Jump to content

User talk:Amaury

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Harryheart (talk | contribs) at 21:33, 21 February 2009 (→‎February 2009 talk page edits). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If you would like to get to know me, you may do so by visiting the following links:

You can also catch me at the following places:

December 2008 talk page edits

Welcome!

Hello, Amaury, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Lumia Waber, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted (if it hasn't already).

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Cadwaladr (talk) 07:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Lumia Waber

A tag has been placed on Lumia Waber requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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 page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Cadwaladr (talk) 07:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009 talk page edits

Syncsta

Understood. ^^ - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problems, the nice thing about wikipedia is there's always someone looking over your shoulder. It's also the annoying thing about wikipedia once in a while, but on the whole it means being bold as you were is the right thing to do. Happy editing! --fvw* 02:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know. Every one click I do on "Recent changes" I see a whole new page of edits... whereas with other wikis like PSUPedia only one or two edits are made when I click "Recent chnages" unless they're updating several articles, which only lasts for a minute or so. XD - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sacrament (album)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Sacrament (album), without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. We have some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cannibaloki 02:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Vandalism"

Please refrain from wantonly reverting any edits that are deletions and calling them vandalism. You reverted an edit of mine, one which deleted redlinks and blatant vandalism on St. Peter, Minnesota, and you also deleted constructive work on Patrick Stump while another user was still working on it. We appreciate your enthusiasm in vandal-fighting, but again, please look closer before reverting.Iulus Ascanius (talk) 01:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 01:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I know I get into it too... Iulus Ascanius (talk) 01:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not vandalism :)

Not vandalism, the Template replaces the text with the agreed-upon text for ARBs by Wikiproject:Terrorism :) Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 05:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha! :) - Eugene Krabs (talk) 05:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

This is your only warning.
The next time you make a personal attack, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack? What are you talking about? - Eugene Krabs (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Long-term effects of alcohol

I've undone your moves at long-term effects of alcohol. Contrary to your belief, if you search dictionaries or Google for example, long-term, the hyphenated version, is much more common. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 07:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's one word. See http://psupedia.info/Longterm_schedule - Eugene Krabs (talk) 15:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Type in "longterm" at Google and see what the first result is.Iulus Ascanius (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:203.45.49.142

Policy does not prohibit users, including both registered and anonymous users, from removing comments from their own talk pages. Unless they're removing declined unblock requests, confirmed sockpuppetry notices, or shared IP header templates...there is no reason for you to restore what they've removed. --Onorem♠Dil 00:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the administrators wants it there. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 00:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And? They have no reason to revert the anon either. --Onorem♠Dil 00:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay... I guess I understand now. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 00:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also note, JBsupreme is not an admin...not that it matters. --Onorem♠Dil 00:38, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see. His profile sure makes it look like he is one. XD - Eugene Krabs (talk) 00:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Full names

Please stop moving articles to the full names of the individuals involved. Articles are placed under the most commonly used name, not the full name.—Kww(talk) 05:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That does make sense. Thanks for the comment. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 05:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Hello, Amaury. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic WP:ANI#User page wandered into mainspace. Thank you. EdJohnston (talk) 06:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop moving things without discussion

If you had asked someone, we could have told you that iCarly and ICarly link to the same place, and that the display of the first character as a lower case "i" is accomplished through some special macros on the title page. I'm happy to answer questions about things, but every time you do one of these unnecessary moves, you create some side effects that other people have to clean up. Please stop.—Kww(talk) 18:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tweenies

I hate to pile on, but this is something that you should know for future reference, and this says it better than I can:

In a recent edit to the page Tweenies, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to other English-speaking countries, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the appropriate variety of English used there. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, you can ask me on my talk page or you can visit the help desk. Thank you. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 18:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't Tweenies first air on Nick JR? I remember watching the first airing when I was 10 or somewhere around 10 (17 now); it was in English spelling and everything. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 18:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't know, I've never seen it, but the article says that it originated in England in 1999 and dubbed to the U.S. in 2003. I'll look to see if this is correct though. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 18:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It seems the article is correct. Here is an article from the BBC where they licensed it to Nickelodeon. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 18:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning!

