User talk:Thecheesykid

I

Archives

Archive 1 (2010)

Note: Feel free to post something to me, I'll listen to anyone. Please assume that, if I have done something wrong, that I am infinitely sorry and will never EVER do it again! :)
— ThatOlCheesyDude

Dwarf planets

Why this edit? Please comment here. —bender235 (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the barn star! ;) I would love to work as a team with you on this. Dexter has some pretty good episode articles (from what I see you've created), but it's character articles could use some work. I'd also like to see Rita's article reach GA status. I'm going to put some more work into it later tonight. HorrorFan121 (talk) 19:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. It's definitely going to need a lot of work to reach GA status, for instance the entirety of the seasons information will need to be revised and perhaps a Reception of her character section. For some really good examples of character articles, you should go to the Lost characters, there are some really good articles there. I'll help out as much as I can. ^____^ That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 21:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. A lot of work will be needed for it to get there. I'm willing to put in the work for it. I know that Rita's article will need a development section, and the reception of the character in general. Do you think we need the seasons information though? I covered most of it in the television section. Either way...I'm glad I got someone on board. ;) PS: Do you know any solid sources that pertain to critical reception of Rita or Julie Benz's portrayal? That would really help out. HorrorFan121 (talk) 22:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IGN should have a few nods to Julie Benz's talents that we could lift some quotes off. For instance: "we saw more of Rita's sexual issues and insecurity, well portrayed when Rita and Dexter double date with Deb and her boyfriend and Rita" in [1]. It would probably be a good idea to put in her awards too: She won a Satellite Award for Best Acress, and a Saturn Award for Best Actress and a Scream Award for Best Horror Actress, all found in List of awards and nominations received by Dexter, along with the joint Screen Actors Guild Award of 2009 and 2010. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 23:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks. A user uploaded the main image for deletion. I'm not sure what to do about it. Do you think a screen shot would be better? HorrorFan121 (talk) 23:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's probably a better idea, take a screenshot, make sure that it's low resolution, so that it can be accepted under wiki policy, this time you should probably consider giving it a Non-free use media rationale under the reasoning that no other images of its type can be found because they are all copyrighted under Showtime. Also, I've now added an awards section to the page, but it still needs a few references, which I'll work on. ^____^ That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 23:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do. I loved that picture though. :( Oh well. I have the DVD's so I'll go through and see if I can find a suitable image. Thanks for adding the reception section! HorrorFan121 (talk) 00:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about the new one I just uploaded? I think it suites the article, and follows the guidelines.HorrorFan121 (talk) 00:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's far better. I've templated the image and given it media rationales, so I think we should be all clear on that one. You might want to change the caption now however, because it is no longer a promotional image. Another thing, when removing the seasonal info, try saving the references by integrating them into what you've done thus far. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 00:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing the copy edits! I can't put a lot of work into Rita's article tonight, but definitely tomorrow. It's coming along nicely. HorrorFan121 (talk) 23:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, tonight I'm not going to be able to do a thing on Wikipedia I'm afraid, but you go right ahead. I have one problem with the article, that is: The conception and casting section should contain information solely on the beginning of her character, so the "The Getaway" information is going to have to be moved to a development section. ^____^ But, really good work. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 15:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to do a little list of things that could be altered to improve the article, I'll try to do some of them.

Perhaps a section pertaining to her past? Since nothing is mentioned of her history with Ackerman and Paul..
Nothing is mentioned of her from her role in season five, in the first episode, that might deserve a sentence. Y
The literature section needs improving, but I can't really do that because I couldn't stand the books (I felt they were badly written), so I can't do anything with it.
Already aforementioned "conception and casting" move needed. Y
A critical reception section is needed. Y
I need to put in links to the awards years. Y

