User talk:Deiz

Archives: Talk 1 - Talk 2 - Talk 3 - Talk 4 - Talk 5 - Talk 6 - Talk 7 - Talk 8 - Talk 9 - RfAs - Trophies

Welcome to my talk page

I'm pretty easy going about what goes on here. However, if you have come here regarding an administrative action I have taken that you disagree with or wish to be clarified, or regarding a copyedit or cleanup I have performed, please ensure that you:

Maintain a civil tone and are clearly interested in improving the encyclopedia.
Bear in mind that I have been an editor since December 2005 and an administrator since May 2006, and have a big fat pile of edits - I am in no way "better" than any other editor, but I may have a greater understanding of Wikipedia policy and practice than many. To put it another way, Wikipedia is not the Stanford Prison Experiment.
Know that I do not hate you (I love you), nor do I hate your company, group, product or friend (at worst, I am ambivalent towards it / them, and I may well love them too)
Have read any and all links to guidelines or polices included in my edit summaries or talk page edits related to your reason for being here.
Understand that disruptive, trolling or otherwise undesirable or unconstructive messages will be treated as they would on any other Wikipedia page.
It's "Deiz". D-E-I-Z. Not Diez, Diaz or any other Spanish sounding misspelling...

Reliable Sources

Hey there, I'm having a bit of a conflict of opinion at a rather small article One Nine Nine Four. A fellow editor is attempting to add a "Criticism" section to this article that is sourced to a message boad with the opinions of 23 unidentifiable people. In my opinion, this fails Wikipedia:Verifiability and WP:BLP#Reliable_sources. I am not against adding a criticism section, just that it needs to be properly sourced and not based on the opinions of a few "fans" on the internet. I have removed this content, and requested correct citations are provided before it is re-added, however it just gets added back with the same source. I was wondering if I am correct in thinking that such material is not encyclopedic without proper references. Cheers Nouse4aname 08:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right. There really isnt much to say about this movie right now, I've trimmed out the padding. If others continue to add unsourced or unnecessary content we can take a look at further options. Deiz talk 11:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for that. Hadn't thought much about the cast list actually, but it looks a lot better now. It seems a petty thing to argue about opinions like that, but if you let it go on one article then it'll get into everything. Thanks for the edit! Nouse4aname 11:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seoul Subway infobox

Take a look at this and let me know what you think. :) I've had to wing it a bit because I'm really not too sure what kind of information needs to be there, so any suggestions will be welcome. Regards. PC78 16:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! Give me a shout if you need any other help. Deiz talk 00:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got around to finishing this off. The finished version can be found at {{Infobox SMS station}} should you feel inclined to use it. Regards. PC78 16:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buu (disambiguation)

What does Bam's Unholy Union have to do with Buu? If nothing, then it should redirect back to Majin Buu. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Acronym. Deiz talk 08:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cardinal Kung Foundation

Hi Deiz. You A7 speedy deleted Cardinal Kung Foundation about ten months ago. I restored it and GRBerry and I have been working to provide references to the article and identify significance to the organization in the article. If you object to my restoring the article, please let me know. Thanks. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 01:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. If an article can be restored and verified, all good. Nice work. Deiz talk 01:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1994

It looks like this matter is getting a little out of hand! I wonder if maybe it should be made more clear in the guidlines that forums/message boards are not acceptable sources...there does not yet seem to be a concise list of acceptable/unacceptable sources, which may be a rather helpful tool for new editors (and even more experienced editors too). Nouse4aname 08:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxycodone

Deiz, could you restore the words 'potent and' to the beginning of th Oxycodone article? You protected it after someone badly cleaned up some vandalism. I think it's probably important to make it clear in the opening of the article that Oxy is a potent drug, otherwise it requires too much reading to see it's different from things like codiene.

