Jump to content

User talk:Melsaran

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ecombmiami (talk | contribs) at 20:55, 13 June 2007 (ECOMB). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello Salaskan! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! PeaceNT 16:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous


Avoid trivia sections in articles

Dear Salaskan, please don't change the status of officially adopted guidelines like Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles, without first discussing about such things on the guideline's talk page. The guideline went trough a poll that was advertised on the places where such things are usually discussed and thus saw adoptation by a wide group of editors. Policies and guidelines have a high regard within wikipedia and changing them without a single form of discussion, let alone changing their status will not be appreciated by most editors and by some may even be considered vandalism. I see you are a new user, so not many people will be annoyed in that case, but please be more carefull and please read WP:POL. TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 18:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:194.122.157.100

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thanks. TigerShark 22:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to push poll

Hi, just a note, I made some changes to your edits on push poll; for more, take a look at Talk:Push poll. Thanks! Meelar (talk) 19:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage in the Netherlands

Excellent addition to the article. Thank you for it. Jeffpw 11:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, I just thought something was missing in the article so added some text :-). Thanks for the rewrite by the way, it's a bit more clear to read now. Salaskan 15:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages can't be GAs

Hi! I thought you'd like to know that I removed your GA nomination of Lincoln. On the Wikipedia Talk:Good article candidates it was agreed that disambiguation pages can't become GAs because they are not really articles. Best Wishes! Gutworth 02:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I can kinda understand that as they indeed aren't really articles, but I thought it was a really good lemma for a DP at least. Thanks! Salaskan 10:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Joe

I just left new comments for you. I do understand your point of view. But how about this other idea? The template could be usable on extreme situations by a sysop and made also available to members of certain projects that are having problems with certain pages. For example, I would like to propose the use of this template at WikiProject Professional Sound Production. I will tell the members that I have tagged the controversial Audio mastering page, and that we need a vote to keep it or delete it. It could be a good experiment and it would give you grounds for complete deletion from the system, if it fails. But, if it works, you would have contributed to the inclusion of another proven useful tool at WP. What do you think?. Thanks for your attention. Jrod2 02:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Love Is War

I've moved Love is War back to Love Is War. Seems that you've mistaken "is" for "in" :-) Regards, Jogers (talk) 15:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, you're totally right. Excuse me. Salaskan 16:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template Fct

Template {{fct}} which you have used has been Nominated for deletion As you have used it I was wondering if you could vote for it to be kept? Ajuk 23:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me! I joined the discussion. Salaskan 23:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Love Is War

Looking back at this article, I now have no idea why I added the template, so I've removed it. Sorry about that. (I have also re-italicised the album name, in line with WP:ALBUM#Formatting). Colonies Chris 09:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, and thanks for the style addition. Salaskan 09:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Wikipedia:Userbox migration

I reverted your edit to WP:UBM because it makes no sense. All that it's saying is that you can have anything in your userspace within reason, so no pro-nazi or pro-pediphilia (these are real examples and they've been deleted), and no solicitation (which is reasonable anyways). -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 20:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prohibiting nationalsocialistic comments is a violation of WP:NPOV. Wikipedia takes no stance on political matters. If someone has far-right views, they have an equal right of expressing it as communists, capitalists etc. have. An entirely other matter would be the advocacy of hate, violence and/or discrimination actively, which is forbidden. When someone places a nazi-flag on their user page, it should be regarded as democracy, however. You can't say you're democratic when it's only "within reason". Democracy permits all viewpoints. Salaskan 20:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per God King, pedophile userboxes are banned (and per WP:ARBCOM, bring it up with them), and Nazi ones are also banned (per God King, bring it up with ArbCom). Sorry. If you ask someone else (which won't do any good), I'd recommend Cyde or an ArbCom member. Please discuss any future major changes on the talk page. -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 22:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Argumentum ad Jimbonem! :-) Salaskan 14:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then read the mailing lists to find the 20 day 100 email discussion about the Nazi Userbox (it was in January I think). And I don't know where the whole anti-Jimbo sentiment has come from lately). -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 22:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war. -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 22:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for these clarifying links. I guess the policy cannot be altered that easily as there have been many months of consensus forming prior to this. I apologise for editing the policy, albeit a very little, without discussion on the talk page. Salaskan 15:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Script

{{helpme}} Why doesn't this work?

