User talk:Ioeth

This is Ioeth'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: 7 days

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Ioeth}} on your talk.

Feedback on Friendly

Hi Loeth, I thought I'd let you know that I really enjoy using Friendly. Is there any way I can add additional article templates to the palette? Toddst1 18:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you like it! If you have a template(s) that you have in mind, you can suggest them on the Friendly project talk page. The project is very young, so suggestions for additional templates or features are greatly encouraged. I do have in mind a customization for the tagging feature that would let users specify their own tags, but I haven't gotten a chance to implement it yet. Thanks for the positive feedback. (btw, the first letter of my username is "i", not "l"...no worries, everybody seems to see an "l") Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I bet you 5 fake dollars that someone objects to your RFA based on your username being confusing. -- Merope 19:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, everyone thinks my name is Todd. I'll check out the talk page. Toddst1 20:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers!

Cheers for that, and good luck with the RfA! PhilB ~ ^T/_C 19:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Always good to hear from another happy Friendly user. Keep up the good work! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Littlejohn

I take issue with you accusing me of "adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles, as you did at Richard Littlejohn." All I did was to write the plain and simple truth, which is that Littlejohn is a fascist. This is only controversial among himself, as he refuses to admit the truth.I would hate to see Wikipedia become a place for people to place autobiographies.Themanganator 20:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, adding this information with an edit summary of "minor punctuation alterations" is grounds for reverting the article and issuing you a warning. If you want to add information like that to an article, you have to cite multiple reliable independent sources for verifiability and use an appropriate edit summary. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 20:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pushplay productions entry

Kind of new here. Thanks for the feedback. Reading guidelines and working to improve the page so it conforms to Wikipedia policy.Wilbydaniels 20:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St. Stephen's Hull

I have reverted this back to remove all of the additional material on directions etc that have been added this evening and made the entry completely unencyclopedic. The reversion removed the PROD - do you still think that the PROD is required in the reverted state? Keith D 21:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure anymore. The article is much better after the revert, but it's still on the line between valid and spam, to me. AFD may be more appropriate. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JB Eckl > J. B. Eckl

I reverted JB Eckl to a REDIRECT page. If you want to put a SD tag in J. B. Eckl, that is fine. ~ WikiDon 22:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, no need to delete a speedy to an article that still exists. I did notify User:Henrik about the author's actions, though. I should have switched it back to a redirect too, but I must have just overlooked it in the page history. Thanks for letting me know! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 22:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was probably created by J. B. and/or his friends or associates, it is most likely "self-serving" and possibly Conflict-of-Interest, POV, etc. So, at the least it needs a review, and maybe additional THIRD-PARTY and notable sources. ~ WikiDon 22:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the guy looks like he could meet notability, so I don't think I'm gonna prod or afd it under that. If no sources are added in a few days, I might submit it for being unreferenced, though. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 15:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My own religion

Dude i made that page because i wanted to express my religion to others. call me insane but i wrote what i truly think.Are you saying i cant have freedom of religion on wiki and that wiki is a bunch of oppressive tyrants that won't let their kingdom have what they want? please write me back. Dxism (talk · contribs) 22:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user appears to have mistaken Wikipedia for the United States government. It's an easy mistake to make, because Jimbo Wales does bear an uncanny resemblance to George W. Bush. Dxism, you don't have any legal right to create articles on someone else's private web page. Just like my freedom of religion doesn't give me the right to sacrifice goats in your bathtub. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 03:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updated My Information

Hi There, I had added more information on my subject from reliable sources. If you have any questions, please let me know. (Sheepshaedbayman) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheepshaedbayman (talk • contribs) 19:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Talk:Inferno Media

Did you mean "not internationally famous"? Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I did! It's been like that all along, really... Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 22:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article - Lindsay Grace

I suspect that this is self bio. One site stated him as student. Other references do not give negligible info. Someone just added references from anonymous IP. This article is clearly disputed. 19 07:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact there are two articles Lindsay Grace and Lindsay grace. After my edit to Lindsay grace, it was redirected to Lindsay Grace by other user. But anyway this article is disputed. 19 07:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 14:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SubAntarctic Foundation for Ecosystems Research‎

