User talk:Hersfold

Welcome to my Talk Page!

Thank you for coming by, however please note that I have largely retired from Wikipedia. Messages left here will not receive a prompt response, if ever. Please also note that I no longer hold any access rights; if you are contacting me in relation to a block, deletion, or any other administrative action I have taken, I am unable to assist you. Please contact another administrator for help.

If you do have an urgent need to contact me specifically, such as for one of my bots, please send me an email via Special:Emailuser/Hersfold.

Archives

This page will be archived every month. If you can't find what you're looking for, check the most recent archive.

User:Hersfold/Talk Header - v • e

Magpul Industries question/comment

Hello,

I noted that you deleted Magpul's page on the account of "blatant avertising" and would like to contend this. I am not in am way related to Magpul, but threw up that page hoping that contributors would bring it up to Wikipedia's standards.

Magpul as a company is quite significant, in that this small company has been able to design a small arms platform which rivals the multi generational and multi million dollar efforts by the US Gov. and contractors. If there was too much "advertising" in the page, couldn't the excess be trimmed? I will work to de-avertise the page if you could restore it...

Regards - Gfreeman556 (talk) 20:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC) gfreeman556.[reply]

BTW: I'm a wiki noob!

Hello, sorry it's taken so long to get back. I've been very busy the last several days and was forced to take a wikibreak in order to get things done. As for the article, it read very much like a sales catalogue, and had very few reliable sources, including several that were in violation of our external links policy. You may want to look through WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV for more information; the use of "peacock" terms was one problem specifically note by another editors, an evaluation which I agree with. To quote some instances: "...has demonstrated amazing resiliency and reliability." "Magpul's rifle stocks consistently have improved upon the ergonomics and design of..." "the Magpul Masada began as an evolutionary upgrade". As for improvements, there haven't been any substantial improvements to the article since May. You personally don't appear to be very active either. If you feel as though you understand the above policies, I can restore the article and move it to your userspace for work, but I need to be sure you're going to work on it so it doesn't just get deleted again. Please let me know what you want to do. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AAU reminder notice

A friendly reminder from the Adopt-a-User project =)
	Hey there Hersfold! This is a friendly reminder to update your status at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters whenever it is appropriate in order to provide new users with the most up-to-date information on available adopters. Also please note that we will be removing adopters who have not edited in 60 days. If you become active again (and we hope you do!) please feel free to re-add yourself. Cheers!

Notice delivery by xenobot 14:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IRC?

I keep hearing about discussions taking place in IRC. While I vaguely know what IRC is (which is to say, I read the article on it before coming here), I was curious as to where the wiki specific chats are taking place. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In a bunch of different channels, all on freenode. WP:IRC has a list of all of them. Before you join, be aware that IRC discussions do not constitute a consensus - discussions relating to content issues should generally take place on-wiki. Also, with a few channel-specific exceptions, there is no public logging of conversations, however you are welcome to keep records for your on personal reference. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Input requested

Hi. Last month, you'd declined an unblock request of G2bambino (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). He is now the subject of a community discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Specific_sanctions_proposals. I'd like to request for your input at that discussion. Thank you, Ncmvocalist (talk) 04:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Senate elections

Ok, November 2007 was too early, sure. But the 2008 election is almost over, and things are gearing up for 2010. Will we need to wait until someone files with the FEC? And I'm annoyed, but not angry. Let's talk about what the qualifications would be for an article, as these elections are now just over 2 years away and they're going to be pretty important. Chadlupkes (talk) 04:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The election is still two years away, and we haven't even had this year's yet. You're not going to have any references for the article, most likely until those papers are filed, yes. Until that time, everything is going to be pure speculation, which is not what Wikipedia is for. You need reliable sources to verify anything you add, which is what you were told in the last AfD. Guessing what is going to happen is a violation of WP:CRYSTAL, and would be entirely original research. I'd suggest you look over those policies, as they're probably going to answer your questions for you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template bug

Hi Hersfold, I was wondering if you knew how to fix a bug in this template I made. This code: {{Pages|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23|24|25|26|27|28|29|30|31|32|33|34|35|36|37|38|39|40|41|42|43|44|45|46|47|48|49|50}} produces this (without the collapsible table):

