User talk:9cds

I am: on a WikiBreak

Archives: June 2005-May 2006
Please note that I will reply to any messages here, and not your talk page, in the interest of not splitting up threads.

---

'Obivious' nominations

Hey, been working with you and some others on the BB7 pages, just thought that with the hideous table of nominations (something out of a powerpoint presentation from hell) that boldifying the nominees wouldn't actually do any harm. You said it was obvious who was nominated from the table. Took me a while to work it out, that's why I did what I did. Is it that big a deal? I think making the most relevant thing on the whole page bold seems fair enough. But then again, it's Big Brother and I've got a life outside all this jazz. But I'm curious to understand why it's such a bad thing to make the most significant item of interest bold. Budgiekiller 21:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I appreciate your changes - but with the current discussion about colours going on, I don't think making it bold will make it any clearer - if anything, more confusing. You may want to bring it to the talk page, though? -- cds^(talk) 21:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, to be fair, I'm not that fussed. I just wanted to know who was nominated and it took me some time, and I'm the Universe expert in powerpoint etc. (!) so for it to take me a few seconds to find the answer just made me think it needed some highlights. Anyway, it appears that the current tide of events has taken precedence, as you said, so I'll let it slide until the yelling has calmed down. I'll bring it up some other time (or just subversively keep changing the page like an IPvandal using a variety of IP addresses until someone forgets to revert.... [sneaky laugh])...! Budgiekiller 21:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

lol - You could try ;) Once the current discussion has calmed down, I'll bring it up. -- cds^(talk) 21:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: response to helpme

Hi, thank you for helping me. I will write you a note saying the story (short, I promise), but I just have to go run an errand and will be back soon. Thank you for helping. : ) Veritasophia 23:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

-I looked at this after I wrote it...soooo sorry it is so long. You can delete it after you read it, so it won't clog up your talk page.-

Ok, I decided not to go out after all. Here is the story: I am not a frequent wikipedia user, but I am interested in education, so I edit articles about universities, usually putting statistics about academics and programs (for example, the percentage of professors with doctorates, info I found useful when deciding which university to attend, that sort of thing). I am also mildly interested in fashion and society (haha, I am a girl, it is just fun, I know it is silly). So last night I was looking up someone, and found there were whole categories abotu socialites. Haha, this sounds so silly now that I write it, but anyway I was reading about people and I had just been reading in a magazine about Lauren Hosty--I thought her story was sort of cute, so I made an article about her, just for fun. So then today, I was adding something to Trinity Western University's article, about an internship program I think is cool, and I guess "Ardenn" had TWU bookmarked and immediately deleted what I had written. So we were talking about it, and I was saying I think it should be on there etc, and then he starts changing all sorts of stuff from what I had written about other universities. It would take too long to go into all of it (you can see on the talk pages about the sort of thing he didn't like, basically if I wrote anything negative (not innacurate or biased, just a negative fact) he would challenge me on it and make me get the web address etc). So then on my "watchlist" is shows that my little article about Lauren Hosty was marked for deletion. Yup, him again. :( I tried saying that that was not nice, that it is clear he was only doing it because he was mad at me for the university thing (I mean honestly, he's interested in politics and universities and then all of a sudden decides to check up on a mildly famous canadian socialites? It is impossible to prove, but totally illogical, and incriminating on his part given the time in between). So I try to say that, but nicely, and literally within 4 minutes there are 4 other users voting to delete it. This is why I need help: It is absolutley illogical that these 4 other random users (him too) would suddenly be interested in deleting this article, expecially given that Ardenn's arguement was that no one cared about Lauren Hosty so she shouldn't be on wikipedia. Haha, it is just so silly! My point is that, yes, socialites are kind of a silly topic (probably not worth mentioning in a printed encylclopedia) but there are pages and pages of socialite articles, and I was saying that unless he is willing to argue with all those authors about how they shouldn't be on it because it is stupid, then he should leave this one alone. Especially considering that he seems to be attacking my pages in particular just because he didn't like what I wrote about some university.