Have you purged your server cache yet? In Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox, hold down the 'Ctrl' button and then click the refresh button on your browser while on your monobook.js page. See if that works. Extranet is now E talk 22:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thanks. Salaskan 22:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latin/French influence on English

Hey Salaskan! I've got a few links for you. this one tells you something general about the history of the English language and why it is completely OK that there are so many French terms in there, and these are related to the topic and more for fun: [1], [2]; these are WP articles: Ander-Saxon, Inkhorn term. Don't be so puristic! :-) Cheers, Krankman 21:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for the links. Will read them soon. I'm quite interested in etymology as of lately. Salaskan 21:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but...

[inflammatory comments/links removed] United States is as plural as Netherlands: They are both singular in construction. The United States is a country (not *are a country) made up of 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the insular areas; each state in the U.S. is obviously a U.S. state. —JackLumber /tɔk/ 13:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, United States in common usage is singular as the word represents one entity (in this case, a country). However, if you entirely pronounce the title, it becomes "List of United States states", which doesn't sound correct. Then what about List of American states? SalaSkan 14:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"U.S. states" *does* sound correct. American state may mean something different. Please don't edit my posts---that link served to prove my point. (Why?) —JackLumber /tɔk/ 14:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, why? SalaSkan 14:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because something in that paragraph sounds strange to a native speaker. —JackLumber /tɔk/ 14:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Go edit it, it's a wiki world ^^ SalaSkan 14:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no, that's so your gig. —JackLumber /tɔk/ 14:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then stop whining? Or at least tell me what it is, if you care so badly? Thanks in advance. SalaSkan 15:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Don't make such tendentious and blatantly POV moves.
—wwoods 18:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't template the regulars, and discuss your edits on the talk page please. SalaSkan 18:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've reduced the protection back to semi-protection.
If you seriously think "genocide" is an appropriate word, try to make your case on the talk page before changing the article.
—wwoods 15:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kay. SalaSkan 19:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read...

...WP:POINT. —JackLumber /tɔk/ 21:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what? I don't waste time in arguing with other editors about their language skills. SalaSkan 21:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 06:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! SalaSkan 13:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

CattleGirl talk 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. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for all your vandalism reversions and reports to AIV just now- very much appreciated! Cheers- CattleGirl talk | sign! 11:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment! SalaSkan 13:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Dude, why did you just revert my Air Traffic edits? --SteelersFan UK06 13:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, happened accidentally. I saw an edit using AVT which changed a header into ------==header==, so I thought it was a test edit. My apologies. SalaSkan 13:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aah, my apologies also for snapping at you, I have just noticed in the "Changes" page that in one of the headings I had changed it to "→→→==..." by accident. I was trying to comment on one of my edits and include the character in my edit summary and accidentaly placed it in the article itself. Well done for having such a good eye! Keep up the good work! --SteelersFan UK06 13:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Clarkson reversion

Thank you for your efforts towards removing vandalism - however you need to be more thorough with your changes. You reverted the last edit, but you failed to spot several others. This may have masked the errors from people currently watching the most recent edit. See the ones you missed It's a little more involved than simply reverting to the previous edit, make sure you check the page history to ensure you remove all the recent vandalism. Thanks for your help, and keep up the good work. Cpl Syx 14:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I use Anti-vandal tool which just lets me click "rollback" when I see a malicious edit in the list and then automatically fills in an edit summary and saves. I don't even get to see the edit history. Have you got any solution for this? SalaSkan 14:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing someone elses userpage

It was just a typo correction, but people don't normally edit someone elses userpage. Arienh4 19:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to User:Sir Intellegent/essays/I-don't-know-where-to-put-it disorder? Well, I don't quite think that the user felt bothered by my typo correction, but rather helped. It's not like I changed the meaning of anything he said. (and I feel an irresistible urge to place an apostrophe in your word "elses"... But I wont [sic] now ;)) SalaSkan 19:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your TW edit at Feces

