Jump to content

User talk:A Nobody: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
DYKadminBot (talk | contribs)
25,702 edits
Giving DYK credit for Nan Vernon on behalf of [[User:|]]
new section
Line 276: Line 276:
|On [[Wikipedia:Recent_additions#September 13 2009|September 13, 2009]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know?]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[Nan Vernon]]''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page <sub>([[User:Rjanag/Pageview stats|here's how]])</sub> and add it to [[WP:DYKSTATS|DYKSTATS]] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|Did you know? talk page]].
|On [[Wikipedia:Recent_additions#September 13 2009|September 13, 2009]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know?]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[Nan Vernon]]''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page <sub>([[User:Rjanag/Pageview stats|here's how]])</sub> and add it to [[WP:DYKSTATS|DYKSTATS]] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|Did you know? talk page]].
|} [[WP:DYK|Wikiproject: Did you know?]] 06:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
|} [[WP:DYK|Wikiproject: Did you know?]] 06:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

==Merging articles during AfDs==
Hi A Nobody. You've probably noticed me close a few AfDs you have been involved in, if not being actively involved in a discussion or two. I am a bit concerned by a habit you seem to be starting, of merging content mid-AfD and then claiming the article cannot be deleted per GFDL concerns. I first noticed this on [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isola (fictional island)|the Isola AfD]], but have since noticed you have done it in at least [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manon Batiste|one other AfD]]. I am aware you are probably the most vocal inclusionist on Wikipedia - I have no problem with your philosophy on deletion - but I am concerned about some of the seemingly underhanded methods you commit during AfDs.

To me, merging an article and then claiming the GFDL protects the article from deletion is somewhat suspect and almost is a swipe at the AfD process. Many, many articles have been kept thanks to mid-AfD improvement, but merging is definitely different from improvement. It clouds the debate, distracts participants from the points of contention and doesn't seem very honest. If you are willing to submit to a merge as a compromise, might I suggest that you wait until the end of the seven days? At least that way there won't be a messy DRV. ;) '''\''' [[User:Backslash Forwardslash|Backslash Forwardslash]] '''/''' ([[User Talk: Backslash Forwardslash|talk]]) 10:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:14, 13 September 2009

A Nobody's article contributions

Welcome to my talk page! Please be sure to make all posts civil and constructive, as I will ignore or revert anything I deem to be bad faith, dishonest, or vandalism. For example, anyone who has ever referred to me as something other than my username or by some insulting play on my username is not welcome here, barring they apologized and made good faith amends. Also, let us try to keep two-way conversations readable. If you post to my talk page, I will just reply here. If I posted recently to another talk page, including your talk page, then that means I have it on my watchlist and will just read responses there. I may refactor discussions to your talk page for the same reason. Also, please do not refer to me here or elsewhere by my previous username as I changed names due to real-world off-wiki harassment that remains a concern. Due to the issues that caused my name change and other matters (such as the demands of college!) I may be slow in responding to messages and I may even stop editing for long stretches of time. Sincerely, --A Nobody 18:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To add to this article

I am not sure what was on the previous version of the article, but the following out of universe information can be added from "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62: the character is voiced by David Kaye. PTOM states that "The Resistance 2 story is all about Nathan Hale and his role in this great conflict." Ted Price, one of the game developers, adds, "Internally we wanted to know more about Hale, and focusing on him provided the opportunity to answer questions about him." Thus, I encourage someone to restore the article and add this information in a manner such as this:

Nathan Hale is the protagonist of the Playstation 3 games Resistance: Fall of Man and its sequel Resistance 2. He is voiced by David Kaye.[1]

Development

Ted Price, one of the game developers, adds, "Internally we wanted to know more about Hale, and focusing on him provided the opportunity to answer questions about him."[2]

Biography

Hale killed practically every chimera in England and then went to America to win again.