On another issue, my hard drive crashed, and I hadn't updated my email address with WP when I changed ISPs a few months back. My username was User:Johnpf, but my password was lost along with a lot of other important files. You can check that I'm on the same IP as my edits fron the last 3 months. How can I establish my identity and get a new password? WierdJohn 16:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's only semi-protected so any accounts older than 4 days can edit it. I don't have a big problem with potent but it's probably unnecessary, as the facts in the article speak for themselves. As far as your original account goes, I really don't know. If you didn't leave any evidence of your identity attached to your account then you might not be able to get it back. Maybe try the Contact Wikipedia link on the left there. Deiz talk 00:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zeitgeist the Movie Deletion

I saw these two links listed in the deletion archives for the listing ...

The Globe and Mail (Toronto Newspaper) The Globe and Mail

TheStranger (Seattle Newspaper) The Stranger (newspaper)

I don't know if they're significant enough. I will try and scout around for more. It's tough with the sheer amount of online material to find real newsprint stuff. Amira227 13:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search of Google News found these in addition...

The Globe & Mail

V247

Amira227 13:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The G & M article is subscription, and doesn't mention Zeitgeist by name in what can be seen without splashing out $5. The Stranger article... there's a couple of paragraphs but it's probably not enough to nail as a significant reference in terms of establishing notability. When attemping to recreate a previously deleted article because new / more sources have come to light, it's important to be sure, very sure, you have the goods. V247 is a passing mention, counts for nothing in this game. Have you seen the Vancouver Sun piece? You're after a couple more of them. Deiz talk 13:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, fair enough. Maybe have to wait another month for more stuff to surface. I found some references to it being shown at festivals. There are 9/11 Truth filmshows going on publically. What with 9/11 just passing again there will be more stuff soon.

San Diego City Beat

+ one in the Berkeley Daily Planet, which won't load currently.

Amira227 13:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a good idea. Citybeat is just a listing. Again - significant coverage in major media sources. Deiz talk 14:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I paid a few canadian dollars and got a copy of the review. It is all about the movie. Don't know if I'm allowed to post it on Wikipedia, as I guess it's copyrighted. What do you think? I couldn't see anything from the Vancouver Sun btw. Amira227 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found the VS piece on Google or Google News a couple of weeks ago. Let me sleep on the G&M question. Deiz talk 14:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to the G&M article. Do you recall anything about the Vancouver Sun article? Amira227 16:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The movie's being shown next week in a London venue. It's listed on the websites of the Guardian and the Evening Standard. Not enough yet, I know. Amira227 08:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Itaewon.

I should have responded sooner - sorry 'bout that. I'll try to improve the page when I get a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardyandtiny (talk • contribs) 13:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scanger

Hello Mr.Deiz. While i appreciate what your saying I'm rather skeptical about having to say scangers wear tracksuits and support Celtic. I mean it's something we see on the street. I had restored the article to what it was like a while back and although it was unsourced it was accurate although it probably needed to be updated. It was also a very popular article and people would often say to look at the scanger article on wikipedia and it couldn't have been popular without being accurate. The H-Man2 19:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look I have to say this. Ik now about although policies but the problem about wikipedia now is that usrs have lost sense. Many users are now just blindy following these 'rules' that were written by someone just like me and you instead of having an actual discussion. The rules don't always fit. As I said this is about something we see on the street which doesn't need a newpaper artcile to back it up. Now have we have a proper discussion about the article isn't of just pointing out these 'rules'? The H-Man2 16:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i just looked at my last comment and it is hard to read. Next time I'll use microsoft word before hand! But the point is that to anyone who's from Dublin it is well known what a scanger is and looks like. It's not something that would be disputed. The H-Man2 18:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drummers

I reverted your edit as it deleted a link to a perfectly valid article to a drummer,ie ?uestlove. How you construe that as self-referential I have no idea. If the article is there on WP then it's a valid entry on the list, is it not? Also could you keep the patronising comments to a minimum, I am perfectly aware of the guidelines, I was also perfectly aware that you were an Administrator when I reverted your edit. I also understand that Admins have brain farts once in while just like the rest of us. --WebHamster 13:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject External links

