User talk:DangerousPanda: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:44, 5 December 2012

Note: please do not use talkback {{tb}} templates here unless you are referring to discussion areas that I have not yet been a part of; I do monitor my conversations

This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15: 15 days

Sorry

I apologize for constantly adding Tyga or others to the associated acts section of the Nicki Minaj article. I just thought he would make a good addition to that section. I'll try to understand that the associated acts section of artists means a bit more than just working together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captainmad (talk • contribs)

Don't fan the flames

There are enough incompetent admins simply hanging out to fan the flames. Don't. Really. -Fjozk (talk) 12:58, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right because they keep on deleting articles simply because they dislike the author. The Wikipedia Admin has to know this. Look at your tlak page they disable it.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.144.180.188 (talk) 10:28, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...I know that I have never deleted anything simply because of who created it. Indeed, I don't dislike anyone, nor have I held a grudge in my life. Nice try though. Oh, and don't forget WP:SOCK applies to editing anonymously (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration request

So, in the current Arb request, you claimed "The rest of the Bureaucrat cadre disagreed" with a decision I made. Could you clarify where all the other 'crats disagreed with my action please? Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't they gang up and suggest you wait longer next time...from the discussion I saw (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I requested in the current Arb discussion, can you show me where the "cadre" disagreed with me please? Otherwise you're somewhat mischaracterising my contributions and what other crats think of me. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:56, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, nothing I said makes you or your contributions look "bad" in any way, period. I'm sorry you seem to be misreading so badly as to think that. However, if you review this discussion, the issue of waiting a period of time was somewhat predicated on what some of your colleagues considered to be a hasty return of the tools. Yes, some supported you, others argued against. Either way, a more extended time for resysops was applied at that point - none of which makes you look bad a any point (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's the part where you characterised my position as being unique, i.e. that "the rest of the Bureaucrat cadre disagreed" with my actions, which, clearly, is not true. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think my summary at the end of that section summarised it well. None of us crats criticised TRM as doing the wrong thing, although some of us may have chosen to act differently. --Dweller (talk) 11:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I most certainly did NOT criticize TRM in the ArbCom case whatsoever ... to me, the wording is quite clear about that (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you're criticising me or not is neither here nor there, I can take criticism, but what I don't understand is why you would say that the rest of the 'crats disagreed with my actions when some clearly and overtly agreed with them. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...I figured you would have acknowledged the modifications I had made, rather than leave it looking like I was unresponsive. A bit surprised by that actually (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Crown the Empire

I do not believe it was fair to delete Crown the Empire. The band is very notable. Websites that has been confirmed and are used as sources everywhere (i.e. Alternative Press, metalunderground, rocksound.tv, Lambgoat, and absolutepunk.net) has posted about the band on multiple occasions. The band has released two EPs actually, not one. They are signed to a heavily covered and established record label (Rise Records). Over 84,000 "likes" on Facebook as of today (likes is probably not a useable source of notablility, just wanted to point that out). They are set to release their debut album on Rise Records (tomorrow actually, if I can recall correctly). And has worked with Joey Sturgis and Cameron Mizell, both being established producers in the genre that the band is a part of. The band is very notable in my opinion. Not to mention you deleted it after multiple votes of keeping the page. I do agree the page was in bad grammar/formatting but I do believe it deserved a deletion. I say the page be re-added once proper sources are found and formatting be fixed.
XyphynX9 (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the band is touring with bands such as Motionless In White, Chelsea Grin, Stick to You Guns, etc. All bands that have articles among Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XyphynX9 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, non-Policy-based arguments to "Keep" that were easily discounted. Nothing addressing the actual requirements as per WP:BAND - obviously you still have not read those notability requirements. Press releases, social media ... nothing useable. WP:ILIKEIT and the fact that they exist is not sufficient. If their album actually ends up meeting the requirements, then someone can either create a WP:USERSPACEDRAFT and check with some seasoned editors before moving into articlespace, OR can use the WP:AFC process. However, as of now, they're unfortunately nobodies as far as this project's requirements. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UNDELETE The band has reached the notability standard by charting on various billboard charts. To be specific: Number 1 on Heatseekers, Number 8 on Independent Albums, Number 13 on Heavy Rock and Number 46 on Rock during their Album's debut week. Based on that I request the undeletion of their page so it can be updated to include the pertinent information that makes them notable. http://www.billboard.com/#/album/crown-the-empire/the-fallout/1711244 (Accessed 5 Dec 12) also excuse commenting on the deletion page post deletion new to WP Editing and did not notice. ^^ "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart" from WP:Music