Test

	Name	Size
1	1	37.36
2	2	36.14
3	3	34.24
4	4	90.01
5	5	106.39
6	6	61.26
7	7	52.7
8	8	76.57
9	9	45.2
10	10	26.32
11	11	3.97
12	12	2.62
13	13	5.73
14	14	1.71
15	15	2.28
16	16	2.93
17	17	7.05
18	18	2.14
19	19	1.83
20	20	3.1
21	21	3.31
22	22	1.72
23	23	3.24
24	24	2.7
25	25	1.76
26	26	0.91
27	27	1.36
28	28	1.07
29	29	0.72
30	30	1.71
31	31	1.34
32	32	1.82
33	33	1.84
34	34	0.78
35	35	0.64
36	36	0.67
37	37	0.81
38	38	0.58
39	39	0.49
40	40	1.48
41	41	1.07
42	42	1.85
43	43	0.43
44	44	0.93
45	45	1.47
46	46	0.31
47	47	0.95
48	48	0.56
49	49	0.29
50	50	1.25
51	51	0.49
52	52	0.49
53	53	0.56
54	54	0.68
55	55	1.5
56	56	0.57
57	57	0.76
58	58	0.32
59	59	0.38
60	60	0.51
	Total kB:	643.86

Note the Expression error: Unexpected < operator and Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "{" . Do you know why this is happening? Thanks again for your help, αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 12:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep looking at it when I get the chance. I'm not seeing it immediately. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I found the problem, and know how to fix it, but you're not going to like it much. I tried to stick the template into my sandbox, and then subst: the code to see what was going on, and instead of getting fewer error messages, I got a lot more - see. Fortunately, it tells me what went wrong. You've written a template that's so big, it hits the template limit. Template limits are one of the cases where WP:PERFORMANCE can be seen in action. Making a massive page, or one with a lot of templates, is a potential way to break the wiki, but the developers have thought of it and set up these limits to prevent it from doing just that. Unfortunately, in the process, they occasionally break templates which can cause pages to explode as you've seen. Each page is limited to about 2 MB of content. When a template is transcluded, it doesn't take up a lot of space itself, and only shows a few bytes' difference in the page history. However, when the page is displayed, that template is expanded into what it actually is. So, the edit box won't have a lot of stuff in it, but the page itself can be huge. To prevent them from getting too huge, any template that will put the page over the set limits will not be expanded in this manner. Your template apparently does that around parameter 38, and so is regrettably useless beyond that point. On very large pages, it's very likely the problem would occur sooner.

I did a little work earlier trying to make the template more efficient, and will do so again in a moment, but we can only do so much, unfortunately. It'll probably have to be cut down to a maximum of 30 parameters to be of any practical use. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow thanks. It seems that the template could be much smaller with some kind of loop. Are there any functions that create a for loop, or something similar? αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 23:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope; since the page is only loaded once, it's not possible to do any sort of iterative or recursive function on the page without javascript, which can't be embedded into a page unless the devs set it up to be part of the wiki software, like the sortable tables. I've actually tried to set up a recursive template, but the devs have caught onto that as well and set the software up to detect and stop template loops. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Temperance Fountain

Hey, I hear you are in DC, so I wanted to ask a favor. When you have some time, would you mind validating some coordinates for DC landmark for me? According to sources Temperance Fountain is at the corner of 7th & Penn. NW, across from the Hancock statue, so I kind of guessed at coordinates based on Google Earth -- unfortunately the satellite imagery for that intersection isn't very clear (I put it at the southwestern corner). Would you happen to know if this is right? Thanks... howcheng {chat} 21:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I'm actually up in Baltimore, so while I am in the general area, I'm not really able to run by and take a look in person. I did fire up Google Earth, though, and poked around there. I'm not entirely certain that the given location is in fact correct; from what I can tell, there are a couple monuments there, and several pictures on Panoramio of each, but absolutely nothing of the Temperance Fountain. I find it hard to believe someone wouldn't have taken a picture of it, so I'm worried we're in the wrong place. As I said, though, I can't be much more certain that you are. Sorry, howcheng! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfC/U

There is currently an open Request for Comment on User Conduct here, regarding G2bambino. As someone with past interactions with him, you are invited to comment. — [ roux ] [x] 15:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Have A Question