Hi, regarding this edit, I can't see that what you reverted could be described as vandalism (whether or not you agree about the appropriateness of the image), and also I can't see any edit from Kamikaze in the history of the page which relates to the one that you undid. I don't know anything about WP:TW, but is it possible that there's some error in the software? Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 14:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I probably clicked the wrong button, shouldn't be identified as vandalism indeed. The edit was [3] by the way. SalaSkan 14:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that was 15 April, and your TW changed more than just that. I think I'll stick to the simple undo button unless and until I get rollback! ElinorD (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? This is reaaaaally strange... I just clicked the rv button, and it changes the entire page. If this happens again I'll patrol old school-style again, this is ridiculous. SalaSkan 14:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IE7 Criticisms

Hi, saw that you reinserted IE7 beta criticism references back into the article. A beta test is to find bugs; so when bugs are found, whats so surprising about it? Plus bugs do not stay forever, so what happenned in the past is not relevant to the current version of the article. Plus the article states "various serious bugs and security leaks have been discovered". Well, how is such a generic statement a criticism? Every other browser had and have bugs, even serious bugs. Heck, every popular software have had serious bugs during their lifetime! --soum talk 16:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, according to my memory, IE7 was extensively criticised because of the amount of bugs, at least a lot more than most new releases. Compare these results: [4][5] SalaSkan 16:13, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What happenned during the beta test phase, how does it reflect how solid the current release is? This applies for both IE7 and FF2 betas. And how can press coverage be an indicator of the security (or lack of it like browsers). It has to be compared on valid statistics like number of vulnerabilities since release, severity of vulnerability, whether they were remotely exploitable or not, number of patches issued, average time for issuing of patch, etc etc! (I am compiling the stats from secunia.com now) I am goona remove the entire section unless some solid criticism is presented, backed up by facts. its not a place for generic statements like "it has been criticized" that leaves more questions (who criticized? why? what happened next?) than information it provides. --soum talk 16:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here are IE7 and FF2 bug reports. IE7 had 11 and FF2 had 9, which by any statistics is NOT "a lot more than most new releases". --soum talk 16:24, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Of course, it's not an indicator of the security, but on Wikipedia we don't determine whether a browser is secure (or anything else, for that matter), but attribute words to reliable sources. As multiple reliable sources have reported about IE having extremely many bugs, we may include that in the article provided that we cite them. SalaSkan 16:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Show one site which claims IE7 (NOT IE in general - the article is about IE7 not IE) has "extremely many bugs" after it had its final release. I have already provided evidence to the contrary. --soum talk 16:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I wasn't talking about "after the final release", but about the beta version. If it received criticism for a very severe amount of bugs in the beta version and we find reputable sources, this can still be included in the article. And, want some sources? [6] (about the amount of bugs), [7] (about the blatant stealing of features from other browsers). SalaSkan 16:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The IE7 article talks about the finally released version. So criticisms also should be of the same. If it needs to be mentioned, a development history section be added (or prose added to release history secn). Criticism is not the place for it. Take a look at all other browser articles. Which one lists criticisms of a beta version? There are better articles than this which will be a better place to house information related to an unsupported release, who deals with entire development history of IE7.
And I am not talking of the criticisms on feature list. I removed the ref just because it was a forum link, not an appropriate ref by any standards. However, if it needs to be talked about, there are a lot of references which praise IE7 for implementation of the same features you are saying it has been criticized for. --soum talk 16:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I have serious quesitons regarding the suitability of the second site you gave, as a ref. --soum talk 16:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Which are the "better articles than this" you wanted to link to? Perhaps we can include it there instead. And what's wrong with that ref? (dinner now, be back in ±30 mins) SalaSkan 16:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry. Its happenning a lot today. Text is getting eaten up in flight!!! Wonder if someone is snooping on my connection. Or is it yours? :D --soum talk 16:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, no idea :). Anyway, that article already contains some info about the bug site etc, so it'd be a bit superfluous to add even more refs there. And what is your objection to this ref on "criticism about stealing features"? SalaSkan 18:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(deindent)Regarding the source, my only concern is on its reputability. Layout and stuff makes it look like a self published source. --soum talk 07:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but it is used as a source on seven different pages.[8]