Consensus

I'm wanting to clear up the error that Jimbo Wales was the sole founder of Wikipedia, as presented on his user page but you reverted it saying "as per consensus". I know that "Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale" so I'm wondering what sort of consensus it was that overrides WP:VER, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV which all indicate that Jimbo was the co-founder of Wikipedia with Larry Sanger?Momento (talk) 10:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry ... but at what point does Jimbo claim that he was the sole founder? The wording is quite correct as it is, even if he was co-founder. You know as well as anyone that the whole Jimbo/Sanger thing is inflamatory, and consensus is that the way it's phrased in Jimbo's userpage is appropriate, and that adding fuel to a long-standing fire would be stupid (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also add that the three policies that Momento cites, apply to article space - Jimbo's userpage is not article space. The article Jimbo Wales does indeed describe him as "co-founder". Consensus is that we permit Jimbo to keep this particular aspect of his userpage the way he prefers it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:37, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not Harassing

I'm not harassing you who does?

Just to let you know that I'm not gonna visit this Wikipedia again after what you've done to my articles just because somebody here keep on reporting to you lies and telling you to do this and that. this too much. Imagine, one after the other.

I came here to contribute for the growth of this knowledge center with a sincere heart but some people here would accuse me of vandalism. The effect, I'm not gonna edit the articles here with discrepancies and leave it so that Wikipedia would become a laughing stock to many.

I'm gonna tell my friends whom I told before to donate to Wikipedia to not to go on.

Actually, there are lots of other who complain about the unreasonable deletion of the other articles which they made.

Be informed that I'm gonna be deleting all my contributions here. Do not object anyway they're all mine.

I'd rather do a research on Britannica Online even if the articles are fewer because I believe the people are not rude. OptiStar (talk) 11:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my articles

Be happy because I'll do ahead of you with the deletion of my articles. Tell bikers bikers that he won and he can now celebrate.

It's a waste of time to be here. OptiStar (talk) 11:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I voluntary deleted my contributions here in Wikipedia

There you have it BWilkins, I already deleted all the articles that I created here including my contributions out of my own accord.

You can now have the peace here in Wikipedia now that I leave this website and try not to visit it as much as I can. OptiStar (talk) 11:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know, people grow and mature by learning. In a community such as Wikipedia, there are literally millions of people who have the opportunity to help you to learn. You came to Wikipedia thinking that it was one thing, and many many people tried to guide you otherwise. They pointed out the policies, and tried to help you to understand. Rather than actually take 10 minutes to read and understand what they were saying, you lambasted them about hating your contributions, make childish comments about telling people not to donate to the project, and delete your contributions and go off in a huff. Nothing about the AFD's of your work is about you - it's about us wondering why you won't take a moment to read WP:CORP. Indeed, I'd be surprised if you can tell me anything about Wikipedia's general notability guidelines and what does or does not constitute a reliable source. Those simple levels of understanding are all that anyone has ever asked of you so that your hard work is directed in the right direction, and not on articles that have little chance of being a part of this project (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone suggest the user obtain a mentor? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 13:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a fantastic idea - but the responses I have seen this person do when someone provides even the slightest attempt at assistance suggested to me that mentoring either might not help, or they wouldn't be amenable to the situation. I would be thrilled to be proven wrong in this case, because I do they they can provide some good energy given the right direction - but they have be willing to take direction first (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:29, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would think it would be a whole different dynamic, to have one-on-one counsel from a mentor, as opposed to advice from various uninvolved editors, and the user would respond differently as a result. From what I've seen, I'd recommend User:Superm401 to the rescue. (User talk:Superm401) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 14:50, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I gently prodded Superm401 to see if they're willing (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good move. (The user s/ be the one to make the contact really, but me thinks you're right, 'cause situation is too far gone for that. This is best chance for positive end.) With fingers crossed, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 16:23, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Four Stroke Engine Cycle