Hello. I was wondering if you could tell me where the daily question archives are, because I sometimes have a few questions to ask the administrators of Wikipedia with multiple replies. So, if you could show me the page with the questions asked each day, that would be appreciated. Thank you! BlueCaper (talk) 00:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. We have questions asked on many different pages every day. Most will have a small box to the right side of the page that lists the archives for that page. If you can tell me which page in particular you're asking about, I can try to help you out more. Wikipedia:Questions might help you find the page you want. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hersfold! It turns out that I found what I needed, and it was similar to your suggestions! It was Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives that I needed. So, thanks! BlueCaper (talk) 20:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD

Hey Hersfold, when approving a MOTD, I know that you add the motto to a new un-used date, but where you do put the discussion? iMatthew (talk) 11:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can move it to the top of Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Decisions, where after a couple days someone will stick it in the appropriate archive. Thanks, iMatthew! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CEB

Hello Hersfold: I am interested in creating a department on Wikipedia titled "Code Enforcement Bureau (CEB)". it will be a department of established users who specialize in handing out citations, i.e. they will be recent changes patrollers. Although it may not be liked, the goal of the CEB is to alert users that what they did/edited was wrong, so to save the user much emotional pain when it is deleted. What is your opinion? --Archeopteryx (talk) 19:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds a lot like the WP:CVU, an already existing project that patrols recent changes, issues templated warnings, and reports repeat vandals to WP:AIV once they've vandalized past a level four warning. I'd recommend you take a look at that, as it sounds like your plan would be a bit redundant to what they're already doing. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:06, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About Cheat Pages

If you remember, you blocked me for 48 hours for continuously posting video games' cheat pages. I was just wondering: could I do that on Commons or not? BlueCaper talk 23:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]

No, certainly not. Commons is intended as a repository of freely licensed images and files. They're not going to want that any more than we do, and in fact, none of the Wikimedia Foundation's projects would. As I think I've already told you, stuff like that needs to be on your own site, not here. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. I was not going to create them anytime soon, anyways. I just wanted to know so I could clarify that for others who ask that same question. Thank you for informing me, Hersfold. You know, that should be one of the specific examples on the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is Not page. -BlueCaper talk 00:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you and request,
Hey, thanks for the category tree thing, but besides that, I've recently been semi-involved with another editor, who has recently been blocked indef for disruption. Would it be possible of you to look in on his talk page? I finally lost my patience at the bottom, but his behavior.. I can't quite put my finger on it(I might already have), but something seems off, hopefully you'll see what I mean.
Wallamoose (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Here you go.— Dæ dαlus^Contribs /_Improve 03:50, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not entirely. I'm getting that you seem to be hinting this is someone who's been blocked before, but I don't have a clue who that would be. As for Gwen's actions, I fully support them, as that guy was being about as assholish (/me clicks "add to dictionary") as you can possibly be. I doubt a CU would be willing to look into it either, as without some sort of suspicion on who we're looking for, they'd just say Checkuser is not for fishing. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know CU isn't for fishing, I wasn't requesting it, but in a way you did answer my request. You gave a name to his behavior, you named it's tone. That's all I was really asking for, because I couldn't quite pin it down. Thank you.— Dæ dαlus^Contribs /_Improve 20:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you're welcome. Still not quite sure what I did, but I'm glad I helped. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Creating an Award Template
Hello. I have heard that you have created a kind of Barnstar. Do you know how to create a template for a non-Barnstar award? I am considering making Wikipedia Administrator Awards specifically meant for administrators to receive. -BlueCaper (talk) 02:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]
You can use the same templates, or there are a few others you can use. To make your custom one, follow these steps:
Go to the page you want to create the template at, say, Template:AdminAward

Choose one of the templates listed below, and fill in the fields that are in ALL CAPS. Leave any {{{1}}} things alone.

Code Appearance

{{subst:award|image=IMAGE NAME.EXT|text={{{1}}}}}
Example

{{subst:award2|image=IMAGE NAME.EXT|text={{{1}}}|topic=AWARD NAME}}

Awesomeness Award

Example

Note: This is really the standard barnstar template, it just may display funny in this table.

3. List it on the appropriate page of WP:AWARD, probably Wikipedia:Other awards.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask someone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards - they'll know more about this than I do. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here it is...for you!