Hello Eugene Krabs. If you keep moving articles without getting support from other editors to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. These inappropriate moves create a mess that may have to be cleaned up by administrators, due to the way that moves work on Wikipedia. It is not smart to make the administrators mad. EdJohnston (talk) 19:21, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A few words of (unsolicited) advice

Hello. I'm sorry to see that you have been blocked again, because I know that you mean well; however, before you go through making changes across different articles, you should first make sure that what you are doing is correct. I would strongly advise you to take this time to go over a few of our policies, especially WP:TITLE (our naming conventions) and WP:MOS (our manual of style). For example, in this message, you said that if a possessive word ends in S that you don't add an apostrophe S, just an apostrophe. If you check WP:MOS#Possessives, this is not necessarily correct. In fact, it gives "Illinois's legislature" as one the examples. It states that adding an apostrophe S is more common for modern names and common nouns as opposed to just an apostrophe being more common for biblical and classical names.

I see that you are enthusiastic about helping Wikipedia, which is great, but you just need to focus it on tasks that will be more constructive. The welcome message that you deleted had several very good links that would help you; you may want to go back and look at it a bit more. Please, for the time being, don't make any page moves without prior discussion and a clear WP:CONSENSUS. You are, understandably, on a very short leash when it comes to this. If you think an article needs moved, first check the policies to ensure that it is correct, and then post it on the article's talk page and discuss it. Remember, there is no deadline, if there is a small problem with an article, it can wait until it has been discussed. If you ever have a question, don't be afraid to ask for help. I sincerely hope that during this block, you will read up on policy a bit. If you do, I am confident that will have a less rocky and more enjoyable editing experience. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 00:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just talked to my English teacher about this yesterday; he said ' is more common now, not 's at the end of a word that ends with an S. Also, if I'm blocked, how am I editing my talk page? And what do you mean blocked again? This is my first block here. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry about the "again" part, it's now stricken. I must have been thinking of another user, my apologies. I'll admit, it's been a few years since I've been in an English class, and, as fast as grammar rules change, I may not be fully up-to-date on it, but, here, we go by what the WP:MOS says. If you think that it should be changed, you could bring it up there, but barring getting it changed, you should try to stick to what it says. Blocked users are generally allowed to edit their own talk page, unless they use it abusively. Thanks for restoring the welcome message, I honestly think that it will help you a bit. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 02:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In case you didn't know: By yesterday, I meant yesterday (January 19th). - Eugene Krabs (talk) 03:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. I'm not saying that he's wrong, just that on Wikipedia, we need to try to go by what our manual of style says most of the time. When it says that either way is fine, it's usually best just to leave it as it was originally written (unless it is inconsistent with the rest of the article). Personally, there are a few things in it that I find counter-intuitive, so I usually keep it open when I'm doing anything other than vandalism reverts for quick reference. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 04:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also like to apologize for getting a little preachy up there. That was a bit over the top for just one short block. When I posted that, I was going by my misconception that you had just been blocked for that the other day... that's what I get for trusting my memory which is about as good as that of a goldfish's :) Anyway, when your block expires, just keep away from moving pages and I'm sure that things will go a lot smoother when you get back to editing ;) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 07:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Templates