Loeth, I have added some sources for verification- problem being whilst the work of the organisation is vry important they are very small- but I hope this makes them verifiale Mark7211 10:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Elizabeth Lowell- Only Love (2003)

A tag has been placed on Elizabeth Lowell- Only Love (2003) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Treygdor 20:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a redirect page created when I did a page move. It should be speedied under R3, not A1. I went ahead and changed the db tag on the page. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of Evisum

The Evisum Search Engine has been online since 1999. Could you please explain to me why you seek to delete its entry into wikipedia? According to Google there are 77,300 Results for Evisum. Please advise.

pputter November 13, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pputter (talk • contribs) 19:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Estebo

How is that considered a personal attack? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonja+Roman (talk • contribs) 21:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NPA and it should be abundantly clear. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of vandalism

You are welcome. I find myself fighting a LOT more vandalism lately, as well as deleting cruft. Is it just me? Bearian 14:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish. Every time I turn on TheJosh's New Page Patrol script or Lupin's Anti-Vandal tools it's just a continuous fire hose of crap. I swear it's going to wear out my mouse one of these days! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 14:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of Sik

When you placed a speedy deletion tag on Sik, you tagged it as a Biography, when it was clearly not a biography, solely nonsense. In the future, read the whole content of the article before tagging it.

Thanks, Redmarkviolinist ^{(talk) 21:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)}[reply]

In the context of the article (below):

sik is a word for nang and nang is a word for reece which literaly means your the best at everything.

I interpreted the word "reece" as the name "Reece", which is why I tagged it as bio. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit-conflict but I'm posting it anyway) {db-bio} covers "person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content," not just biographies. The article, if I read it correctly, is about a person named "Reece," pretending to be about a word. I'm okay with {db-bio}, though I probably would have gone for {db-nonsense} as well. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I try to use {{db-nonsense}} as little as possible (when there are other options) because a number of folks seem to have a different definition of what, exactly, "patent nonsense" is. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I respect that completely (I avoid {db-ad} for the same reasons). I think your use of {db-bio} is acceptable in this case, and I would have deleted it if I'd come upon it at the CSD queue. Except that someone turned it into a redirect to Sikh, which I guess works, too. Not sure why they didn't choose Sick. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I guess it could go either way? Thanks. Redmarkviolinist 16:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Congratulations you are now an administrator! Secretlondon 23:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Don't delete the main page! -- Merope 23:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Ioeth! Your RfA was successful. You are now an administrator on the English Wikipedia. I hope you have just as happy a time editing in the future as you did before your RfA. You may want to look at the admin guide to read up on any tools you are unfamiliar with.

--Angel David 02:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks everyone! I'll try to keep my collateral damage to a minimum! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 15:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Standhands (talk · contribs)

Any chance you're willing to make this block indef? He sounds like a sleeper to me. -- lucasbfr ^talk 15:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think an indef is necessary now? I'd definitely be willing to up it to at least a week since the user re-did his vandalism as I was blocking him, though. What do you think? Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 15:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my personal opinion is that since this account was registered in June, never edited and only woke up to do a vandal move, its purpose was only do be able to perform autoconfirmed actions. That's why I would have indef blocked. I might be wrong though (but arguably, I'm not the nicest admin when it comes to blocks, I usually do 31 hours (which is 1 whole day + some time to make sure that the kid will no longer be in the school library when it expires) for a first offense, but I indef if the vandalism is something that was thought beforehand (ie vandalizing userpages, moving pages around, ...). And congratz on your RfA ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 15:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Excellent argument, I think I agree. I'm gonna go redo the block now. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 16:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete : Joshua Hempstead

We are new to this, but we do have a copyright to Hempstead's Diary and are only trying to share what we think is valuable public information (250 years old!) How can we get this out there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by newlondonhistorypeople (talk • contribs) 16:45, 15 November 2007