User talk:Discospinster

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

Archives

1. 02 Jun 2005 - 20 Jun 2006

2. 02 Jul 2006 - 01 Oct 2006

3. 03 Oct 2006 - 19 Dec 2006

4. 20 Dec 2006 - 10 Apr 2007

5. 17 Apr 2006 - 29 May 2007

6. 01 Jun 2007 - 17 Sep 2007

7. 05 Oct 2007 - 25 Dec 2007

There are loads of examples of bands who don't meet every requirement that have full articles on Wikipedia. Does the band's internet popularity have to do with it's following on the streets? This is an article I feel should stay on. Is there anything that can be done to keep it on?

Takenforaride77 (talk) 02:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response:

I would say that they singlehandedly rebirthed the punk scene in the Lehigh Valley, but really things like that don't get listed on what is considered to be a verifiable source, besides like kids commenting about it or whatever on message boards (obviously not what you would consider verifiable). I guess they're too underground for even the internet haha. But they are valid, and there was never an emphasis on recording it seemed, so it's gonna take some time to prove that, and according to those rules, it seems they will never be fit for Wikipedia, because their music provides intentions of going against big things, such as major labels or being nominated for music awards etc, which is what that list is comprised of. And there's nothing to verify representation for a scene...Any thoughts?

Takenforaride77 (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response:

Haha, it's different tho. It's something the people can change, which IS what they seem to stand for. It doesn't matter. I thought that if people wanted to learn about them, they could do so, but I guess not. We'll see what happens. Thanks for your time and wit, haha.

Takenforaride77 (talk) 03:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fettes College

Hello, I am a current pupil at the school i believe i have the right to edit the page more than you!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.31.126 (talk) 01:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC) No never mind, I'm way too stupid and retarded to know this or anything else. You, of course, have earned the privelege far more than I have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.167.114 (talk) 04:20, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

I have granted you administrative rollback privileges, as I trust you to make good use of them in your patrolling. Yup, admins can grant rollback now. Use the tool wisely. :) Wizardman 23:26, 9 January 2008

Thanks

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You've probably received more than your fair share of these, but I wanted to thank you for the quick reverts on my user page. Cheers, Caknuck (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That 90's Show

Please do not remove {{fact}} tags as you did to this episode, without adding a reliable source. It maybe obvious to you, but not to others, such as myself. I have no idea what that painting is. Ctjf83^talk 03:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please, with your 50,000+ edits you should know that a picture on another article is hardly a reliable reference. Ctjf83^talk 03:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, it needs a source that explicably states the connection. We have decided that it is probably true so we left it, but it still needs a reliable source.--The Dominator (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hollywood North

Greetings & salutations. There is an article here on wikipedia Hollywood North in which there seems to be a disagreement with me and another person who appears to me has taken ownership of that article. I added a link there in the "See also" section of List of films shot in Hamilton, Ontario and the person in question kept removing. At first no reason was given for the removal of the link I added to it by the party in question. Please have a look at the discussion we had there regarding the issue and give me your opinion it please. The link to that discussion page is over here: Talk:Hollywood North Thanks. Greatly appreciated. Have a good day. Nhl4hamilton (talk) 11:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the two reverts on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship?

You seem to be a great user ready for the mop, so would you like me to nominate you to be an administrator? NHRHS 2010 01:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disco Spinster

discospinster,

i have a few things to clarify and discuss with you. firstly an apology. in my first adress, i did not mean to infer that as a past memebr of the college community, i have any more right to decide what goes on this page. However, as a general editior, i have just as much right as you to edit this page. you mentioned consensus. my self and others have made simmilar additions to the page regarding the list. yet, you and others are continualy threatening with action

you spoke of guidelines by consensus. not to rehash old quarrlels, however on WP:SCH#WNTI the last line of the intro sates Note that these are only recommendations, and editors are not obliged to follow them. they are recomoendations. not laws. hence lists of students CAN BE INCLUDED.