Wikipedia Administrators Award

This Wikipedia Administrator Award is given to User:Hersfold, for his dedication and hard work. Thus, he is honored with this medallion as a token of appreciation of his faithful service to Wikipedia. Given by BlueCaper (talk) 10:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]
Does it look nice? The Omega symbol represents a head, like "head" (admin) of Wikipedia. I would have added color padding in the background if I knew how. BlueCaper (talk) 10:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]
I later created another WAA, the Constructive Arbitrary Appreciation WAA, that has bricks for constructivity as a result of actions, and a gavel for the law and law enforcement. Here is the one I originally intended to give you:

Constructive Arbitrary Appreciation Wikipedia Administrators Award

This Wikipedia Administrator Award is given to User:Hersfold, for rightfully penalizing a Wikipedian who is now working to make sure that he or she does not do wrong anymore to Wikipedia. Thus, he is honored with this emblem as a token of appreciation of his enforcement of Wikipedia rules to protect Wikipedia. Given by BlueCaper (talk) 11:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]
Good ideas, but just keep in mind administrators aren't cops. We don't penalize users; any action we take is directed to prevent disruption to the project. We may at times enforce rulings of the Arbitration Committee, but that's the only time we're taking any sort of penalizing action here. As for the images, you've got a good concept going, but you might want to head over to the Graphics Lab, as they may be able to clean up the images a bit and make them really shiny. ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are a bit rough. I did them simply with the Paint program that is on any Windows computer. I did contend with myself about whether or not deletions and blockings are punishment. I do not consider them technically penalizing, but they do deliver blows to the innocent creator of something deleted. I admit that in the past, I was newer to Wikipedia and tried to make an "Asian Capitals" page. What I didn't know was that I was basically requesting a merge of articles. It was deleted (twice), and I did complain. So, to be able to give out an award like this is very reconciling, although I should rethink the title of the CAAWAA. I have 5 others to make: two for 100 & 1,000 articles started, a "Hero WAA" for being a good role-model for Wikipedians, a newborn with a "Ω and W" head congratulating inauguration of administratorship, and a "Liberty WAA" for not abusing power.
You may also want to review existing awards - a lot of these are already in existence, or can easily be done with another existing award. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I said something to the Graphics Lab about the regular WAA. As for CAAWAA, I wish to rename it. I was going to ask what the Commons equivalent of moving a picture's page is, but I have decided that since the administration is not a form of penalization, it would be wrong to award them a picture with a gavel and bricks. So I will replace it with a new picture and make the title "Annihilation of Innocent Maiming (AIM) WAA." I will add the award on this talk page when I get around to creating the award, and I will put the {{done}} template before it. Oh, and please tell me whether or not it is possible to move Wikimedia Commons media. Yours truly, BlueCaper (talk) 19:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC) P.S.: Do you like my Wikipedia signature?[reply]
It's a bit complicated, but you'd be better off asking someone on Commons how that works. Basically you'll have to re-upload under a new name, and have someone delete the old one. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am able to edit now
Yeah, I just logged in and I am able to edit now. I don't know the IP I used yesterday, they are assigned so randomly. Anyway, I've mailed the admin who blocked. Can I start editing now or would it be wiser to wait for a reply and clarification from the admin before starting to edit. I also wish to apply for an IP-block-exempt. This is the second time that I had been blocked for the same reason. I don't know if I had been hard-blocked the first time around (that was in March 2007) but the blocking admin unblocked me on receiving my mail and I started after I was unblocked.-Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 03:06, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Without knowing your IP address, or what blocks are affecting you, I'd rather not grant the exemption yet. You are welcome to continue editing, of course, but should this happen again, please use the {{unblock-ip}} code provided for you in your block message instead of {{unblock}}. This allows us to determine what block is affecting you, and therefore help you out easier. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had been blocked as an "Open proxy". The IP range used by BSNL is 59.*.*.*. Thanks, anyway-Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 04:40, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't help a whole lot - the software only allows us to block ranges up to 59.<defined number>.*.*. The open proxy bit concerns me, however - are you using some form of anonymizing proxy to edit from? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I don't. As I said earlier, I use a BSNL connection. BSNL assigns the IPs dynamically. I don't know about the technicalities which BSNL uses. But no, I don't use any anonymizing proxies.-Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 04:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Symbol_comment_vote_20px.png
[copied from Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 October 21]
The result of the debate was: speedy delete under G7, although I'm not sure why David didn't do it himself.... Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I explained why on my talk page; I'm not the image's author; I'm merely the file's uploader. I provided almost none of the its substantial content. —David Levy 03:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, but by uploading that version of the image, you were the only one who made substantial edits to that image. So G7 probably still applied. Oh well. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I prefer to err on the side of caution, but I obviously don't object to the deletion (and certainly don't advocate needless bureaucracy). So unless someone objects (which I doubt will occur), I'd say that the outcome is fine. —David Levy 04:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Possum Observatory
Hello... not certain that one warrants a "delete", as opinion was pretty much evenly split between keeping/moving the material and deleting it. --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I closed it as "delete" because there wasn't much content to be moved to a new article as was suggested, and even those in favor of moving the article felt as though the observatory wasn't notable enough for an article. I'm open to restoring any content people want to use for an article on Drummond, but I didn't see that there was a consensus to keep the article on the observatory. Does that help explain it at all? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Women's suffrage
Hi, can I ask why Women's suffrage has been semi-protected for a month rather than indefinitely? The vandalism is coming from lots of different IPs and previous temporary protections did not prevent the vandalism from resuming. Also, the page is pretty important. Thanks. --Helenalex (talk) 09:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree to the above statement, based on it's past history. Just not sure as to why certain articles are always targeted to get vandalized though. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 15:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I generally prefer to see a longer protection log before I indefinitely protect something, even for semi-protection. This article has only been protected three times, and never for more than three months at a time. Anonymous users do have useful edits to make as well, and it is sort of against the spirit of the site to make them register to edit such an article. If vandalism continues after the protection expires, we can always put it back on. It's really no big deal. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Your Decision to Delete the Article Guitar Zero 2
Hello, I am the original writer. First off, let me just say that I respect your decision to take down the article. However, some things came to my attention. You mentioned that those who voted to save the article to look at the article WP:SOCK. I realize that some of the forums members have made accounts for the sole purpose of voting to save the article. However, I would like to point out that webdeulist and teancum, while being members of the game's forums, are sincere Wikipedia members. Secondly, there is a link to WP:ATA in the article's deletion page. Was this aimed at everyone or just those who voted to save? Because truthfully I don't feel that either side made very strong arguments. Also, I would just like to know how you came to the decision. I do not argue with it in any way and truthfully, I was going to take the article down myself (or request it to be taken down) for the time being. But I would just like to know how you made the decision. It could help me if I ever rewrite the article when/if the game reaches the notability standards of Wikipedia. Lastly, I would like to say thanks for providing a link to Wikipedia's notability article on the article's deletion page. --Lts100 (talk) 14:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The comments I made may not apply to everyone. However, generally when someone !votes "SAVE", it's an indicator that they're not a regular Wikipedia contributor, since the standard comments are Keep/Delete/Redirect/whatever. For what it's worth, however, webduelist (talk · contribs), X orange90 x (talk · contribs), Bm2092004 (talk · contribs), and in fact yourself, have all made very few edits outside of the Guitar Zero 2 article or the AfD. Encouraging users on an off-site forum to "vote" to keep an article is considered meatpuppetry and a violation of policy.