Reception

PTOM states that "The Resistance 2 story is all about Nathan Hale and his role in this great conflict."[3] Playstation Universe lists Hale among the top five Playstation 3 characters thus far.[4]

References

  1. ^ "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62.
  2. ^ "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62.
  3. ^ "Resistance 2: Getting To Know Nathan Hale," PlayStation The Official Magazine 13 (November 2008): 62.
  4. ^ Dave Wales, "Top five PlayStation 3 characters thus far," Playstation Universe (March 16th, 2008): http://www.psu.com/Top-five-PlayStation-3-characters-thus-far--a0003095-p0.php

Restoration

Nathaniel is a character in Jonathan Stroud's Bartimaeus Trilogy. Nathaniel is one of the main characters of this series. After coming of age as a magician when he was 12 years old, he was granted the new name of John Mandrake, and is known by this name to everyone but the title character, Bartimaeus and in the later part of Ptolemy's Gate to Kitty.

Attributes

Appearance

In The Amulet of Samarkand he is described as being small and scrawny with dark hair. His hair, as he increases in rank, becomes increasingly long, but during the gap between The Golem's Eye and Ptolemy's Gate he has opted for a crew cut in (politically advantageous) tribute to the soldiers fighting in America. He is further described as attractive, with "the scent of power [hanging] around him" and of medium height and slender build, his forehead prematurely lined (Ptolemy's Gate, U.S. Edition, pg. 21).

Personality

Nathaniel is, at first, a small, shy boy uncomfortable with anyone who is not Mrs. Underwood or Ms. Lutyens. He is very nervous and scared by Bartimaeus when he first summons the demon. As the books progress, and he becomes more and more proficient, he also becomes more confident, and possibly overconfident. He works fervently when motivated, as is shown when he furthers his education with incredible speed in The Amulet of Samarkand. Throughout the books he also shows signs of ambition to rise through the ranks of the government, a common goal among magicians. Bartimaeus compares him more than once to Simon Lovelace, as they share a similar mindset, and habitual tics, such as stroking back their hair.

Role in books

The Amulet of Samarkand

In The Amulet of Samarkand, Nathaniel starts off as a young boy who, at the age of five, had been given up by his parents to apprenticeship under a mediocre Whitehall magician named Arthur Underwood, the assistant minister of Internal Affairs. Underwood begins teaching the boy in magic, but Nathaniel, being inquisitive, decides to advance his education to higher levels without the knowledge of his tutor.

However, at the age of eleven, in his master's house, Nathaniel is publicly humiliated by a greedy and ambitious young magician named Simon Lovelace. In a fit of juvenile fury, Nathaniel hatches a plan for vengeance. He sets several mites (a weak kind of imp) on Lovelace, but Lovelace is powerful and stops the mites, then proceeds to beat Nathaniel as punishment.

Later, after much research and preparation, Nathaniel summons Bartimaeus, a 5,000-year-old djinni, to exact his revenge on Lovelace. Mrs. Underwood - Nathaniel's master's wife - inadvertently reveals Nathaniel's true name to Bartimaeus. This vastly limits Nathaniel's control over the djinni, because spells can be cast on people when their true name is known (hence the practice of assigning names).

In the end, Nathaniel earns the respect of the majority of the other magicians including Rupert Devereaux, the Prime Minister. He is accepted as a magician in the government.

The Golem's Eye

Nathaniel summons Bartimaeus again, facing off against the Resistance and sinister magicians.

The second book picks up almost three years later and features Nathaniel as a junior magician working his way up the government ranks. He is described as one of the governments' rising young stars. In this book, Kitty Jones is introduced as an important character. She is a part of the Resistance movement, which seeks to end the oppressive rule of the magicians. Nathaniel is tasked by his superiors to crush the Resistance movement and capture the members. His task is complicated when a seemingly invulnerable clay golem starts to make random attacks on London. Much to the displeasure of Bartimaeus, Nathaniel recalls the djinni to aid him in uncovering the origins of the golem, and to save his own skin.

During the course of the book Nathaniel is almost fired from his post and executed for treason. By the end of the book however he has come back to favor when Duvall's conspiracy comes to light.

