User talk:Fish and karate

La page du parle du Proto

Archive 1 (March 05 - August 05)

Archive 2 (August 05 - September 05)

Archive 3 (September 05 - November 05)

Archive 4 (November 05 - December 05)

Archive 5 (December 05 - February 06)

Archive 6 (February 06 - March 06)

Archive 7 (March 06 - May 06)

Archive 8 (May 06 - July 06)

Archive 9 (July 06 - October 06)

Archive 10 (October 06 - November 06)

Archive 11 (November 06 - December 06)

Archive 12 (December 06 - January 07)

Please place your comments at the bottom of the talk page.

I may reply on here, or on your talk page. It depends how whimsical I'm feeling.

This talk page is archived when I feel like it. Usually when it goes over 50k.

Wheeeeeeee.

---

New administrators - please direct your RFA thanks message (or the messages where you curse me for opposing you, whatever) to User talk:Proto/RFAs. I will read it, don't worry.

New to Wikipedia? - hello! See Wikipedia:Welcome and Wikipedia:Help for useful advice to get you started. If that doesn't help you, then by all means come back and ask me your question(s).

Did I delete your page? If it was through Articles for deletion, and you knew about it, kindly proceed directly to Wikipedia:Deletion review. I'll just direct you there anyway. Why not save time? If your page was speedily deleted, read Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?, and if you still don't see why it was deleted, then please do ask me here.

Here to complain or talk about anything else? - yes, this is the right place. Note that I reserve the right to amend any abuse to make you appear unintentionally dumb, lame, or funny, and I may even resort to disemvowelling.

---

Mr. Lady Records

I still don't think it's terribly notable, but it's well-written enough to be worth staying on Wikipedia - I haven't actually voted myself on the AfD, and I think it's important the process continue. However, I find it highly likely that the decision will be to keep since your overhaul, as already appears to be becoming the case. Well done for your rescue. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, nominated for deletion in the first place :) Thanks anyway! Proto::► 09:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Hey, thanks for participating in my recent RFA. You were amongst a number of editors who considered that I wasn't ready for the mop yet and as a consequence the RFA did not succeed (69/26/11). I am extremely grateful that you took the time to advise me on to improve as a Wikipedian and I'd like to assure you that I'll do my level best to develop my skills here to a point where you may feel you could trust me with the mop.

I've been blown away by the level of interest taken in my RFA and appreciate the time and energy dedicated by all the editors who have contributed to it, support, oppose and neutral alike. I hope to bump into you again soon and look forward to serving you and Wikipedia in any way I can. Cheers! The Rambling Man 19:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC) (the non-admin, formerly known as Budgiekiller)

Delhi FAC

Hi! Thanks for your comments in the FAC. I have provided citation for one sentence. Curbed one sentence and provided citation for that. Removed one sentence as citation could not be given. Please have a look. And a huge thanks for the edits you made in the article. Thanks a lot. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

oops! Overlooked that. Now citation has been provided for that one, too. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

When I reverted it, the link no longer re-directed to that short-storey but rather to the short-storey collection by the same name. DrWho42 03:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

The short story collection was a redirect to the main article until you changed the article. As you changed it to something with no content other than "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream is a collection of short stories by Harlan Ellison featuring I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream", it's been turned back into a redirect. Proto::► 14:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

3 Deleted Articles on Goblin's Translations

Out of 4 articles on Goblin's "funny translations" nominated for deletion, 3 were deleted. Can you please explain the difference between the 3 that were deleted and the 1 that was not? All 4 nominations to AfD were essentially about the same thing. Chronolegion 13:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Because the discussions at AFD were different. Proto::► 14:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

List of fictional police detectives on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of fictional police detectives. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AndyJones 15:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Sister Spit

Sorry, I am not yet convinced. this ref only includes tangential mentions of the person in a discussion of another subject (Wikipedia:Notability (music)), and the other article here fails the non-trivial published works requirement, as it is merely a press clipping announcing the next concert in a small paper (not sure how notable the paper is). With only one disc, I still seriously doubt their notability. From here we have two options: (1) We keep the notability tag, and another user will look at it and may delete it in the future based on his/her decision. (2) We start a WP:AFD, where a number of users look at it and judge its notability. The second one has the advantage of being faster and less dependent on one person, and both of us can add arguments there directly. What should it be? For now i add the notability tag again, but let me know if you want the AfD process. -- Chris 73 | Talk 20:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I have created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sister Spit, and will put it life in a few minutes. Please comment there on its notability. On a side note, the AfD is not a process for deletion, only a process to determine notability. I hope this helps. Best wishes, -- Chris 73 | Talk 21:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Boyfriends