OK, great. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 15:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I put some more work into it. I added a critical reception section and merged it with your part about the awards. I split up the conception and casting section and took The Getaway information and started a development section. I haven't picked up the books before either. :/ Not sure what to do about that. The information in the Literature section was the original differences from novels section that was at the bottom of the page. HorrorFan121 (talk) 05:45, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, well that's all pretty awesome, I reckon it's ready for its submission to Good Article status. :) You might want to consider a peer review before submission, to get people to review it for errors and to get it some recognition, but you don't have to. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 22:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm going to post a request for a peer review. The only thing I'm worried about is the Literature section. You've already copy edited so it should be in pretty good shape grammar wise. Thanks so much for your help on it! ;) HorrorFan121 (talk) 02:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Thank you for all your help with Rita Bennett. We make a great team, so long may we continue! - HorrorFan121 Talk 23:40, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

^Thought you deserved this. HorrorFan121 (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am flattered and it was a pleasure working on the article with you. :) That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 20:25, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An editor peer reviewed Rita's article here:Wikipedia:Peer review/Rita Bennett/archive1. I'm going to need to find some way to incorporate new, sourced information in the Literature section. I strongly disagree about removing the main image as this editor suggested. HorrorFan121 (talk) 20:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Images

Hey! Sure, I can do that. Just let me know which episode, etc. when you're ready. HorrorFan121 (talk) 20:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just uploaded them. What do you think? I also managed to find a screenshot from My Bad (Dexter) here [2]. HorrorFan121 (talk) 21:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parent cat

Since you have commented at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_5#2010-11_Television_program_seasons, I ask that you please comment at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_6#Television_programs_by_season to help resolve the parent category.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of season one episode articles of House for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articles Paternity (House), Occam's Razor (House), Maternity (House), Damned If You Do, The Socratic Method (House), Fidelity (House), Poison (House), DNR (House), Histories (House), Detox (House), Sports Medicine (House), Cursed (House), Control (House), Mob Rules (House), Heavy (House), Role Model (House), Babies & Bathwater, Kids (House), Love Hurts (House) and Honeymoon (House) are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternity (House) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 14:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again. You might wish to comment, as this eventually could have a huge impact on articles related to House. Cresix (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because You Left/Dr. Candle

Hello Thecheesykid, I was just wondering, since you're helping out on the Lost pages (thanks by the way), and you also seem to realize that the certain IP continually removes the comments about "Dr. Candle", do you think there's anything that can be done? Since the beginning, we've never commented (to my recollection) what he calls himself in any specific episode, thus, this episode should be no different. Also, it's usually been IPs (this same one for the last few months) that have changed it; all actual members seem to agree that it isn't needed. Do you think there's anything we can do? Cheers, and please keep up the good work. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 21:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because You Left GA

Hi there! I reviewed Because You Left, and just have a few suggestions to be resolved. You can find the review here. In the review, I also noted the edit wars going on with the article (which I see you discussed above). Has that been resolved? Thanks, Ruby2010 talk 22:30, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Dark City (1998 film)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Dark City (1998 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Viriditas (talk) 11:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'll be spending a few days on this. Please be patient. Viriditas (talk) 11:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody good show old chap. :) No q's at the mo, but thanks very much for taking the time to review the article. May it pass with flying colours... but... how can colours fly? Stumped. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 19:29, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dark City (1998 film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Dark City (1998 film) for things which need to be addressed. Viriditas (talk) 01:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Faraday

I posted some initial comments for the Daniel Faraday GAR that you posted up. Hopefully you have a chance to take a look, and please let me know if you have any questions. Canada Hky (talk) 19:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, I've fixed some of the link problems (dead link and disambigs). I'll do a copyedit and improve via your suggestions. I hope to have everything done at least by tomorrow or the end of the day. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 19:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there are a few more issues to be addressed, including an issue with a sentence pulled right from a source, and the second opinions. Please take a look when you get a chance. Canada Hky (talk) 23:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few more fixes. "Sentence pulled right from a source"? Which sentence are you speaking of? --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 23:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inception

Sorry. I didn't mean created articles, I meant edits to the article. Also, if you're not satisfied by my review, you are allowed to put it up for GAR. GamerPro64 20:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, please don't misunderstand, your review was fair, you just had me a little confused at some point. Thanks for looking at it. Happy editing. ^___^ That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 20:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the things that lead to the quickfail and renominated the article, if you don't mind. igordebraga ≠ 05:34, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, that's brilliant. Good job. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 14:03, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback Right Granted

Hi there,

I noticed that you've been doing some great undoing of edits that are vandalism, so I've given you the rollback tool.