I am sooo very sorry for making this so long; I didn't think it would take that long to write. Please don't be frusterated with me. I just don't know what to do. I said that I would appreciate him keeping me acountable about not being biased with the university articles (my whole purpose with them was keeping facts accurate) but that he shouldn't use his frusteration with me to delete my other articles. :( I am so upset. If you don't have time to help today, that is fine, and thank you for helping at all. It's just, it makes me never want to go on wikipedia if people are going to be so mean. Thank you sosososo much. Veritasophia 23:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, firstly, as said before, you shouldn't take the AfD personally, and the reason there are 4 others quickly jumping in is merely becasue a lot of people (myself sometimes) who look at all the open AfDs and vote on those that stick out.

As for the other user following you around, I'm not sure what to do about this. I'll chat to a few people about it for advise. For the moment, I know it's hard, but try to assume good faith :)

I hope you don't leave Wikipedia over this - it's mostly good, I promise! I notice you have got help elsewhere - together, I hope this situation will get sorted. -- cds^(talk) 23:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I got your message. How should I show you the links? Should I copy and paste the actual link, or just write with []'s the name of the page? Veritasophia 00:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If it's diffs, then you can put the full link in single square brackets, or the article itself you can put in double square brackets. -- cds^(talk) 00:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, here are the main ones: Trinity Western University Laurentian Leadership Centre Melvin H. Smith, Q.C. University Canada West If you look at the history pages for these, you will see that I will have written something, and he'll delete it without asking for clarification or asking in the talk page if it is true, etc, and then I'll write something about how it is true, and not biased, and put it back, and he'll edit it again or put a tag thing on it saying that the "article is full of POVs and problems" or a tag for it to be deleted or that it needs verification (the Melvin Smith one). I am all for things being accurate (of course! that is why I do most of the university edits to begin with, so that the true information is there) but he seems to be going after all my edits in particular, and not asking me for verification first.

My parents just came home and we are going to dinner now, so I can't write anymore for now, but if you look at my contributions list, a lot of those will have edits by him after mine. :( I am so upset that this is such a problem, and I really appreciate you helping me. I *want* to write on here and do my little edits and make sure everything is accurate, and (as much as you can trust me) I promise that I would not lie on purpose or make things up. But for some reason he is just mad at me, and like you said "following me around". And regarding the whole Lauren Hosty thing, it really isn't a big deal, but the principle of the thing: he is just deleting it to hurt me. I was reading about wikipedia vanity, and from what I can tell, as long as it is not written by the person or their family or whatever, and is *mildly* interesting, then it is ok to have an article about something that is not *super* widely known. It says that lack of fame is not the same as vanity. That might be what is going on, that he just thinks it is irrelevant, but it is written by a neuatral person who thinks the article person is cool, in which case I think it is ok to keep it. I hope this makes sense. I will check back later. Thank you for your help and for reading all this. It is very late where you are! :) Veritasophia 01:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a lot of this has stemmed from simple misunderstanding. Certainly I feel the redirect should've been discussed first. I think if you still feel there needs to be certain information included, you should take it up on the article talk pages. As for the user following you, I think he means no harm in it, and is only trynig to keep the place tidy. I hope this doesn't discourage you! -- cds^(talk) 01:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I added the modeling (American Girl and JCrew), and the films (What Dreams May Come, Jack, The Fog, and The Devil Wears Prada), but I went to check if there were any messages today and it was deleted. : ( Was there something else I should have done? I would have thought that being in 4 movies (albeit small roles) was enought for it to remain, but I guess not. Please let me know if there is anything I can do, and thank you for being so nice. Veritasophia 20:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Responded on user's talk page. -- 9cds^(talk) 15:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I guess I just meant that I did what the others suggested (to write about what I thought was interesting, and add the movies, etc) but it was still deleted. I know its not hugely important, but I guess it is just sad because I tried. Thanks though. Veritasophia 20:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, ok. You may want to ask the people deleting the content, they hopefully will nicely explain :) -- 9cds^(talk) 20:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Personal attack?