Ptolemy's Gate

In Ptolemy's Gate, Nathaniel has risen to the ruling Council and is arguably the most powerful magician in the government. He stands against a force of hybrid magicians with spirits trapped inside them, led by Nouda. Romantic feelings are hinted at in the book at various points between Kitty and himself. Nathaniel summons Bartimaeus into his body to help fight the Hybrids with Gladstone's staff, and destroys most of them, leaving only Nouda alive. However, during this fight, Nathaniel is seriously injured and he loses strength quickly, even with Bartimaeus' assistance. When Nathaniel and Bartimaeus confront Nouda, Nathaniel dismisses Bartimaeus which saves Baritmaeus just prior to the staff being destroyed killing both Nouda and Nathaniel. Bartimaeus returned to the Other Place, but is known to have survived; according to his "journal", he was summoned by a female magician with a stutter afterwards. Kitty, in the end, goes visit her old friend Jakob before she begins to travel around the world in a new life.

Trivia

  • Nathaniel's chosen magician name, John Mandrake, may be a reference to the popular comic strip and real life magician, Mandrake the Magician
  • Nathaniel's birthday is on November 26, as confirmed by the author.

References


RFA Thanks

References


The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 31 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 14:20, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 22:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

J04n's RfA

I've left you a reply to your vote. Cheers, Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 21:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 22:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Hélène Deschamps Adams

Hello! Your submission of Hélène Deschamps Adams at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 21:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have commented there. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 21:12, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch!

Fixed. One of those weird cases where you accidentally remove text higher up in the edit box. =) Cheers, –xenotalk 01:18, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed.  :) Best, --A NobodyMy talk 01:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why Thank You!

And a very happy Labor Day to you as well. ;-) — Ched :  ?  03:17, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I played tennis wity my dad in between on wiki sessions today; tomorrow is chili fest with relatives! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 03:18, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks from me as well. Tennis is always fun, I played with an old friend today (though I got crushed :) Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 04:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am probably more talented at fighting than tennis... but I have always enjoyed the latter, even if my twice my age father beat me 12 games to 7... Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 04:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks from me, too. It's going to be a hectic weekend for me, though. Tim Song (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I hope you have some time for relaxation! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 05:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, A Nobody. You have new messages at TomCat4680's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Okay, I have replied there. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 05:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

How cute! Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 05:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How thoughtful of you, a very happy Labor Day to you too. :) — neuro(talk) 06:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 06:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia Ofrenda

Here is the complete text of the article as it was when I deleted it.

Olivia Ofrenda is the dead beatnik who owns the Blue Casket Club in the 1998 LucasArts Adventure Game Grim Fandango. She wears a purple beret, a grey trench-coat like jacket, green stockings and small round shades; she like most in the game is a constant smoker.

Olivia Ofrenda's origins like most in the game is unknown, what is known that she obviously didn't get a good sales package from the Department of Death and had to make her way through the Land of the Dead by other means of transportation. One way or the other, she came to Rubacava.

Somehow she took over a night-club on the shores of the port-town and called it The Blue Casket. She soon became the attraction of many men; including the cities' crime overlord Maximino; of which he proposed to her with marriage. Yet Olivia, while attractive could never love a man and went after Maximino only for his money.

However she soon began an affair with Maximino's lawyer Nick Virago, attempting to spice up the boring relationship she had withe Maximino. As for the man himself, he attempted to proposed to Olivia on the side of an airship known as the Olivia I which he built himself. The proposal ended in disaster when the airship mysteriously exploded and crashed into Maximino's Cat Track. This momentary disaster postponed the proposal for a while in Olivia's favour.

Maximino wasn't perturbed though; he built a new airship for Olivia, of which he called the Olivia II. Yet Olivia's affections had gone for a new more powerful gangster of whom was Hector Lemans. Hector's takeover of El Marrow had stretched to Rubacava, and Olivia had seduced the large all-powerful kingpin to her wares. She finished with Maximino; and it is believed his depression resulted in Rubacava being taken over by Lemans.

Lemans needed Olivia for another reason as well; the sprouting of Manuel Calavera of whom she had known after his time in Rubacava. She agreed to wait in Rubacava after Hector predicted that Calavera would return. Probably through the revolutionary beatniks in her club; Olivia also must have known Manny was part of the Lost Souls' Alliance, the only resistance to Hector.

