Jump to content

User talk:OliverTwisted

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jbartas (talk | contribs) at 00:12, 6 April 2009 (Input on TCP reset page: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Frustrating Deletion Notices? Get Answers Here :




Drama Free Zone! Take A Deep Breath Before Posting.



Re: Art of War

I'm still a bit green at this so I hope this entry doesn't pop up somewhere that it shouldn't. Apologies if it does. Anyhow i'm just a poor boy without even a poor family - my parents left me in the woods and I was raised by monkeys. I really miss my monkey mum. I am polite and considerate of others and currently living in a cave: it is only by serendipity I find myself with an internet connection. So please Sir, Mr Twisted, would you consider adopting me... On a more serious note I'm looking to make some quite dramatic changes to Sun Tzu's Art of War article. I left a brief, of sorts, on mytalk, usertalk thingy. I could do with advising on changes that I am proposing and how to implement them. I should be a regular visitor for the next week or so(as some editing is a course requiement), more intermittently thereafter. I see that you are also researching this endeavor so a collaboration of some description seems sensible. Please get in touch and keep in touch ASAP, for the next week or so, as I want to get an edit or two in prior to my assignment deadline(09/04/09). Working under the auspices of one more erudite than I at such matters might be just what the course is looking for me to do.Fithsun (talk) 00:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As much as I love a good sense of humor, I will probably be in Europe during the time in question. For a list of editors accepting adoptees, please inquire here: WP:ADOPT. To help out though, I have enlisted a few other editors who have worked on the article in the past to monitor your proposals and progress.
Playing the Devil's advocate for the moment, I was wondering if a major overhaul of one of the most popular articles on Wikipedia is the best project to tackle as your first on Wikipedia? There are going to be push-backs. As a new editor, you might not be aware of this, but each edit to the article is watched by several thousand people from all over the world. I just happened to be active at the time your edits went live. There is even software which identifies new edits in a queue, to make sure each one is analyzed by at least one experienced editor.
As an example, you might want to click on the "history" tab of The Art of War article (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Art_of_War&action=history) to see the frequency of edits and reverts which occur. Also, this article has been assessed by a committee, and while it most definitely needs improvement, it is important that the article not take any steps backward, in regards to WP:STYLE, WP:SOURCES, and WP:CITE. When I was a new editor on Wikipedia, I received a savaging over my first article, so I want you to understand that I am just giving you the "heads up," not trying to discourage you from contributing. I would wholeheartedly recommend joining the communities listed here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Art_of_War). Also, be prepared to have your references and sources available, because the calls for them will be quick and loud. Once you join the communities, you will have dozens of other editors with whom to share ideas. Finally, you'll want to check out WP:SAND. This is a great place to create test articles, as you become more comfortable editing. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 06:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your advice, have a good holiday - regards Fithsun (talk) 17:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, OliverTwisted. You have new messages at Decltype's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi, I'm very new to Wikipedia as in days old. I submitted an article that's now up for deletion, I admit my article was lacking I didn't sign it or reference it correctly, which was my mistake, I didn't realize.I am also unaware of how to submit my commentary on the deletion debate page, I was scanning it for a good fifteen minutes looking for a way to respond to your comment but I was unsuccessful.

Digressing, I wanted to confirm that Chu-hsien was legitimate. The book I'm referencing is a horticulture book, not a fictional piece. It was written in 1964 by Roderick Cumming a very talented Chrysanthemum breeder. He referenced to Tao-yuan-Ming who was born in the city you mentioned previously when you flagged my article for deletion, but that was the city which was dubbed the Chrysanthemum city and Roderick received his information as according to my source from a Lieu Chiech-yuan who in the book I have is referred to as a, "modern authority famous for knowledge of Chrysanthemum history," (Cumming 2). Of course Cumming was referring to Modern as his modern of 1964, but still the city is not fictional. I do apologize for my inadequate article posting, would you be so kind as to explain to me how to post the information I've just told you on the deletion debate page? I feel like an idiot but I really can't figure it out. Mandasheep (talk) 09:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned, it's probably a spelling issue, which is why we need some Chinese experts. But, your information is very helpful, and I will copy it for you to the article talk page, and create a link on the debate page. For Deletion discussions in the future, look for the edit link on the right hand side of the page, adjacent to the title of the entry, as opposed to the edit buttons underneath the name of the entry. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 09:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I thought, it's a spelling issue. Please view the article talk page for more information. Before attempting to add this information to the Chrysanthemum article, please wait for the deletion/merge discussion to run it's course. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 09:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD discussion