Why is everything I say that concerns something you do a personal attack? Stop deleting what I have to say; the article you keep posting on my talk page says you shouldn't delete peoples' comments, only the attack; or something along those lines. You're just deleting the whole thing. JD 00:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It's fine if you feel that the content should stay, nobody's saying you can't give your opinion on things. However, you can't link an action to a user: if they put an article up or AfD you should vote on it, rather than say "ffs they've put it up for AfD!". This is seen as a personal attack. Just comment on the content rather than the person, and we'll all be fine :) -- cds^(talk) 00:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

There is so much I would just love to say to you, but I'm worried I could be breaking one of your precious Wikipedia rules, and you are not worth my being banned. If you want to sort things out, reverting things immediately is not the way to go about doing things. And just for the record, I didn't comment on the content because it's not the content I have a problem with; it's the course of action you chose to take. And also, the ffs was not aimed at you, and if you see that as a personal attack, that's not my fault. JD 00:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Notice

IN THE MEDIATION CABAL; Case: 2006-06-01 JD UK and 9cds

To: 9cds

You are notified that a case, in which you are named as a party, has been submitted for mediation. Your response to the other party's claims is hereby requested. Please post your response in the discussion section of the case page. The case page is at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases

/s/

Geo.plrd 01:46, 1 June 2006 (UTC) , Mediator; Cabalist of the Mediation Cabal

Clarification of Notice

This is to clarify the notice, on the case page 2006-06-01 JD UK and 9cds you edit the section labelled Discussion, and put your response there. Geo.plrd 02:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. -- cds^(talk) 02:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed begging?

Why are you deleting things from my talk page that don't concern you? --JD^talk_email 12:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If you've got the time to make endless reverts to other pages, I'm sure you have the time to answer my question. --JD^talk_email 12:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I was just about to ask this, is it actually allowed to delte things from other user's talk pages? How would you like it? [1] Trampikey 14:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's allowed. Yes, people have done so in the past. -- cds^(talk) 15:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Show me where it says people are allowed to do that. --JD^talk_email 18:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It's a wiki - show me where it says people are not allowed to do that. -- cds^(talk) 18:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

You deleted a message on my talk page that was meant for me, and you deleted it before I was given the chance to read it. Is that allowed? --JD^talk_email 18:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If it's against wikipedia guidelines, yes. -- cds^(talk) 18:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, so show me where it says that then. --JD^talk_email 18:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It's common sense to remove votespam. -- cds^(talk) 18:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

And I want to see the Wikipedia page where that is written. --JD^talk_email 18:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

JD: Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. — FireFox ^user_talk 18:54, 01 June '06

I don't see it... --JD^talk_email 19:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

You are missing the point. I am advising you, Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. — FireFox ^user_talk 19:11, 01 June '06

And in reply to your question, the closest you're ever going to get to an answer is WP:UCS and WP:IAR. — FireFox ^user_talk 19:14, 01 June '06

And with those last two statements you completely confused me. I don't see how I have been disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, and don't see how WP:UCS or WP:IAR are relevant to this. Just forget it. --JD^talk_email 19:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar For keeping a cool head during the Big Brother UK series 7 diatribes, and being the voice of reason, I, Celestianpower, hereby award you the original barnstar! Great work! --Celestianpower háblame 22:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help your the best! Come to my talk anytime buddy! Bubbles2430 20:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Glad to be of assistance :) -- cds^(talk) 20:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Help

How do u see the new users on wikipeda? Also when can I move a page? Cookie 22:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

WikiCookie

Here ya go! Thanks for starting me off on the redesign of my userpage. --Xyrael ^T 14:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Reply to helpme

the article Veritee was removed ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amoona (talk • contribs)
Hello thanks for your help: the page Veritee was removed and I am trying to create this page can you help? please respond on my talk[2] page— Preceding unsigned comment added by Amoona (talk • contribs)

Replied on talk page as requested -- 9cds^(talk) 22:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

hi, thanks but the article I want to create is not advertisement, can you do someting i am interested in this product and want to start an article, please advice ?

this is the text I want:

(spam removed)

PLEASE RESPOND ON MY TALK PAGE on my talk[3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amoona (talk • contribs) -- 9cds^(talk) 22:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Benbread

CDS a la #YPN, right? Anyway, thanks for reverting my userpages vandalism, people don't like me now for reverting their filth -Benbread 22:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