Here are the welcome templates: Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates/Table, and here are the warnings: Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. I keep these links on my user page for quick reference :) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you're looking for this: Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. You can find all of the templates arranged into categories here: Wikipedia:Template messages. If this isn't exactly what you're looking for, let me know. Hope this helps! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 19:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. I'm not understanding what the speedy deletion is for, so I placed a hang-on tag, but I need help. I'm not familiar with some of these templates. Can you help? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_Walmsley - Eugene Krabs (talk) 19:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It has been tagged as WP:CSD#A7, basically saying that it does not assert notability. Most articles are deleted due to a lack of reliable, third party sources, which is likely to be the case here. Also, it shows that it's a copyright violation. We cannot accept copyrighted material from other places. You can use other sites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Most likely, in order for the page to survive, you'll need to find third party sources make sure that it's not a copyvio. You may also want to take a look at WP:FIRST for tips on writing your first article. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 19:49, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I looked, but I couldn't find the "User talk messages" templates (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Template_messages/User_talk). - Eugene Krabs (talk) 19:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the welcome templates: Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates/Table, and here are the warnings: Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. I keep these links on my user page for quick reference :) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Hey, how do I get to my sandbox? I want to test 'em out. :) - Eugene Krabs (talk) 20:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, anytime. To make your sandbox, you can just click on this link User:Eugene Krabs/Sandbox and start testing :) Have fun! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jake Walmsley

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Jake Walmsley, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.jakewalmsley.com. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jake Walmsley

A tag has been placed on Jake Walmsley requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. FlyingToaster 19:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

License tagging for File:Jake Walmsley.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jake Walmsley.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Syncsta

I'm sorry, I can't delete pages or images, only admins can. You can put a {{db-self}} template on it, which marks it for speedy deletion by request of the creator. Hope this helps. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 21:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You sure look like an administrator. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 21:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:) Thanks, but nope, I'm just a regular editor. I just noticed that you had already put it up for speedy, so I just told you something that you already knew. Sorry about that, I should've looked first ;) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting blocks

Hey, only admins can block users, but you can request a block for obvious vandalism at Wikipedia:AIV. Cheers, --aktsu (t / c) 02:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait a few minutes before requesting a block on the anon in case you're here and want to try requesting it yourself :) --aktsu (t / c) 02:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice. =) - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009 talk page edits

Modifying others talk page comments

Do not correct comments in talk pages. Talk page comments pretty much belong to other editors, and, except in certain cases, shouldn't be modified by other editors. It's OK to remove vandalism. It's OK to remove "forum" comments, where someone has just posted something like "I think Miley Cyrus is the greatest!" or other crap like that. But correcting other editors spelling, capitalization, and grammar? Strictly off limits. That's an offense that can get you blocked if you repeat it.—Kww(talk) 14:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, you get busted for every little thing here. No offense, Kww. I'll stop. It's just that every little thing gets you busted (talking about other users... not just me.) - Eugene Krabs (talk) 16:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, most users don't have the kind of trouble you've had. I think you would do yourself well to focus a bit on working on article content on a few areas that you are interested in until you get more of a feeling of how things work. The impression I get of you is that you are someone that sincerely wants to help, but you charge ahead a little bit too fast.—Kww(talk) 16:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least I don't blank pages or add gibberish and swear words to articles. =) - Eugene Krabs (talk) 16:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Barack Obama

Will you please review the administrative report here regarding the deleted materialy you have just re-added at Talk:Barack Obama? You are also leaving inappropriate warnings on editors' talk pages.[1][2][3] Perhaps you were not aware that this matter is already escalated to an administrative notice board. If you think this is an issue, please discuss it in the appropriate place but do not reinsert material that has been removed on WP:BLP grounds, or join an edit war on pages like the Obama talk page that are under article probation (notice to follow). Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 21:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also put January instead of February. Haha! Anyway, yeah... I was not aware of the discussion until you posted on my talk page. I thought it was vandalism. Thank you for contacting me. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I brought up you continuation of the edit war on the AN/I discussion Wikidemon linked to above. --Bobblehead (rants) 21:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted images