The discussion page is there now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Mikita. I was still writing it when you contacted me! Regards, WWGB (talk) 11:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it. I had done a speedy for A7, but it was declined and I just happened to see the AfD templates and thought I'd weigh in. Didn't mean to rush you. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 11:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that books, albums, Software etc., or schools, are not eligible under this criterion.It's not eligible under that criteron.-PeRmEtHiUs (talk) 12:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the guidelines again. This is a website, and thus falls under WP:WEB. Furthermore, you have now broken the 3 revert rule. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 12:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


WAIT JUST A SECOND

The Lower East Side Band
Queer/Strange requests that are notably strange since the article specifies numberous sources including materials that were publicly mass distributed by TV, Cable TV, public knowledge, and personal knowledge of persons mentioned including John Lennon and Yoko Ono. Perhaps before such articles be marked as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xaoskeller (talkcontribs) 09:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your user talk page, and the article talk page for a detailed explanation. Please don't take maintenance tags personally. They give you the tools you need to improve the article, and to protect it from Speedy Deletion. Best regards (and don't forget to sign your posts on article talk pages and user talk pages.) --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 09:24, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Athletes

Yes, i understand. But WP:ATHLETE is clear: ALL World Cup competitors are notable. And both Jakob Hlava and Remi Santiago has competed in World Cup. Hlava has competed 31 times and has competed in the World Champinships. Hlava is also notable by a 16th place in World Cup and being a brother of Lukas Hlava. The Rolling Camel (talk) 13:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not deleted any of these articles... but I suspect you are going to be much like Sisyphus while you are introducing and defending these articles. Might you consider creating a page of World Cup Competitors (Non Winning), rather than an individual article for each athlete, even the ones who have two sentences of information, basically saying "they competed, they lost, they were bummed." I'm being flippant, but it's a thought. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 13:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, i don't take that. Delete Remi Santiago. he is not notalbe. But Jakub Hlava is per the reasons i sayed in my first comment notable. If not a 18th place is notable, the we schould delete 50-70 more articles of the same sort. a 18th place in World Cup is notable per WP:ATHLETE. The Rolling Camel (talk) 14:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your points. Playing devil's advocate for the moment, reformatting may not diminish the notability of the athletes, so much as it condenses the information. If it were in a graph format, there would be no need for a reader to click on a link that contains no more information than the position in which they finished. I did not nominate Jakob Hlava, and each athlete should certainly be judged on their own merit. Some may have enough info for their own article. Some may not... a graph might preserve their accomplishments, even if there is no additional information for a reader to explore. It's just a suggestion. I saw the onslaught of templates on your talkpage, and thought you might want to head off more. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 14:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indian denial

Can you find sources for Indian officlal statement on this issue.I found one but it's not working [1].yousaf465'

I'm sorry, but I have no background on which to offer any constructive info to this article. Please look for help here: WP:INDIA. If you do not believe this community will be able to support you, you can also look for relevant communities here: WP:PROJECT. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 14:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Googling found one above mentioned but still trying.We have to present both side of conflict.--yousaf465' 14:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What should we do with this[2].--yousaf465' 14:20, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As the nominator for deletion, I won't be participating in editing the content. I am only pointing out guidelines, and asking questions to make sure a thorough discussion is conducted. I have no interest in the topic, aside from complying with guidelines, and achieving community consensus. I have only made suggestions to be helpful, not to press a political point. Perhaps you might want to communicate with the author of the article for additional support. Best regards again. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 14:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response.I will copy the link to talk page.--yousaf465' 14:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had to face axe just for adding India to SST article!ANd your are asking to merge it They will kill me.--yousaf465' 10:20, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you are concerned for your safety, ask another editor to make the changes necessary so that your username is not mentioned. If you are talking figuratively about being "killed," meaning fighting other editors to get the information included on State-sponsored terrorism, once a Merge decision is made, it would bypass most basic concerns; as this was decided upon by a long, and thorough discussion of the topic and consensus was reached. However, this seems unlikely since the votes are all over the board. This will exist as it is, and then be relisted for another debate. This gives you time to attempt to expand the article beyond 3 events. You need to look for sources to back up the synthesis of information you have compiled. I really hope you are successful. Can't you find any sympathetic editors on the talk page for State-sponsored terrorism who can help? --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 10:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking in figuratively.What I have added is with sources except about Indian denial I couldn't find any other source then about BJP's denial.I only add for what I can find sources for.Can you idenitfiy any other unsourced material I will be happy to move it to talkpage for further discussion.You seems to be quiet helpful and civil I appreciate that.--yousaf465' 11:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, after spending a significant amount of time pursuing the information in the sources for the article (at your request), I have come to the conclusion that this article will not be able to meet guidelines to stand alone. Speculation removed, the Lahore incident would certainly merit mention on the State terrorism, or other related page. Alternatively, you might consider restructuring the article to be called "The Lahore Incident", thus not making the same accusations of state sponsored terrorism in the title. Otherwise, I'm afraid I won't be able to be of much more help with this article. Best regards. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 11:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now I also tilting towards a merge.Also on your request named as Lahore incident.Please also identify OR I will remove it..yousaf465'