{{Uw-copyright1}}

Hi, please discuss the changes you make on such warnings at the relevant page (WT:UTM) before implementing them. The copyright series used to be a 4 step warning, but after discussion it was decided to go for a single warning. Copyright violations are a serious problem on Wikipedia, and editors who deliberately ignore that policy should be prevented from continuing. -- lucasbfr talk 20:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was just being bold. Anyway, not every newbie has read these policies, and a less severe warning would probably be more appropriate in some cases. SalaSkan 21:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G'day

I've just read your user page. I'm a bit pedantic about language usage too, and agree with the sentiments expressed by userboxes en-gb-5, totootwo, theretheir, youryou're, its2, apostrophe and Apostrophe Abuse. (I also find the boxes amusing, too.)
My current pet peeve is the misuse of I/myself/me, particularly the misuse of "myself". Do you know where I can find a userbox for this?
Regarding en-gb-5, I don't believe there is such a thing as "American English". In my (highly biassed and subjective) opinion, the British speak English, and the Americans speak American. (Well, almost. I don't really want to offend the Canadians, the Mexicans and the residents of South America. But what else can you call the language spoken by the residents of the United States of America? {USAian? I don't think so. And you can't call it USian - that would offend the residents of the United States of Mexico.)) (By the way, in case it isn't bleedingly obvious to other readers, the previous outrageous statement is an attempt at humour - spelt with a "u".) So, Salaskan, what is your belief about the "Australian" language?
(And yes, you're right, "This user spends WAY too much time on Wikipedia" and REALLY needs to get a life! I've just got to do one more edit first ... ) Keep up the good work. Regards, Pdfpdf 07:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! First of all, I totally agree that "English" technically means "from England", and that thus English English is the real form of English, and American shouldn't be called English in the first place. Also, the "residents of the USA" ought to find a word to describe themselves apart from "American", as America is the entire landmass of North and South-America.
The Australians are very puristic when it comes to repelling Americanisms, fortunately. And I think their accent sounds pretty funny .
And which cases of misuse of "myself" are you talking about in particular? I couldn't find a userbox for this, perhaps copy an existing userbox and change the text to a nice sentence which represents the difference between those three words. For an (insanely long) list, see Wikipedia:Userboxes/Grammar. Regards, SalaSkan 11:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "myself": In particular, in letters/emails from salesmen that start with "Good morning" and finish with "do not hesitate to contact myself or my colleague". (Shudder.)
And yes, the length of the list is truly impressive! I guess I'll have to do it myself. Thanks for the link.
Regarding the "residents of the USA": Good idea! Yes, they ought to find a word to describe themselves (apart from "American"). Hand the problem back to them. (Note, however, that they have a reputation for being generally unaware of anything outside their borders that doesn't involve large quantities of oil.)
Regards, Pdfpdf 15:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I like your multicoloured signature. (I must get around to sprucing up mine.)
Is there a particular significance to the choice of red-and-gold?

Haha, I can understand that! Sometimes I'm just so puristic when it comes to language...
For the template, I created one, and put it on your user page (just remove it if you don't like it). Sorry for the ridiculously stupid sentence, but I couldn't come up with anything better. Any changes are welcome!
By the way, that's completely true, they probably won't ever notice it. So let's just call them "extremists" from now on, suits them well.
About my sig, not really, I was just bored with the standard signature and these colours stood out nicely. SalaSkan 15:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Some good laughs: The US World Domination Tour - Americans are not stupid! - I Am An Atheist - Bush Almighty! (I Hate Republicans) - The Idiot Son of an A**hole SalaSkan 15:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That was a really nice gesture, and is most appreciated. It's 01:30am here; I'll post a proper response tomorrow. Tot ziens. (Or is it "Tot zeins"? I can't remember!) Pdfpdf 16:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Tot ziens" is perfect. SalaSkan 16:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about "USAsians", or perhaps "USAzians"? Pdfpdf 06:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that I like "extremists", but it's hardly unique or exclusive. (After all, there are some who might consider us to be extremists ... ) Pdfpdf 06:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, but you might insult the Asians with that. USA**holes may be a bit too explicit... hmm.... This is difficult! SalaSkan 16:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spelling error