I know you feel like you get busted for everything, so I'm sorry, but here it comes again. Using copyrighted images in userspace isn't allowed, so I've had to removed the Spongebob Squarepants screenshots from your user page.—Kww(talk) 11:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's fine. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 15:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But wait. Why was it marked with "copyvio"? It's just a cartoon for crying out loud. I'm very confused. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 22:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was a copyrighted image. Don't you think that television shows are copyrighted?—Kww(talk) 02:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know television shows are copyrighted, but how can one small image affect anything? - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's covered in an article called fair use. The short version is that you are allowed to use samples of copyrighted things (like your screenshot) only if your purpose is to make a review or critical commentary of the thing being sampled. Since you were using it for decoration, it was a copyright violation. Wikipedia is actually stricter than the law would allow it to be. Our policies are covered under WP:FUP, WP:IUP, and WP:NFCC.—Kww(talk) 02:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on File:Mr. Krabs.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because File:Mr. Krabs.jpg is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting File:Mr. Krabs.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Mr. Krabs.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stifle (talk) 12:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Elements of grammar

A tag has been placed on Elements of grammar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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 page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. §FreeRangeFrog 05:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Elements of grammar

A tag has been placed on Elements of grammar 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 page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Victor Lopes (talk) 19:24, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The six traits of writing

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The six traits of writing, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Original research, WP:Howto

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Shadowjams (talk) 00:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doing exactly what this SysOp did on this other page I created: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_elements_of_grammar&action=history Give me a break already! - Eugene Krabs (talk) 00:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The six traits of writing

I have nominated The six traits of writing, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The six traits of writing. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Shadowjams (talk) 00:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Your actions are being discussed at the Admin Noticeboard for Incidents

Hello, Amaury. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (talk→ Bwilkins / BMW ←track) 14:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:AndyManchester

Users are allowed to remove warnings from their own talk pages per WP:TALK. When they do this, please do not revert it. AndyManchester is perfectly within his rights to remove them. It seems you know this since you have removed warnings and notices on your own talk page. Besides, his edits do not appear to be vandalism. They may or may not be correct, but they certainly appear to be good faith edits. Please be careful. Looking at the WP:ANI discussion on you, the community appears to be losing patience. Please be careful. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 08:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're sort of good friends, I will listen to you. You're nicer than some of the administrators here. =D - Eugene Krabs (talk) 16:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Just to make sure that I don't give the wrong impression, I'm not an admin. I'm pretty sure you remember that and I didn't take your last comment to imply that I was, but I just like to be careful not to misrepresent myself. Despite whether you feel that the other users are nice or not, you really should try to listen to what they are saying. For example, below, Deor left a warning that it seems you didn't care for. While you may not like the template, you would be better off listening to what Deor is saying. It is not in good practice to refactor other people's talk page messages. Even if it is just to correct a typo, you should not do it. Also, while you may not have liked Elbutler's WP:MENTOR suggestion, it was good advice, and it was quite nice of her to offer to do it herself. I would ask you to reconsider, as it stands, you are on pretty thin ice. Please listen to what others are saying more and be a little less dismissive. While you may feel that they could be nicer, they are speaking in the best interests of Wikipedia and trying to help you. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I've blocked you for 24hrs because of your repeated personal attacks and overall cantankerous attitude displayed during the last few days. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trying again

I can tell that you want to be a good editor, so I'm going to try again to talk to you. First, let's talk background here: you have 533 edits. In those 533 edits, you've managed to bother people enough that you've been blocked twice, for 24 hours each. I have over 22,000 edits, and I've also been blocked twice: both by mistake or misunderstanding, and for under 3 hours each. You should be able to understand that that means I've learned a bit about how to edit effectively here. If I got blocked at your rate, I'd have been kicked off Wikipedia years ago ... they don't let people get 45 blocks, and that's how many it would have been.

You really need to stop letting anger show. It's impossible not to get pissed off at people here. It's going to happen. Do you think calling them "stupid" or "smarty-pants" helps? Does telling someone that's giving you advice to "shut it" help? Nope. That's pretty much what got you blocked this time. Especially when people that you do it to people that are trying to help you learn something about how to edit here.