That's me. No worries :) He's been dealt with. -- 9cds^(talk) 22:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Mammal4 help

Many thanks for the formatting help - I'm sure I'll get the hang of it in the end! Mammal4 13:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

BB06

I wasn't even meant to change the image, and I'm expecting somebody that actually lives in Australia to want to change the image back to the 2005 opening titles image. Also, having a colour that matches the image makes it kinda difficult to see where the image ends and the background begins. But it's more for the first reason. --JD^talk_email 21:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, the image looks good - I like it. It's the background colour - I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't be able to see where the image ends. But I don't know how it should look, so sure, that's fine! -- 9cds^(talk) 21:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

How what should look? And who said it wasn't fine in the first place? --JD^talk_email 22:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

BB06 - Gaelan Walker

The link that I re-added was already there before you decided to hack and slash at the BB06 article. You may not think it's relevant, but if any of the links that you deleted were of any relevance, that one would most probably have been the only one. I'm leaving it on, because someone that actually lives closer to Dreamworld than you or I thinks the link should be there, for whatever reason. If you don't like the links being there, speak to the people that originally added them. --JD^talk_email 15:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Prop Solution

There is a proposed solution for the case with JD, Please review it and advise. Geo.plrd 22:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Speedy of 7 Seconds of Love

As the consensus was unfortunate but clear at the AfD, I won't pursue it further, but this article wasn't a speedy candidate due to the assertion of notability regarding press and the popularity of Veitch. Please reconsider how these are closed for future reference.--badlydrawnjeff talk 13:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't me who deleted the article - it was put up as speedy by someone, and deleted by an admin. I merely closed the AfD (if you think I closed it wrong, my apologies, and let me know so that I don't make the same mistake again) -- 9cds^(talk) 13:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hi! I keep bumping into you on the BB7 page and in a few other places. You quite often 'beat me to it' with fixing various edits on that page. Just thought I'd say hey. Celardore 22:53, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Haha, I love the way people treat reverting vandalism as a race :p Nice to meet you, some really good work on the BB7 article, you've made it look really nice. Keep it up :) -- 9cds^(talk) 22:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean I'm racing you, just I'd get edit conflicts because you did the same thing a few seconds earlier is all =) And there is always room for improvement, we'll see what happens! Celardore 23:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

RFA

I removed your request for adminship as you need to read the rules Requests for adminship#About RFA. ForestH2

I'll open it again but you have to put it at the right section. ForestH2

By the way, I've added to more questions to your RfA. As always, additional questions are completely optional. When you have a minute, I'd appreciate if you would take a look at them. Thanks. JoshuaZ 00:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi 9cds

As a courteousy - you closed Joseph D. Campbell as 'no consensus' - I think the argument to delete was far better than that to keep (which was non-existent). As AfD is by no means a vote, I think you may have made the wrong call - I would have deleted - and so I have taken it to deletion review. Regards, Proto||type 11:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

BB AU Screen caps

You only just noticed them? They've been there for ages - I had put them in tables, but Barrylb said they looked clutterd and removed them, leaving the AO and FNL ones on there. I wanted to see if they would look alright if they were small, but I only clicked to edit the Shows section so I couldn't look at the whole article. If you want them back, consider looking at the ones in tables in a previous edit, then speak to Barrylb. --JD^talk_email 16:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I must admit I didn't like the tables, but I think the screen caps should be in the article still. -- 9cds^(talk) 17:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Stress and Esperanza

I hope your RfA goes well. Please come back when you are feeling better. Best of luck, Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 18:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Wish I had time to leave a pretty picture. Instead, here is a smiley :) Hope to see you back soon. -- Samir धर्म 07:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

RfA

Hey, just wanted to say that although I opposed your nomination, it wasn't personal and I think you'd make a great admin soon. I can see that some of the comments (particularly those revolving around the 'malformed rfa') weren't fair at all, but my opposition was simply based on the lack of experience (I've seen RfA's rejected on lack of experience for people with 10k edits!) and the whole BB7 episode with JD_UK. Anyway, I understand that you might want to take a wikibreak but please, please don't take it personally and don't write the whole thing off. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you want to discuss further, but please don't dismiss Wikipedia on this experience! Kind regards... Budgiekiller 19:05, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi 9cds, thank you for voting in my RFA which failed eventually at a result of (91/51/8). I do not plan to run for adminship until a later date. Once again, I will like to thank you for voting. --Terence Ong _{(talk | contribs)} 14:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use image