It's ok to correct my spelling error on my essay. I put a notice that anyone can edit that page (after I looked in the history). It is under the essay tag in a <small> tag. I can make it big, bold, italicized, and underlined if I need to... And thanks for saying *bleep* instead of the actual word. Sincerely, Sir intellegent - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 14:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! I really dislike wikilawyers who revert clearly harmless good-faith corrections just because you aren't "supposed" to edit others' user pages. SalaSkan 15:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.: You're quite intellegent [sic], just so you know. ^_^

Thank you

Thanks for your comment at the RfC, to be honest I am continuously being bothered and threatened with ArbCom by this user [9]. It's becoming even clearer that his editing of my user page had an objective of intimidation. Atabek 04:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

 Hello Melsaran, I just wanted to thank you for giving your comments at my recent RFA. While it didnt pass (I withdrew after it became apparent that the RFA was "sinking like the titanic" =]), I will try to focus on and build upon your comments, and the comments of all the other Wikipedians who participated. Thanks again for voicing your opinion, and I wish you very happy editing! Anonymous Dissident Utter 06:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who whom

About your recent change to my edit, the switching of who to whom. Yes I see you are right. It is not that I don't know my grammar, it is simply a case of this being a little sticky and unclear, well, atleast on quick inspection. "Whom does she love?" is right but "...whom I dislike" is a better example as to how my brain read the text. But given that I'd say "I hope that he is friendly" and not "hope that him is friendly", I apologise for the sheer arrogance of the edit. Speaking Dutch as a first language, you'll be surprised how many persons who speak English as a first language are totally ignorant of this phenomenon and use "who" at all times; more often than not, it is those who speak a non-English language as a first one who pick up on these things. Evlekis 23:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to this edit? Heh, I now see (in the page history) that some anon reverted your edit to "who", and I changed it again. A very weird sentence indeed:) you would expect "I" to be the subject but in fact "who" is the subject as "is friendly" doesn't refer to I. Thanks! SalaSkan 14:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NP Watcher

I've added you, with pleasure. Be careful at first, as with any new tool. Out of curiosity, what brought you to my door? --Dweller 14:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! I needed an admin to do this for me as Martin seems to be on a Wikibreak, and to see which admins are online at the time, I went to the history of WP:AIV and clicked the link to the first admin I saw in the list of blockings. ^_^ SalaSkan 14:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Serge Corbin

WP:CSD#G4 (repost) is only for situations where an AfD resulted in an article being deleted and it is reposted in the same form. Since this was speedy deleted the first time, G4 does not apply. Please use PROD or AfD if you believe this article should be deleted. Thanks,--Isotope23 20:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So if someone speedily deletes a nonsense article, and the exact same article gets reposted, I have to prod it? Sounds like [[WP:DENY|recognising] the trolls. SalaSkan 20:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you also use an editor warning each time, the person will either get the idea or fairly soon be blocked. That's even more effective for trolls.

But I came here to tell you that although Otis Watson is most likely nn, the article does assert notability, and cant be done as a speedy. I totally agree with your feelings of impatience at these sort of articles, but being able to keep the speedy procedure at all relies of using it very narrowly so people have full confidence in it--because there are those who distrust it enough, and distrust admins like me enough, that they want to end this essential way of handling many things. DGG 20:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ECOMB

Hi. I am trying to build a wikipedia page for my non profit environmental organization in Miami Beach: ECOMB. Not less than an hour after I started, you deleted my page because it was about an organization - there are many organizations, people, bands that have wikipedia pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_stones http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_congdon. Listing ECOMB on wikipedia is important because of its impact on Miami Beach and more specifically South Beach, the Trend Capital of the United States. In order for Social Behavior to change among our youth's outlook on the environment, their icons need to buy into the theory that doing good for the environment is a cool thing to do. I am trying to build up a case to pitch these celebrities and I need the online credibility of Wikipedia, Myspace, ect.. in order to "get to the next step". Please give me another hour or so in making my page and you will see that this page merits worth in your library. - Ben McFerren ECOMB Board Director

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Melsaran&oldid=137986659"