When Calavera did come back through town, Olivia joined him and went with Manny to Nuevo Marrow. She ratted out the LSA's Headquarters and persuaded Salvador Limones to let her join him when they went to hunt down Hector.

The exact events are not revealed in the game; but it is presumed that Olivia beheaded Salvador with an axe seen earlier, dumped his body in Hector's Meadows and used Salvador to find Manny again. Her deception revealed she took Calavera to Hector's Meadows and told him to meet with the big boss himself. While she rifled through a case of tickets, Calavera was talking to the Head of Salvador; she proceeded to pull Manny away from the car, picked up Salvador and taunted him.

Unbeknownst to her, Salvador had an exploding tooth of which when exploded made a cloud of sproutella gas. Salvador bit on the tooth and sacrificed himself to save Manny; Olivia was caught in the gas and as her face sprouted she ran into Hector's Meadow and joined as another victim of sprouting.

I don't want to be responsible for restoring that to article space. By all means recreate the article if you can demonstrate the character's notability using proper references! Best wishes. --RobertG ♬ talk 07:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Labor Day!

Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 02:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, I reply from work as we don't have Labour Day here. Hopefully yours is better. Stifle (talk) 08:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto, winter (well, early spring really) here too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're wishing yourself a happy Labor Day? That gave me a good chuckle. :) Anyway, I would like to thank you for the good wishes, and I would like to wish you a happy Labor Day as well. :) Cheers, Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 12:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome and thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 14:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!

A Nobody, MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

—MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) 18:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mergers of current AfDs again

Hi again. I previously contacted you regarding mergers, specifically for articles currently at AfD (archived to User talk:A Nobody/Archive 19#Mergers). My interpretation of WT:Articles for deletion#Merging during live AfD is that such mergers should be done rarely, with the exception of WP:SNOW for obvious consensus. The support for your view was fairly limited.

It has been pointed out that you have continued to perform these mergers:

Please consider waiting until the AfD has been closed before merging any content. Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 04:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have clarified my claim "The support for your view was fairly limited." Flatscan (talk) 05:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:IAR and WP:PRESERVE, no, if I have information that can actually improve other articles and the article under discussion is not a hoax, libelous, or copy vio, I am going to be WP:BOLD and improve the other articles as should have been done per WP:BEFORE. Any editor who is here to build an encyclopedia will rightfully see that the above examples improved articles on notable games and a major figure of the French resistance in World War II. As compared to everyone I have to argue with in the discussions, my edits improved not only the two articles under discussion, but nearly a half dozen other ones that no editor would contest. THAT should be encouraged and commended. While others just go back and forth with me, I actually work to improve content. I have shown that I am here not to simply kill time and space in AfDs, but to build and improve articles and not even to solely focus on the fictional character ones that some dispute the relevance of; rather, I have shown that I will go beyond the fiction articles with my sources and devote equal time and energy to adding the sourced content to articles concerning real people and the parent game articles as well. Moreover, at worst, those who wanted to delete the character articles could still end up with a redirect, which is a far cry from a keep and again given that the characters are main characters verifiable through multiple reliable sources no reasonable editor would take issue with. Deletion is an extreme last resort. If any of us volunteers ever have the sources available when we happen to be online to improve content, we do it. We do not play games waiting to humor the same usual half dozen odd accounts in the discussion who are not helping to improve content, who in some cases have outright admitted they do not want to look for sources, and who even if the article is improved would still never argue to keep (yes, I can provide diffs of such declarations if necessary). Finally, the guideline merely cautions against it. It does not preclude it altogether and as far as rarely goes, merges from a mere two articles a week among hundreds of other editors is indeed a rarity or minority of my edits overall. As opposed to the above diffs that did more to improve multiple articles than any copy and paste WP:PERNOM or WP:ITSCRUFT, I also have scores of welcomes and happy Labor Day posts the past few days, i.e. perhaps the bulk of what I do here is just trying to make editors feel welcome and appreciated and as such, anyway, I hope you had a nice Labor Day as well! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 15:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately, I am not convinced that the discussed limitations are unreasonable or that your merges fall within them. I will direct most or all of my responses to the existing discussion at WT:Articles for deletion#Merging during live AfD. Flatscan (talk) 05:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Until there is a clear consensus at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion#Merging_during_live_AfD to perform mergers while AfDs are running, given that it needs admin intervention to undo and interferes with the "delete" outcome, which is a valid outcome in some cases, do not do it again please. ++Lar: t/c 19:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is more important: improving content when we can or following bureacracy that interferes with our ability to improve the content? Moreover, I only do so in cases that are likely to close as something other than delete anyway and only when it is absolutely certain that the merge locations will benefit from the merger. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What is more important is not being disruptive. You are substituting your judgment (on whether it's a good idea) for consensus, and if you are ever wrong, the work you cause an admin to undo it outweighs any possible benefit. Don't do it again, please. ++Lar: t/c 19:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it causes no work to an admin, because a closure that is something other than delete requires no administrator action. Any user can non-admin redirect. It actually saves admins from having to use the delete function. Afds should not be used as an excuse to disrupt efforts to improve contennt. There is no rule against doing so, only a mere caution to be careful. If the end result is that articles no one would dispute are improved and the content under discussion does not need to be deleted due to some dire legal reason, no reasonable admin closing the AfD would have to undo anything. And again, I only do so in instances where it is clear the discussion is not going to close as delete. At the end of the day, all I know is that my actions as indicated above have resulted in the establishment of an article on a real world historical figure of some reknown and improvement of articles concerning the 30th most successful video game franchise of all time. None of the handful of accounts who said to delete did anything to improve any of these articles. I am confident any neutral observer will recognize that the guy who actually looked for, found, and added sources in an effort to improve a half dozen articles did more for the project than any who just went back and forth in the discussion. I did not merely "vote", but took good faith action with my volunteer time and went above and beyond just improving the articles under discussion, but to also help improve other articles for which no good faith editor would challenge the existence of. We are here first and foremost to build and compendium of knowledge and no one case say with any honesty that with regards to these articles of all the participants in the discussions I have done the most to actually do something for the knowledge these articles present. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If something closes as a delete, and you have previously merged content, that content needs to be un-merged, which IS extra work for the admin. This was explained to you before. You must also realize that there may be cases where you are wrong about how something is going to end up. Substituting your judgment in advance of consensus at an AfD is a bad bet. I am not sure you're listening to what you're being told. ++Lar: t/c 21:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing I would merge from would ever be closed by any reasonable admin as delete. In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Todd Williams (The Young and the Restless), we had verifiable information on a character from a notable show. One editor with a bolded delete actually said in his comment to add it, which I did. The other deletes are litterally carbon-copy textbook examples of WP:JNN that a closing admin would routinely not give much weight. Accordingly, the admin reasonably closed as redirect with edit history intact and as a result of my action, we know have a reference from Google News provided in an article no one in the discussion contested and a redirect that always assists anyone who types in the character's name as well as edit history available should additional sources come available, i.e. an editor can discuss them on the talk page without having to ask an admin to undelete. In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isola (fictional island), three articles on the actual games that no one wanted deleted now have references when we did not previously. My actions yet again went beyond just the back and forths in the discussions to improve actual content and that speaks loud enough. I have shown that I am here to build and improve articles not merely argue in discussions and I am unpersuaded by those in discussions who are unwilling to help out with actual content and neither I nor anyone needs to restrict his or herself to placate such self-appointed judges. And in some of these discussions, these accounts have revealed their ignorance of the subjects, calling video game characters cartoon characters, GamePro (one of the leading video game magazine) lumped together with blogs as far as reliability of sources, saying articles with sections on Development and Reception have "no" non-plot information, etc. One of the regulars I encounter in AfDs said he would never argue to keep and has indeed never done so. How can anyone reasonably be expected to do enough to satisfy such an account? Another said he is too lazy to look for sources. Why should thus of us who aren't too lazy have to satisfy someone who is? If AfDs reflected actual academic discourse among experts, okay, but they frequently do not. No one shold be prevented from improving articles no one would contest just to please accounts who admittedly will not lift a finger to help improve that content or who admittedly do not care or know about the subjects under discussion. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 13:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Nobody, I would strongly suggest deleting the entry, asking all editors to keep it on the WP:AFD page. I would suggest telling lar not to post to your page again. You don't have to put up with this from an editor who thinks you are a troll, and defends the personal attacks of editors who call you a troll and the continued harrassment. Ikip (talk) 19:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ikip, I appreciate the suggestion and understand where you are coming from. Lar has done a good deal lately that has made me seriously question his judgment and objectivity. The above comments add to that questioning, but Lar, you know, I actually supported him at Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/CheckUser_and_Oversight_elections/February_2009/Oversight/Lar#Votes_in_support_of_Lar and he seemed to agree with me at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Slagle. And as such, I suppose I just want to give anyone as many chances as possible before declaring him or her a lost cause. I guess I am still holding out hope, hopefully not naively, that my earlier impression will return. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:A Nobody/Subscriptions