Was it really your intention to redirect Four Stroke Engine Cycle to WP:NOTHOWTO? Seems like a strange redirect.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 14:56, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope ... something screwed up it appears. I originally redirected it elsewhere (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:01, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought, but since the AfD said it was redirected to WP:NOTHOWTO, I was puzzled...I have taken the liberty of fixing the AfD closure for you. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 17:45, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I got an odd browser error in the middle of the close - possibly because I had already manually done the redirect. Your fix is appreciated (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Eff Won

Tell me this Talk:2013 Formula One season#Numbers and the team and driver table isn't disruptive. Same old story again and again and again – Eff Won / Lucy alone in a pointless debate about something which everyone else has been happy with for years. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have to raise the flag on Eff Won yet again. this talk page edit which followed this revert seems to me to make it pretty clear that Eff Won's sole purpose on Wikipedia now is to go after or argue with Prisonermonkeys specifically. It is becoming utterly ridiculous to have to continue to put up with this behavior. While Eff Won was originally blocked, in part, for his edit warring to try and get his way with articles, now he seems to be butting into the editing process solely to go against any edits Prisonermonkeys makes. He himself calls Prisonermonkeys' edit edit-warring, so to involve himself in the edit war by making a revert makes him part of the edit war which seems to be treading the line of his 1RR limitation as part of his unblock. The³5₉ (Talk) 08:31, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Information

I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 09:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:TheWesternWorld

Hi, you noted that User:TheWesternWorld abused Wikipedia's email system. The user sent me an abusive email, which said "Kill yourself you retarded piece of shit". Is their any way I could report that?--Mjs1991 (talk) 04:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I received over 100 copies of a similar-reading e-mail from them. After that their access to the "e-mail this user" function was removed. Not much else to do, unless you personally feel threatened by them (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:10, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias's RfA

Would you kindly consider recasting your !vote on Harrias' RfA now that he's answered the question? I've been accused of caring too much about these things, but at the moment, your neutral !vote is the only one standing in the way of a unanimous RfA, which in these days of so much contention on the RfA pages, might be a nice thing to see. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note, if unanimous means 100% support in the way that we currently calculate it, then it's already unanimous even with this neutral. So perhaps you do care too much about this ;) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy December!

The Holidays are coming up... enjoy this lovely brownie as your first treat! Statυs (talk) 02:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*munch munch munch* Thanks! (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Franamax memorial

	In honor of Franamax
	This is in honor of Franamax, who has passed away on November 25, 2012. This user will be highly and deeply missed. RIP.

Request for unprotection of Usage share of web browsers

The first of the month we normally update the stats. Can be protected if needed after editors make the usual updates. Thanks, Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I already asked the question: why do we update it monthly. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS (✉→BWilkins←✎) 01:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The information is valued for historical context. You can see that much of the info dates back 10+ years. Monthly is considered a good level of summarization. wp:notnews is not relevant, this is not tabloid info, or info with temporal value. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 14:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although I wholly disagree with your argument, and do not personally believe that such updates add to the article, I have unprotected it as it appears that the original disagreements that led to the protection have been resolved (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:15, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me more. Do you think quarterly updates should happen or the article shouldn't exist or other? Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:7SeriesBOT

Hi Bwilkins,

Is your adminbot still running, and not finding any pages to delete? I noticed it hasn't made a deletion since September.

Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 11:45, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually down right now. I voluntarily pulled it down, but have yet to re-enable it. Perhaps that's a good project for a cold day like today (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Guidance Barnstar
		That is an awesome, well-written piece of advice. Kudos. Anomie ⚔ 17:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's very kind of you Anomie :-) Thank you (✉→BWilkins←✎) 20:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Anomie beat me to it! But I was going to give you this. Thanks for setting a great example. — Hex (❝?!❞) 11:02, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The beautiful irony is that in that very same attempt to help, I said that "admins are rarely thanked" ... and here, wonderfully and surprisingly, I'm being thanked not once but twice for something. You both honour me (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A little chat

I just wanted to say that my AGF button has limits. I know you don't like me, and I believe that you believe that I'm disruptive, naive, that I don't uderstand policies and that I make more harm than good, and you may have your reasons to. I wanted the restriction lifted because I don't feel comfortable with my name written at WP:RESTRICT, not because I want to go and make 1000 closures. And I can't assume good faith from a user that seems to follow me everywhere just to oppose everything I may say, and write detrimental things about me :( — ΛΧΣ21™ 01:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of realities: first, people are opposing the removal of the restrictions because requesting their removal right now was one of the dumbest things you could do. Accusing people of opposing it because of past issues is pretty ridiculous, really. What's more ridiculous is the suggestion that I "don't like you". You're a bit off your rocker on that one too. I'm a bit worried that you might be taking this Wikipedia thing far too seriously right now, and you could probably use a little time off in the real world (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I just felt you didn't like me. At least that's somewhat the impression I received since we met back in July when Status got blocked for edit warring by Toddst1. I am having a wikibreak now, and I have realized that yes, it was dumb to request the restriction so soon. Also, I have no issues with Dominus opposing it, my issues is with the way he writes about me, which is really inaccurate. He has the right to oppose the lifting and I respect that, as well as your oppose. I am not taking this far too seriously anymore. I realized I was when the restriction affected me and I went out of Wikipedia the whole month. I even stopped editing for about a week. Anyways, thanks for your response. — ΛΧΣ21™ 19:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eff Won (again)

Hi Bwilkins,

Just thought I might let you know that there is a storm brewing over Eff Won. Again. His latest edits on the 2013 Formula One season page have not been received well, particularly in the way he is trying to force his edits to hold by threatening to go straight to an adminstrator if they are at all changed. There is a current request for page protection on the page, and I'm hoping it will be granted soon and hold long enough for a resolution to be found. I have asked him to explain himself, and while it is quite abrupt, I've just about had my fill of his behaviour.

I'm not asking that you take action yet - I just thought you might want to keep an eye on things, because based on what we've seen from him in the past, Eff Won can make things very messy, very quickly. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 09:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help in dealing with Eff Won. I'm happy to see cooler heads prevailed - there have been adminstrators in the past who have bought into his attempts to talk his way out of trouble by deflecting attention onto the edit histories of the people raising objections to his behaviour. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 :Also, the band is touring with bands such as Motionless In White, Chelsea Grin, Stick to You Guns, etc. All bands that have articles among Wikipedia.  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:XyphynX9|XyphynX9]] ([[User talk:XyphynX9|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/XyphynX9|contribs]]) 15:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 :: Oh yes, non-Policy-based arguments to "Keep" that were easily discounted.  Nothing addressing the '''actual''' requirements as per [[WP:BAND]] - obviously you still have not read those notability requirements.  Press releases, social media ... nothing useable.  [[WP:ILIKEIT]] and the fact that they ''exist'' is ''not'' sufficient.  If their album ''actually'' ends up meeting the requirements, then someone can either create a [[WP:USERSPACEDRAFT]] and check with some seasoned editors before moving into articlespace, OR can use the [[WP:AFC]] process.  However, as of now, they're unfortunately nobodies as far as this project's requirements. ([[User talk:Bwilkins|✉→]]'''[[User:Bwilkins|BWilkins]]'''[[Special:Contributions/Bwilkins|←✎]]) 15:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
+'''UNDELETE''' The band has reached the notability standard by charting on various billboard charts. To be specific: Number 1 on Heatseekers, Number 8 on Independent Albums, Number 13 on Heavy Rock and Number 46 on Rock during their Album's debut week. Based on that I request the undeletion of their page so it can be updated to include the pertinent information that makes them notable. http://www.billboard.com/#/album/crown-the-empire/the-fallout/1711244 (Accessed 5 Dec 12) also excuse commenting on the deletion page post deletion new to WP Editing and did not notice. ^^ "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart" from [[WP:Music]]
 == Consensus ==