Please read up on the tool at WP:ROLLBACK to see the much greater and faster benefit you will have from being able to "rollback" vandalism much quicker. If you are looking to help vandal fight, then may I suggest you also try using Huggle, a great anti-vandalism tool?

Hope this helps,

The Helpful One 20:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooh, thanks very much. This looks really useful. Dear sir, you have lived up to your username. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 20:46, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! I do try.. ;) The Helpful One 21:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lost

Hey there. You're doing a great job with the Lost articles (I was afraid of being the only one still improving those...). I even wonder which ones are you focusing on next. But I gotta ask: should Lost (season 5) really be at the Good Article nominations, when seasons 1 through 4 are Featured Lists instead of Articles? Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 01:58, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very good point, thanks for telling me. I'll see if I can get it and possibly Season 6 as featured lists at some point later. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 07:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, give some input here. igordebraga ≠ 17:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 18:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You only put things from the intro and plot... there's anything else? Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 15:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Great job on your work fighting vandalism. I noticed that you're not warning the users, however. WP:VAND suggests I add the following message:

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you.

Have a nice day! Roodog2k (talk) 19:46, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, I'll do that from now on. Thanks. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 19:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check our the templates on WP:VAND, those are the ones that gets used the most it seems. Party on!

Roodog2k (talk) 19:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lost season 3

Hi there! I am beginning my attempt to promote all of Lost's third season to a Good Topic. As you've already been involved in Lost episode articles, would you be interested in helping edit the third season and expand a few of its episodes? I made a template, User:Ruby2010/Other interests#Lost season 3, that lists what articles need some TLC (14 or so in all). If you're so inclined, feel free to pick whichever episodes interest you the most. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 20:16, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll certainly help out as best I can. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 20:23, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the barnstar! It's much appreciated! :) Ruby2010 comment! 21:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood shollywood

Do you seriously think this editor is doing good? I just reverted most of their edits because they are randomly removing properly cited material from articles (even FAs) and leaving them broken with dangling citation name tags. BollyJeff || talk 19:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the editor means harm, I just think they're trying to remove exaggeration from articles, but don't quite know how to go about referencing their own claims. If they go too far, they should be warned however. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 19:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please.