Please check this. It may take some work, digging through deletion logs/etc. I believe it is written like an advert and should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R3ap3R.inc (talkcontribs) 14:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article which contains marketing verbage should be tagged with the appropriate maintenance templates, not deleted. The reference included is to The Calgary Herald, one of the largest newspapers in Canada. A google search for Jet Set Zero turns up entries in travel guides, as well as other notable sources. (http://www.google.com/search?q=Jet+Set+Zero&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a) It's always a good idea to review the guidelines for what qualifies for speedy deletion frequently, as it can change. Please consider reading: WP:SPEEDY. Our goal as editors should be to expand information when possible, not just to delete it. A few minutes on google can do wonders to an article. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 14:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if there is any doubt about the article, you can always nominate it on the AfD boards: WP:AFD. This way, there are at least 3 sets of eyes on each article. Better safe than sorry, eh? --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 15:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does WP:PROD put it up on WP:WfD? —Preceding unsigned comment added by R3ap3R.inc (talkcontribs) 15:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that PROD sends it to an admin for verification. It can be used if the article does not meet WP:SPEEDY. You can read about the process here: WP:PROD. Best regards, and I'm off for the night/day. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 15:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Five for delete [1] good enough to delete the article? 00:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

An "on duty" admin will close the discussion using the proper format. This is not something non-admin members can do. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 00:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem. :) --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 08:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm

Excuse me but I didn't make that page. But if I did it wasn't on purpose. I am really sorry if I did. --Abce2 (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which page would that be, buddy? --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 16:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A page that was Devlizhman. You posted a warning on my talk page.--Abce2 (talk) 16:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I did, I'm very sorry. The page was deleted quickly. I use an automated software program that once per year makes mistakes. Feel free to delete any information that does not apply to edits you've made. Sorry for the inconvenience. --OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 17:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent allegations on ANI

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I feel that this edit and its edit summary is inappropriate. Basically since day one I have been constantly bombarded with smears of the nature you have indulged in. The sock puppet allegation was shown to be unfounded but it is still used as a thought terminating cliche much to my dismay and frustration. My initial comment to your posting on ANI was not meant to be aggressive and I am sorry if you read it in such a way that you felt you needed to defend yourself by attacking my credibility. Interesting that Source Credibility should show itself such an important aspect of human interaction :) My apologies if you take offense at my last post, perhaps I should not have written it but I feel as though I have let the SP allegations slide for long enough. I hope we can all get along amicably in the future. Unomi (talk) 20:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bluck Bluck Sizzle Yum




I'm giving this to you after noticing you expressed hurt feelings about what was said in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Source Credibility discussion. I wouldn't have taken the comments in question personally, but since you did I am sending you some comfort food. Try not to become mired in the debate about the debate (about the debate about the debate about the debate) but rather forgive and forget. Those things, along with kindness and civility, It's a key to happy editing! Best wishes. --Boston (talk) 20:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It must be incredibly irritating to have someone say to you, "I know what you're thinking," as Uncle G said in his comment at the AfD, and imply your thinking and reading ability are faulty. Then to get pounced upon by a half dozen other administrators who tell you it is perfectly valid for Uncle G to tell you what you are thinking and insult you for thinking it, and you're wrong and have no basis for complaint! In fact, you might start looking around to see if you're becoming a cockroach. However, some people actually read what he said and realize taking offense under the circumstances is not unusual. In my opinion, though, Wikipedia administrators as a group do not listen well to criticism of members of their group; and Boston, above, has some solid advice: take the high road. I don't usually take that advice myself, but it would make editing Wikipedia more constructive overall for everyone I deal with here - and for me - if I did. Good luck. --KP Botany (talk) 23:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Input on TCP reset page

Hi,

Thanks for you input on the TCP reset attack page I posted last night. It's my first Wikipedia page, and I had no idea the page standards were so formal. I was also surprised by the rapid response.

I've edited the page to try to address your concerns, however as I didn't understand some of them, I'm sure I didn't fix everything. Specifically, I'm not sure what needs cleanup. The Wikipedia:Cleanup page is huge, and I"m not sure which of it's guidelines I've violated. I'm a terrible typist and my use of English is not the best, so it would be helpful to point to specific sections of problems which need cleanup; e.g. "section is confusing", "too many hyphens" or "typos in TCP reset section".

I have tried to address the link problems you mentioned; populating the reference section and moving external links to a section at the bottom. Please look these changes over and let me know if I'm moving in the right direction.

Any guidance would be appreciated.

-JB- Jbartas (talk) 00:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]