The 'swish' is tagged as a fair use image therefore WP:FAIR applies, unless the 'T&Cs' you refer to change the tag on the image, it cant be on a template. I have listed it at Wikipedia:Fair use review, so you may want to detail these 'T&Cs' on the template/image's talk page. Ian3055 18:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

BB7 Images

Why did you remove these? -- 9cds(talk) 19:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

A moment of wikifury. Not to boo-hoo or anything, but I've had a stressful time IRL recently - but that cloud lifted today (I kept my job). I'm more than happy to add new and improved images to the article, I've still been keeping tabs on things. I let my opinion [that my neutral image of Sezer was best] get the better of me, and I apologise for that. Entirely unprofessional I know. I stayed away from the article the past few days because of that, never really understood how annoying differing opinions can cause such grief until that little incident.

This time tommorow, the article will be all pretty again. Sorry again to all concerned.

Celardore 19:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Heh, glad things are improving - the article really does look bad without them ;) -- 9cds^(talk) 23:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:BBArticleSpoiler

I already have commented on it, and in case you had forgotten, the whole "don't post on my talk page unless absolutely necessary" thing is still in place. --JD^talk_email 15:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Trading spaces

alt text

Hello, 9cds, thank you for signing up to participate in Esperanza's trading spaces program. As you requested to renovate another user's page, you will be renovating Moink's userpage. Please contact Moink on their talk page about the renovating. The renovating will be listed at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Programs#Undergoing_Renovation, please feel free to update the status as it changes. Enjoy!

BbSpoiler

Just a quick question - what does the changes you made do? -- 9cds^(talk) 14:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It's very basic. I just replaced the word "section" in the text with {{{1|section}}} thereby allowing one to change the word section to a word of your choice. This was added so that the duplicate template (Template:BBArticleSpoiler could be deleted without contention.--SomeStranger^(t) 14:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Aha, nice. Thanks! -- 9cds^(talk) 14:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

File:FA-22 Raptor.jpg

Thanks for voting! Hello 9cds, and thank you so much for voting in my recent RfA. I am pleased to inform you that it passed with a final tally of (119/1/3), into the WP:100, so I have now been cleared for adminship and will soon be soaring above the clouds. I was overjoyed, shocked, and humbled by the tally, and, most importantly, all the support. Thank you. If there is ever anything you need, you know where you can find me. Take care.

--Pilot|guy 22:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC) And your support was not late and very much needed :)

{{Afd-list}}

What is it about that template that you think is so special? Did you look at the image link I put down that showed how ugly it looked on the page because it doesn't hide on non-standard MediaWiki skins. Stop being silly yourself. I think it would be hilarious if you actually tried to block me for removing the instructions that only you ever used/needed to nominate an article. The don't edit means the rest of it. You have a lot to learn as an admin yet. I am reverting and well, its your choice whether to put it up for anything. Ansell 10:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Could you be nice enough to actually say why {{afd-list}} is so important. The instructions not to edit the template are not meant to be totally literally interpreted. I am using ignore all rules to make things run better as my defence, what is yours? Also, could you comment here to substantiate your reasoning. Thanks, Ansell 11:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You should not be editing templates that say not to edit it. By doing so you're only trying to make a point, and breaking 3RR at that. -- 9cds^(talk) 11:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you for even one second wondered why the template says do not edit. And what material damage I am doing by removing the one-use instructions which you followed nicely to do the original nomination. I am not making a point. You are making a point that you are a new admin who is suddenly invincible. BTW, I would love to see you justify your first block as a 3RR on listing instructions, something which admins should be able to do without the instructions. The instructions are merely a nicety. There are many people who think the template looks ugly. Why don't you go and fix it instead of making admins look foolish by following instructions to the letter. Ansell 11:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)