You could at least leave me a more specific message instead of substituting {{uw-vandalism2}}. What was wrong with my changes? I was redoing an edit of which I am fairly certain that it was not vandalism. I feel offended right now. Ian (178.37.151.76 (talk) 19:48, 6 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Well, I am definitely capable of making mistakes. To clarify controversial edits, try to explain your actions by putting it in edit summaries. Your edit removed half of the article and the images you removed from the page were pretty rational. Sorry to have caused offence. --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 19:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 01:30, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rita Re-NominationHey, Cheesy Kid! I just noticed Rita's talk page pop up on my watchlist and realized that you renominated it. I feel kind of guilty shoving it off in the back for a while, but I've been focusing a lot on the Glee related articles. The only really big problem during the GAN was the fact that the literature section was really lacking detail and should have been expanded on. They also suggested a second copy-edit to tighten up the prose a little. Not sure where to go from there. I would love to tag team again if you want? HorrorFan121 (talk) 03:12, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Hello again, old WikiFriend, tagging up again would be just brilliant. Think I'll work on the literature section for now, but I'm really not sure how much I can do... --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 13:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply] Hmm...it looks longer now. I can try and pull together some book reviews and interviews about the books later tonight. I have however, never picked up one of these books so I'm not sure how to put together this section. I believe she's less prominent in the books, but that just might be my perspective of it.. HorrorFan121 (talk) 21:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Maliki edit explanationI was editing the Maliki page in order to remove Salafi propaganda - the citation of line that I deleted led to an ebook which was a Salafi manual presenting complete misrepresentations and misinterpretations of the method of prayer according to the Maliki school. What I did was only done with the best of intentions. Please restore my edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.59.200.237 (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Faraday GAThanks for addressing all the issues, I have passed the Daniel Faraday article! Canada Hky (talk) 03:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Thanks very much for reviewing it. :D --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 13:52, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Check your regexpYou are damaging HTML comments! -- John of Reading (talk) 17:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Yeah sorry, I had my AWB remove linebreaks from a huge list of pages and forgot to remove it in the find and replace section, I only did it to 2 articles fortunately and have undone my other revision to Pochvalov. --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 17:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]FlannansI note you have repeated your addition of "Persondata" fields to Flannan Isles. WP:DATA says "Persondata is a special set of metadata that can and should be added to biographical articles only." This isn't a biographical article and I have reverted. Ben MacDui 12:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]No Thank You...Thanks - but it's all part of spending a couple of hours on Huggle :-) --Wintonian (talk) 13:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Hah, fair enough. :P Happy editing to you good sire. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 13:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]ThanksFor the revert. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]No problem :) That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 16:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]AnthropomorphismIt has been well established through the works of Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, Abdul Wahhab, Ibn Baz and other Salafi scholars that their aqeedah (creed) was/is 'anthropomorphic'. As pseudo-revivers of the Islamic religion through the 14th to 18th century, these scholars, may Allah forgive them, beginning with Ibn Taymiyyah, assigned Allah anthropmorphic attributes. There are four creeds in Islam: Athari, Ashari (majority), Maturidi and finally Anthropomorphism. These creeds deal with Allah's attributes in different ways, with the 'Salafi' Anthropomorphic creed being heretical. Please accept my changes. Having read a lot regarding this issue, I think you changing what I have edited and reporting me is unfair. - 78.150.69.16Very well, but I have not reported you. Wikipedia is based mainly on the concept that content must have reliable sources, otherwise information could be libellous or misleading. If you could find a reference for your claims, you would be more than welcome to add that info in. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 17:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Gender in Athletics (sport)I've put a comment on the article's Talk page about that Infobox entry. I'd be interested in your thoughts. HiLo48 (talk) 17:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Request for help nominating Pearlasia Gamboa article for WP:DYKWhy did you blank my request for DYK help? I am guessing you thought it is because you thought it was a hoax or vandalism. I can send you a copy of the actual Pearlasia Gamboa email to US Attorney Timothy Lucey, if it seems to fantastic to actually believe, and too fantastic for DYK, once you see the actual emails yourself. 98.234.235.21 (talk) 19:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Oh wow, it was a genuine request? Hah, that's actually quite funny. Yeah, send the e-mail, I'll revert my reversion. Try changing the title, it seemed too spammy to be true. heh. Wish the best. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 19:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]PGDYKThanks. Please help others stay safe, who might not take seriously threats by those with felonious histories a mile deep of carrying out the threats, because they reasonably appear to be an unbelievable hoax, unless one reads the 1980's LA Times (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=z61PAAAAIBAJ&sjid=d1MDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4598,1097763&dq=allied+artists+bugging+murder&hl=en - Allied Artists records and Kim Richards Solicit murder of cop and bug sheariff's offices, on Allied Artists Fraud and Kim Richards 1986, and the "San Gabriel Valley Transit Authority" and Upsaala Mafia in 2006), or Washington Post or CBS News on PG (in refernce section), and stay safe yourself. Admin Arthur Rubin said on my talk page that it is OK to edit from an anonymous IP, relating to the "alternative medicine" and "alternative medical hold" aspects of all of this, and to do so even if you have a Wikipedia account. None of it has reliable sources, and when the news breaks, Wikipedia is not news, so it can't go in the articles for a while, so best to warn editors on their talk pages. More info is at Quatllos! website, with images of documents and emails posted on kidnap thread, and GPR thread including about Richards and Allied Artists, in addition to PG. PPdd (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]What???Sorry ma'friend but he is one of the rudest people of the world. I ask him to do something but he, not only don't answer to me but instead of it he deletes my comments. --178.128.75.48 (talk) 18:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]