I have to say, I do object, and not just because it would be Boyfriends (film). There's an actual film called Boyfriends, so it shouldn't be changed for a redirect. It might a good idea to put "You may have been looking for Boyfriend" at the top, though. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

It would be film (didn't spot it was a British release). I can move it. Usually, a plural will direct to the singular (so tables redirects to table, babies redirects to the same place baby does (infant), dogs to dog, sharks to shark and so on. Does this make sense? Proto::► 21:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

That's because Baby is a crap 2003 film that no-one has made an article for! But, whatever, I'm not going to argue with any more people this week. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed (with regards the crapness of that film), but see Baby (disambiguation) - the musical is at Baby (1983 musical), the rapper at Baby (rapper), the Natasha Bedingfield song's at Babies (song), and so on. Proto::► 22:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, you and your infuriating reasonableness. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Zeta Phi

Hi, why was the Zeta Phi Chapter of Beta Theta Pi article deleted? On what authority? There was note vote to delete. Please explain.

Notability for this particular chapter was met in the illustrious collection of alumni, i.e. Sam Walton, Ken Lay, Edgar Snow, Enoch Crowder, Gary Barnett, Crosby Kemper, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.63.10.24 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

Forget the alumni. The notability is in that the Zeta Phi Society, from which the chapter evolved, was the first fraternity founded west of the Mississippi River. That is an assertion of a historic nature and of a unique nature; I can't see how that doesn't qualify as an assertion of notability. —C.Fred (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: "Hey"

You're very welcome. Any time. Congratulations on your victory! Intheshadows 06:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your comment on the Entertainment Reference Desk. BeefJeaunt 19:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Suz Andreason AfD sock suspicions

Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suz Andreasen, do you think that I should have reported the suspicious votes at WP:SSP? My rationale for not doing so was: (a) I didn't consider them in closing, (b) I suspected that they belonged to A____ M____, and I didn't give his opinion much weight anyway, (c) WP:SSP was, and always is, backlogged, and (d), I couldn't be bothered with all the drama likely to result. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Nah, the closing admin would have discounted them if they would have made a jot of difference to the result. Just note them on the AFD if you suspect sockery. Proto::► 11:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Had a chat with A.M., who seems like a well-intentioned new editor, so I think it can be forgotten anyway. Cheers! Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Woollybear Festival

I'm still trying to understand why you deleted my Woollybear Festival entry. I did everything as correctly as possible. How can I go back and correct whatever may be wrong if you've already deleted it? HonoluluGuy 01:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Responded to user's email. Proto::► 11:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Travb - Vendetta

Thanks for the support you gave against this users allegations. I do not expect people to take sides in his vendetta against me but I appreciate that you looked at his evidence and were quite neutral in your response. I personally find his User:Travb/m page that he has created against me offensive and full of conjecture and assumption, but I will leave it to the admins to determine his true motives for this. Thanks once again for not taking sides. Mobile 01 02:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Americas finest city

Turns out it's a legitimate nickname, I'm going to recreate. John Reaves 11:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I should clarify, I nominated it for a speedy while browsing Special:Deadendpages. It was only after nominating, that I realized the San Diego article lists it as a legitimate nickname, therefore a legitimate redirect (despite how it looks). John Reaves 11:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I spotted it. It still seems like a bad redirect, but it's not a speedy. Proto::► 11:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Moondyne

Left a note to say hes offline till the 20th SatuSuro 14:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

futanari

I am sure you've noticed by now your suggestion that futanari be afd'd was ill-advised. It is my very strong hope that you don't decide to ignore the discussion taking place there simply because the discussion has been posted to various forums. There are obviously dozens of people commenting there that are members of the project prior to your mistake here. ... aa:talk 18:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion and protection of Comparison of BitTorrent sites

Hi Proto,

You deleted the Comparison of BitTorrent sites today, under the grounds that it's a recreation of deleted content. I am, however, familiar with WP:CSD, and it specifically states that the article can only be speedily deleted if it is "substantially identical" to the original. This was not the case - as I stated on the talk page, the new article had much more detail (which was the main complaint at the AfD) and cited sources.

If you feel that you cannot recreate this article in the mainspace, please recreate it in my userspace. I'd like to at least have a backup copy.

Best regards,

Ultra-Loser ^{[ T ] [ C ]} 23:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)