Thought your idea was so good, I decided to Make one myself. Cheers. --kelapstick (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Labor Day greetings

Thanks for the greetings - however in Britland where I live 7th September is celebrated merely as "the seventh of September". Hope you had a good Labor Day, without too much labor. Wishing you a happy Guy Fawkes Night in advance ☺ Tonywalton Talk 23:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome and thanks as well! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 13:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs and sourcing

It's becoming apparently in your rush to rescue articles you're grabbing "any source that works" and slapping them in articles as reliable without actually checking in any way: it should be fairly obvious that neither That Guy with the Glasses nor RealPoor as you used them should count as reliable sources, much in the same way I've seen you cite google news and google books sources without actually checking to see if they're discussing the subject at hand or briefly mentioning it (or even discussing the actual subject at all). Please look over your sources more carefully when trying to rescue articles, it'll do them some good for later editors if they survive an AfD.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: [8] think about what you are doing sir, you are encouraging editors who oppose your viewpoint to return to the AFD. Ikip (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, A Nobody. You have new messages at Freshacconci's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

freshacconci talktalk 03:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have replied there. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 03:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Further comment is on my talk page. Short version: playing with an iPod and its potential as an editing tool = bad editing. Again, sorry! freshacconci talktalk 21:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I said there...nothing to lose sleep over. Take care! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for the good wishes on Labor Day. Always a pleasant surprise to receive your messages. Regards SunCreator (talk) 11:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to read that! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Happy Labor Day and 9/11 to you

I am sorry that I didn't get your greeting, esteemed fellow "inclusive" Wikipedian! As 9/11 has become somewhat of a holiday like Memorial Day, I thought I would extend to you greetings in a timely manner for that day. That day is also my birthday as well, I will be 54 at 10:39 a.m. Central Time. My how time flies!. Most cordially!--Drboisclair (talk) 01:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned on User:Cunard

I mentioned your ingenious template User:A Nobody/awards on User_talk:Cunard#Articles_you_have_written_template. 14:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is cool. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 14:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Nan Vernon

Updated DYK query On September 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nan Vernon, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Merging articles during AfDs

Hi A Nobody. You've probably noticed me close a few AfDs you have been involved in, if not being actively involved in a discussion or two. I am a bit concerned by a habit you seem to be starting, of merging content mid-AfD and then claiming the article cannot be deleted per GFDL concerns. I first noticed this on the Isola AfD, but have since noticed you have done it in at least one other AfD. I am aware you are probably the most vocal inclusionist on Wikipedia - I have no problem with your philosophy on deletion - but I am concerned about some of the seemingly underhanded methods you commit during AfDs.

To me, merging an article and then claiming the GFDL protects the article from deletion is somewhat suspect and almost is a swipe at the AfD process. Many, many articles have been kept thanks to mid-AfD improvement, but merging is definitely different from improvement. It clouds the debate, distracts participants from the points of contention and doesn't seem very honest. If you are willing to submit to a merge as a compromise, might I suggest that you wait until the end of the seven days? At least that way there won't be a messy DRV. ;) \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 10:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A_Nobody&oldid=313544803"