As for your editing, some of it's OK. The articles that you created have a common problem, and I'll try to explain it. High-schools simplify a lot of stuff. They teach things as being absolutely true, when in fact it's just one of several techniques, or sometimes just your teacher's or textbook author's opinion. When I pointed you at English grammar as containing everything in your Elements of grammar article, I meant it. Had you stopped for a moment and studied that article, you would have learned a lot about English grammar, and would have seen for yourself that your article was redundant. Drmies tried to give you the same advice, and all you did was get angry at him, and that's silly. Look at his userpage, look at his edits. He teaches language instruction, is fluent in four languages and familiar with two more. Hard to tell from my userpage, but you should be able to guess from my hobbies and list of places that I've lived: I function well in three languages and am familiar with three more. Our advice is sound: we know more about grammar than you do, and when we try to help you, we don't deserve to be bitten. You would be well served to listen instead of bite.

Next time you want to create an article, why don't you leave a message on my page and describe what article you want to build? I can help you figure out whether its appropriate, and where it would fit in Wikipedia if it is. If you work on fitting in and helping, things will go smoothly. If you just bite the people that try to help, life will go badly quickly.—Kww(talk) 13:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying you guys don't know things, but my English teacher knows things, too. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point. Elbutler (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then listen to your friend when he tells you that that was completely uncalled for and inappropriate. Elbutler hasn't ruined anything that I can see, and was pointing out that you had, indeed, missed my point. No one is saying that your English teacher doesn't know things. I'm saying that he is teaching you a highly simplified form of English grammar. The things he teaches you, by and large, are already covered, and don't warrant individual articles. That problem is an editing problem, and won't get you blocked if you listen to people's advice. Things like You stay out of this! You've ruined enough are a sign of an attitude problem, and that problem will get you blocked.—Kww(talk) 15:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For someone ostensibly interested in English grammar, it's surprising that you would write the grammatically incorrect "This is between Kww and I," rather than "This is between Kww and me." Bongo matic 18:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, no, you're the one who's incorrect. Kww and I is the correct way to say it. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 20:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. Here's free advice from an English grammar teacher. Prepositions such as between govern the object case (that is, according to the normative grammar which your high school teacher is certainly trying to impart to you. In reality, the situation is of course far more complex, and you may be consoled, your "mistake" isn't necessarily really one.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll grant you that. Sorry... :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block question

Shouldn't I be able to edit by now? It still says I'm blocked, but it's been 24 hours. Thanks in advance. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry about that, probably an autoblock that was accidentally triggered during the normal block. I can't find any that's still active right now. Can you try again if you can edit now, and if not, post the exact block message you get on trying? I'll need the "autoblock id" number or your IP address to remove it, if there is still one. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:59, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just got back. I am able to edit now. Thanks for the response. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

48 hour block

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for disruptive editing - making controversial page moves without discussion despite previous warnings and block. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. PhilKnight (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note to other admins: Feel free to unblock without contacting me. PhilKnight (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock}}

Eugene, I'll unblock, if you agree not to make any more page moves. PhilKnight (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, but can you at least move those pages you reverted back so they match how the other "List of Pokemon" episodes articles are. I said you because I'm promising not to move any more pages without discussion prior to moving a page. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, you can list them at Wikipedia:Requested moves, however, I've unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how exactly to put it on there. Can you give me a hand, please? - Eugene Krabs (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the kind of thing I was talking about

Why did you make this edit?—Kww(talk) 21:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why people don't format your page the way you like

Hi Eugene Krabs

Perhaps you are not aware of the "New section" or "+" tab on the top of pages, but it makes it easy for an editor to create a new section at the bottom of a page. This is conventionally what an editor does to add a new topic to a Talk page. As you will see if you try it, it adds a heading-level divider. So notwithstanding your dislike of first-level headings, you'll be fighting against the tools to keep your dividers as second-level headings.

