. So yes, CSD A1/G1 is now more appropriate -- Gurch 23:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you!

Hi King of Hearts/Archive/2006/02. On behalf of my right eye, I'd like to thank you for giving me your support on my recent RfA. It ended with a final tally of (73/2/2) and therefore I have been installed as an administrator now, and I'm ready to serve Wikipedians all over the world with my newly acquired mop and bucket. If you have any questions, do not hestitate to forward them to my talkpage. Once again, thanks for your support.

Soothing R 20:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of celebrities with links to the U.S. Republican Party

1) this list needs work 2) there was about five secinds between the time that I posted it and the time you rv 3) I need some time to fine tune it so don't mess wit it for about 1/2 an hour please.

132.241.245.49 00:21, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cam em Bert

It wasn't me that was experimenting it was Cam & Bert!!! Just grow up and except that homosexuality is the only way to make GOOD cheese. Cam & Bert were subjected to huge amounts of homophobic remarks while creating this classic cheese!

Please don't allow people to hide the truth behind Camembert any longer.

Cam & Bert ROCK!!!!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.37.18.13 (talk • contribs) 00:59, February 19, 2006 (UTC)

125.x.x.x

Can you clarify the report a bit on WP:AIV? --Nlu (talk) 02:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; I removed it since they haven't vandalized in 30 minutes. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 02:15, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of art now COTW

Thanks to your support, this article is now the collaboration of the week. Feel free to help in any way possible during this week. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-02-19 20:22

aktion

sorry for copyright. please see the new vers :) SMC 02:03, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Senator articles

Whoops my bad. Feel free to delete them if they're defective.Sumergocognito 03:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't want to delete them, because senators are notable and should be included in Wikipedia. However, they need to be expanded so we can at least get an overview of their accomplishments. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 05:01, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My removal of content

I got this in my talk page: "Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 01:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)"

I assume you are refering to the goings on at Republic (dialogue). I suggest you view the the article's discussion page and find out what's really going on. Numerous reasons have been given for the removal of this inappropriate paragraph, and everyone but the annoying poster agrees. --24.124.84.133 01:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please include an edit summary then, or people may think your edits are vandalism. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in what's going on at Republic (dialogue), I've put in a request for comment. I'd appreciate it if you would put the page on your watch list, since we seem to be dealing with a vigilante. --24.124.84.133 03:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for adminship for (aeropagitica)

Hello! Many thanks for your kind nomination of myself for the responsibility of adminiship on the English WP. I will look at the questions and the reading list closely over the next week or two before accepting or declining the nomination in order to determine if I can make the strongest possible case for myself at this time. Your nomination, unsolicited as it was, pleases me greatly! Now I have to make my case and see if other users can offer either support or helpful criticism to help me make the grade. Thanks once again! Best wishes, (aeropagitica) 21:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Just to say that I have accepted the nomination and placed a link to the nomination page on the RfA page. Thanks again, (aeropagitica) 23:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Reference

Hi King of Hearts, I need some help with referencing in articles. Can we put the Bible, Tora, or the Quran as reference? As far as I know, these religious scripts are accepted world over by everyone who follows them. I dont see anything wrong in referencing them.. As everyone has to honor the others religion and beliefs do you think it would be a issue? Do you think it abides by the Wiki rules? please help me, I'd like to contribute relgious articles to wiki pedia. (Mystic 04:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Sure, you can reference these. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 04:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a million for your prompt reply, can you kindly check whats wrong with this article I created, its being voted for deletion Math of Quran thanks again (Mystic 11:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]