User talk:Darrenhusted

Hello Darrenhusted, and Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
Here are some good places to get you started:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes (~~~) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, you can leave a new message on my talk page, or put {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to help you. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!

— FireFox ^(talk) _{18:49, 11 August '06}

dePRODing of articles

Hello Darrenhusted, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

PROD removed from Aro Tolbukhin. En la mente del asesino, by User:Rigadoun, with summary '(rm prod, add statement of notability)'
PROD removed from Bog (film), by User:Rigadoun, with summary '(rm prod and fix up a bit; it's probably notable because of the cast--I bet references could be found if someone searched.)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Annika Hansen

Thank you for your help in the matter, much appreciated :) Ejfetters (talk) 04:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. Darrenhusted (talk) 10:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning.

I don't know what's going on. I know how firm Wikipeadia rules are but I might never know all those changing that are pushed into articles since ... I don't know 2001? I don't know when Wikipeadia first started. Anyway, if there is anything else I need to know about, keep me updated so I don't end up confusing vandalism over something minor or a misconception of what's normal in Wikipeadia. I already had one about overlinking on infobox, what else could go wrong? Johnnyauau2000 (talk) 13:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

There is a proposal on the Project Big Brother article that I believe you will be interested in. –túrian^patois 22:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more civil and constructive in the future

(leaving you a message here instead of at Talk:No Country for Old Men (film) since that discussion never went anywhere)

This message was pretty unfair and unconstructive. First of all, I don't see why you think the diff I gave was a "revert"—it's the edit I made, which Ring Cinema immediately reverted, and which I then explained with the extended notes on the talk page, which you never bothered to respond to. You specifically asked me to link you to my version, which I did, and then you used that link I gave you to mischaracterize me as "unwilling to compromise". Apparently you didn't notice that I was the one who started a long discussion and asked people like you and Ring Cinema to comment. And your response to my request for comment was to ignore it for two weeks, then show up after I had already left and say "looks like he's not interested in discussion". Really, it's no wonder people are disgusted with trying to work on this article if this is the way you people treat other editors. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I asked for, after waiting for the discussion to reach a conclusion, was for a version you would be happy with, including all the discussed elements, not just you showing me a revert from a week before. What did you want the summary to look like after the discussion, all you did was show a diff from the week before, so after an acre of discussion you didn't want any changes to your own version, so there was nothing left to discuss. "Keep your badly-written plot summary" does not seem constructive. I waited to comment so I could read the discussion from both sides, but you have moved on. There was no point keeping that thread going, as it had reached a stalemate. Of course if you have a version which includes any suggested amendments then feel free to add it to a sandbox or start a new thread at NCFOM and I will read it and suggest any changes. Darrenhusted (talk) 09:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: I would suggest...

I think that's a really good idea, actually. I can't think of any examples off-hand, but I know I've seen other character lists split like that. Having a separate minor characters article would also clean up the template for True Blood too. -Hooliganb (talk) 13:18, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made some edits to your sandbox for you to look at. I updated the deceased characters infoboxes and reorganized the categories (since there were fewer characters populating each of them). Let me know what you think. -Hooliganb (talk) 16:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can lend a hand with that. -Hooliganb (talk) 17:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Celebrity Big Brother (UK) housemates is nominated for Featured List status

Hey. Just a quick note to say that I've nominated List of Celebrity Big Brother (UK) housemates for Featured List status after the recent promotions of List of American Idol finalists and List of Big Brother (U.S.) HouseGuests. It would be nice for expierienced editors who have knowledge on Big Brother to review the article at its nomination page. I've also asked MegaPedant and Alucard 16 the same favour. DJ 23:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look in the morning. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. DJ 23:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any thoughts...

...on the to-do list I put at the bottom of the '09UK talk page? DJ 23:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah OK. And I'd get rid completely. I ended up replacing the batteries in mine every other week and it just wasn't worth it. DJ 00:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

De-pantsing

CSD G4 only applies to article deleted via AFD or XFD. This one was speedied incorrectly as a hoax. Please note the numerous reliable sources which show it is not a hoax. Your recourse would be to take it to AFD. Edison (talk) 00:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

XRCSXRaiderX

Some one hacked into my accounts today it seems that they have only used this one for Vandalism I'm Trying to figure out what they did so i can fix it if its hasnt been already fix. Sorry for any problems that this has caused I will fix it all by the end of the day.--Dcheagle (talk) 21:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Cold Y Generation

An editor has nominated Cold Y Generation, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cold Y Generation and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. --Law Lord (talk) 02:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True blood improvements

That sounds fine, I'd be happy to help in any way that I can. I'll get as much done on the previous episodes as I can before the finale airs and then get to work helping out with the character stuff.SchrutedIt08 (talk) 01:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BB10 Prize Fund

Darren. Yesterday afternoon you removed without explanation content that had been agreed after discussion on the Talk Page. (See talk page Prize fund). I have reinstated it. If it needs its own section that can be discussed and agreed but I see no reason for it to be continually removed and assume it was done in error without reference to the discussion that had taken place earlier. leaky_caldron (talk) 08:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: True Blood improvements.

Sure, I'd be happy to help you out. Later today I'll look over the episode synopses and work on cleaning things up. I'll make some more additions to the minor characters page too, I'm just comparing the imdb information with the episodes. -Hooliganb (talk) 17:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 11:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Conflict of Interest/Noticeboard discussion

Since you've been involved in the situation with User:Commoncase on Bret Hart, I thought I would inform you of This Discussion of his possible COI at the COI noticeboard. McJEFF^(talk) 18:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Darrenhusted (talk) 19:00, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saw V

Look Here Im Just Giving A Longer Plot I Took Out The Sequel Section Due To It Releasing In A Little Over A Month I Did Not Mean To Attack Other Editors Im Just Inputting My Edits Since They Wont Stay I Keep Reputting Them In It Seems Like A Way To Keep It There. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejace3836 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting. Darrenhusted (talk) 19:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Darrenhusted (talk) 19:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You need to discuss it and stop calling out for "further action". I suggest the talkpage. Darrenhusted (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]