Regards Bongomatic 23:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request to move article List_of_Pokémon_episodes_(season_1) incomplete

You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page List_of_Pokémon_episodes_(season_1) to a different title - however your request is either incomplete or has been contested for being controversial, and has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete will be removed after five days.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:

  1. Added {{move|NewName}} at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
  2. Added a place for discussion at the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved. This can easily be accomplished by adding {{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}} to the bottom of the page, which will automatically create a discussion section there.
  3. Added {{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}} to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 01:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was my first request, so I didn't know. I'm still confused. Can you show me an example or something?

Editing Avalanche Article

I'm trying to revise the avalanche article. There are many errors in the existing article. Does Wikipedia make everything so difficult? If you actually looked at my changes, you'd see that they don't constitute vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somerandomicicle (talk • contribs) 23:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing advice

Instead of doing something like this which could get you blocked for impersonating an admin, I'd suggest you report persistent vandals to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. PhilKnight (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks! Hey, is there anywhere I can go to request becoming an administrator? - Eugene Krabs (talk) 00:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not anywhere where you'd stand a chance right now. Rack up a year without a block and several thousand constructive edits, and it's worth talking about.—Kww(talk) 01:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While I fully agree with Kww's comment, should you be interested in the process of how editors become admins, you can read WP:RFA. Perhaps if you develop an ambition to become an admin it will dissuade you from making so many counterproductive edits in the meanwhile. Bongomatic 03:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why

...you made this revert? Tagishsimon inserted the coordinates, and you removed them without an explanation. Anytime you revert something that is not obvious vandalism, you should always explain why. Using a WP:ROLLBACK edit summary as you did implies that you are reverting vandalism, which this obviously was not. I saw that you didn't warn place a warning, so I thought that it may have been a mistake; but, you didn't self revert, so I'm not sure. I reverted you for the time being, but I just wanted to see if there was something that I was missing. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 01:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Toddst1 (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amaury (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is so unfair. I wasn't even told what I was doing before getting blocked. Please unblock me. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:24, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

After reviewing your edits, it looks like you continued to make admin-like edits after Phil Knight cautioned you not to...he even told you that this could get you blocked. Looks like he was right. And what's with the deletion of the coordinates? Once your block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive edits...we definitely have a big need for those around here. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 02:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

No, I stopped. I didn't get the warning until after I posted the second block template on another user's talk page. Now unblock me. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 02:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't lie, it doesn't give you credibility. You acknowledged the caution at time stamp 00:28, then made 4 more edits, including the ones I was referring to. What, you didn't think we'd actually check? AKRadeckiSpeaketh 14:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, he did respond, just not in the way you or I would expect. He continued to leave the block notices, but only on the talk pages of people that were actually blocked, and crediting the block to the admin that had actually performed the block. Not an edit I would make, but was it disruptive?—Kww(talk) 14:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To Akradecki: Yes, I made more edits, but I was just fixing that one because he got blocked for something else and I put disruptive editing, but I never actually posted more block templates on other talk pages. I only posted block templates on two people's talk pages. After I posted the second one, I noticed I had a message from PhilKnight regarding those edits. I stopped. I didn't post any more block templates on other people's talk pages. I was just fixing some errors on that second one. Please reconsider this block. Thank you. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 20:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I'm inclined to let things stand, as this is your 4th block (if it was your first, I'd be a bit more lenient, but at some point, you need to realize that we take disruption pretty seriously.). I won't have any heartburn, though, if you put up another unblock template and get a second opinion from another admin. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 23:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see you've been blocked again. And by the way, i'd like to point out that you can't "ban someone from your talk page", because it isn't "yours": it belongs to everyone, anyone can post on it. Are you going to act mature and listen now? Elbutler (talk) 12:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Amaury. You have new messages at Apparition11's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Replied again. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 06:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note

An thread at WP:ANI which may concern you is here. –xeno (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon Diamond and Pearl Battle Dimension

Just like to tell you that the air dates have passed and they didn't air, I live in the UK and know when they will air as I keep up to date with Jetox, and so I know if the episodes have or haven't aired! Stop reverting my changes as I know what I'm doing!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amaury&oldid=272347844"