Hey, Deiz! I'm Arknascar44, and I was wondering if you're still interested in helping out over at WP:WPEL. I've done some work on the project page and created a couple subpages and some templates, and am really interested in reviving it! Cheers, Arky ^¡Hablar! 17:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BAM

Please read the article on Bianca Montgomery and Maggie Stone before you make reversions you are not versed in. Thank you. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 10:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. It's a catchy acronym given to 2 lesbian characters on a TV show. Who both, incidentally, have separate articles. Anyway, thanks for the explanation, keep the dab if it makes you happy but save the patronising tones. 30,000 edits, never been reverted before? Not the greatest example of friendly, civil communication for a WMF communications coordinator to set either. GL with Wiki Atlanta. Deiz talk 11:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...I really didn't mean anything patronizing. You weren't versed in the revert, I asked you to do so. My thank you wasn't a thank you with a snap or a head tilt. I'm just kind of speechless. I mean, I can be a bitch, but I definitely wasn't one there. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 11:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dog Meat

I didn't initiate reversions and I am the who re-started the discussion instead of returning the favor of continued reversions. Thanks.melonbarmonster 21:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Williewoodbowls.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Williewoodbowls.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rette tast 19:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Davies

Having the currently active player as the "primary" article is a good example of recentism. When the current Simon Davies retires, and another, equally successful Simon Davies comes along, would he deserve the "primary" article, while the current one gets pushed back to "Simon Davies (footballer born 1979)"? As I see it, neither player is any more notable than the other; one played for Manchester United for a few years, while another has trollopped around mid-table clubs for much of his career, so it is equally possible that anyone searching for "Simon Davies (footballer)" could be searching for either one of those two.

I hope that has clarified my reasoning for moving the article. - PeeJay 11:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alexei Sayle image

Put the image into Alexei Sayle's Stuff article. Does this qualify as fair use? --Lec CRP1 05:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aptronyms

Hey Deiz, I responded to your entry on my talk page [1] Thanks Keeper76 15:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your patient explanations on my talk page. Enjoyed your userpage, BTW. I think I may try the random 10 someday... Keeper76 19:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cky videography

hi, the videography will be a different article, but the link will be on the cky page.

check red hot chili peppers.

ill create the page and then let you have a look before adding.

--Ry90 01:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Jackass, userspace

Now, wait just a minute!!!

First, I fixed it my way so that no one has to change their screen/view size to see it fully.
Second, I thought it could be useful for some users.
Third, before you even think about deleting these pages, I'm sure we could reason around this.
Fourth, I work hard to find the information, even though the pages are not yet entirely complete.
Fifth, this is the place for free information, why not give the public everything they want to know!

WIKIVUE Detroit (talk) SAT SEP 29 2007 1:49 AM EDT

You realize what you did made it into one narrow column about an inch wide but about a page and a half long? Also, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dumping ground for information. Be advised Deiz is an administrator with a great working knowledge of wikipedia policy so it would be beneficial to consider his advice. — Ocatecir ^T 11:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dog meat

regarding the dog meat section in the Korean cuisine article. Firstly I saw your user page, and saw 'user lives in South Korea' and assumed you were just another user with a pro-Korea POV, but then I saw the admin tag, and assumed that someone with POV issues is unlikely to become/remain an admin - so maybe you are the guy to ask about this.

I realise the dog meat issue can be controversial, some wish to condemn people who eat dog, some want to deny it, some want to promote it - whatever, if I had any issues that I wanted to get across I would be contributing to the dog meat article, editing the criticism section.