The WP:ATA link was directly mainly at those who commented in favor of keeping the article. All of the comments made by those in favor of deletion made valid points based on relevant policies and guidelines, specifically notability, verifiability, reliable sources, and Wikipedia is not a Crystal Ball. The comments in favor of keeping the article centered mainly on "the project is not dead", "articles on similar games haven't been deleted", "the game will be up once the lawsuit is figured out", "there are YouTube references as well", etc. None of those are valid arguments against deletion: simply because something exists does not mean it should have an article; other article's existence or non-existence is irrelevant for a discussion on Article X, as they do not set precedent; there is no guarantee the lawsuit will be figured out, and we have no way of accurately predicting that; YouTube, blogs, and forums, are all considered unreliable sources because they can be self-published or easily modified at will, and depending on the content may violate our policy on external links.

The decision to delete the article was made based on the consensus of the discussion. Consensus is not counting votes (hence why we call comments in a deletion discussion "not-votes" or "!votes"), it's judging what people agree with more, as well as what arguments are more relevant to policies and guidelines. In this case, and as I've just explained, the comments in favor of deletion were more well-phrased, made by users who weren't obviously here just for that purpose, and as it turns out there were more of them anyway (again, not that it matters). Reviewing the policies, guidelines, and essays I linked to in the last paragraph should help you out there. I hope this answers your questions, but you are welcome to contact me again if they don't. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the speedy reply, I think you have told me all that I needed to know. --Lts100 (talk) 17:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]