i do not intend on engaging in an edit war. if it seems so that i am, than both yourself and loopla should also be banned, because loopla (and with ure supoort recently) initiated the edits. i have maintained this site for nearly 6 months now. it has become what it is on the most due to my input. including the list of cptns. it was loopla who choose to undo my reviosin, to which i redid it. if i am guilty, then so are the both of you. and before you start throwing any more right back at me, i am not suggesting that i own the page, merely that i was here first, and the both of you began this war

Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. that was a line you wrote on my talk page. i feel that you (and loopla) dont want this discussed. you both want your way, and i am being told to deal with it. conversations regarding this originated as discussion, however, recenty, i have been threatened with blocking. my views are not being heard. again, i have seen all the medals and praise on your page, but as you said, noone has any more right on this site than any other.

i wish to work towards a resolution, at the same time, i am not intending on backing down. i have continusiously justifies the inclusion of the lists anf have refuted any fight that has been put foward. not one wiki law has been put foward to me that overtly oposes my additions.

Zebra91 (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Hi Discospinster, I noticed that you reverted one of the edits by Zebra91 on the Patrician Brothers' College, Fairfield. Unfortunately this user has continued to revert the removal of inappropriate info by several users from this article, and as I can see from the message above he does not plan on listening to the opinions of others. Its all a bit out of hand now and im not really sure what to do about it without breaking the WP:3RR (which I don't plan on doing). What should be done to resolve this? I appreciate your time! Cheers. Loopla (talk) 05:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I can't believe such a rediculous issue has gone on this long. I've given up trying to discuss it because I get accused of being a 'bully' and so it goes nowhere, and im reluctant to revert because I don't want to engage in a 'war'. Hopefully now that there have been a couple more opinions it will stop. Thanks for keeping an eye on it! Cheers. Loopla (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hey, ive made a suggestion on the talk page of Partician Brothers as to a way forward, to help satisfy both sides. Please have a look and just write what you think. Twenty Years 08:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you for the revert on my user page. It is greatly appreciated. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 04:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needing third opinion

Can you help us (with your "third opinion") into a definition with coordination problem base (origined from here)? --Krauss (talk) 13:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

request

I am requesting to get my user page deleted. I am no longer interested in using wikipedia. I need your assistance with this matter. Nhl4hamilton | Chit-Chat 14:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thanks Lisa. Nhl4hamilton | Chit-Chat 04:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EVHS

Hi,

I saw you've been editing the EVHS article. I wanted to bring a few things to your attention. The user evhs00 has basically been copying the Los Alamos High School article. (see for yourself). Problem is that he's copied a great deal of stuff that does not apply to EVHS. For instance he makes a serious of false, baseless and dubious claims:

EVHS was one of Newsweek's 2007 "1,000 Best High Schools in America" (#598). This was baselessly copied from the LAHS article and is just false when applied to EVHS:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/39380/?sort=Rank&count=1351&Search=&start=500&limit=100&year=2007&

EVHS is "mostly middle class". A dubious claim considering espanola is one of the poorer cities in one of the poorest states and has 21% of its population living beneath the poverty level:

http://www.city-data.com/city/Espanola-New-Mexico.html

Many other claims are suspect, uncited, and bear a clear similarity to claims on the LAHS article.

Additionally,

The image of the sundevil mascot was taken from the Arizona State University article and is not fair use.

The image of the basketball team was taken from the EVHS Athletics website and is not fair use.

Basically there's no citations anywhere and the author's methodology is clearly one of blatant copying. I really want to avoid an edit-war between rival high school articles so I'm not going to touch the EVHS article. I'm actually really glad that somebody is working on the EVHS page. But the author needs to learn how to work within the rules.

--Ryan Utt (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning vandals

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Kwame Brown: You may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Enigma ^msg! 03:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

America's Next Top Model

Just so you know, I have protected the page for two weeks. Thanks for the report and happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 01:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I edit my own User page?

So you're Ukrainian and Italian too eh?

Pryvit/Ciao!

Anyway, it's my page, do you have to revert it?

I get it, I've been warned, yeeeaaah.

70.74.172.232 (talk) 01:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Syesha Mercado's page

Under wikipedia's notability for musicians page syesha meets requirement 9 to have a page.....

So what was your reasoning to delete the page?