My point (and yes it is small) is that the word "tried" has certain implications, to me it implies a single tasting, or maybe two tastings to confirm to the taster, if it is agreeable with their palette or not. Whilst this may be exactly what happened for some of the people on the stated %, that % also includes many people who eat it on a regular basis - the word "tried" seems very wrong for those people. For example, I would not say "I have tried computer games" because I did not merely test my like/dislike of gaming, I gamed on numerous occasions - for me "I have played or I play" would be more accurate.

Also use of the word "sometimes" is redundant - no one in the world imagines that anyone is eating dog meat 24/7 - unless there is some implication that something is done "always" then the word sometimes is redundant, not only redundant, but in this case it seems POV to me, if someone wants to comment on how often it is eaten, then state "on average Koreans eat dog meat X times a year" and back it up with verifiable evidence.

I wont comment on what drew me to this article, neither will I comment on my personal opinions regarding dog meat, but what I will say is that while editing this article, I do not display any POV, and merely push for factually correct comments, without any POV stated or implied.

Give me opinions, I realise it's a minor issue, relating to two words, so if you can't be bothered, I really would understand. thanks.Sennen goroshi 07:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added how often it is eaten, by those who eat it - this should remove any confusion regarding if the majority of people "try" it, or "eat" it - I always think its better to state verified facts, than to use words which might imply something. Facts are better than implications.Sennen goroshi 08:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My issue was not with your edit per se, it was with yet another edit scuffle.. I went back to the last version before the disagreement sparked off. I appreciate your rationale, and hopefully we can sort stuff like this on the talkpage.. facts are always better than opinions, and clear language better than vague / subjective.

I do live in Korea, but can say with a clear conscience that I have no POV on Korean issues either way - I don't have or pretend to have any great understanding of Korean affairs beyond the passing interests that one might expect to have while living in a country. I've been an admin for 16 months, at the time I ran for adminship I was living in Portugal, and had no POV issues there either. I've been involved in admin stuff on an extremely diverse range of topics, and treat articles more closely related to my likes and circumstances as I do those I have no interest in or knowledge of whatsoever.

I've made my feelings clear on the article talk page - I hope admin intervention will be unnecessary, but if edit warring, 3RR violation or incivility requires action, action can and will be taken. Cheers, Deiz talk 12:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't revert edits on the grounds that they are unsourced, when the version you are reverting to is equally unsourced. Bsharvy 11:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You added unsourced information, I removed it to a previous version where that line has proved stable and doesn't tug the heartstrings about eating pets. Maybe worry more about sourcing your edits in future. Deiz talk 11:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone has a POV. Linkboyz 13:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:ThongSala1.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:ThongSala1.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rette tast 12:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question.

Hi, Deiz, I have a question about personal abuses including racial and personal attacks done by a wiki user. I think Sennen goroshi is going too far to attack his opponents without common sense. The user mentioned "comfort women" as "chon prostitutes" and insists the slur against Korean,"chon" is an acceptable term. Moreover, Sennen goroshi compares Ledtim's response to him/her with a rapist's crime. You can see the evidence here, Ledtim's talk page . Of course I've got personal attack regarding English by Sennen goroshi. You can see it in my talk page and his/her page. Ah, Sennen goroshi previously erased his talk pages completely, so you can see just my angry responses toward him/her now, so see also this his/hers]. I want to report the bad behaviors to Wiki administration, so let me know where I have to report the matter. Thank.--Appletrees 13:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble is, you're both guilty of something - it would be very difficult to apply any action to one and not the other. I suggest you two leave each other alone - if you have editing disputes, try a request for comment rather than personal attacks. Given my involvement in editing on Korean topics, it's not really appropriate for me to make blocks, so if there is a specific incidence of a racist personal attack or other truly unacceptable behaiour, you should post on WP:ANI with specific WP:DIFFs. Cheers, Deiz talk 05:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please write an accurate article

Neo Gomanism Manifesto Special - On War - Please quote the part of Anti-Chinese sentiment in Japan. This book doesn't criticize China though there is a doubt of the history revisionism though I read this book. --KoreanShoriSenyou 15:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]