User talk:Icarus3/Archive2

/Archive1: June 2005�—March 2006

Please post new comments to this page, and not to an archive.

User: Raccoon Fox

thanks for helping me remove the duplicate templates on my page.

Raccoon Fox 04:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC

Alternative Living AfD

Dear Icarus3, I'm new to Wikipedia & have just created the Alternative Living page. I've noticed that you've placed the following tags on the top page: (cur) (last) 07:57, 20 March 2006 Icarus3 (adding AfD tag) (cur) (last) 07:56, 20 March 2006 Icarus3 (NPOV tag)

The page is new, and a work in progress, still learning the rope here. Would like to hear your advice and input on the code of practice at Wikipedia.

sincerely, WikiSoul

Thanks for your interest in Wikipedia, and especially for being open to learning instead of getting mad and removing tags you don't like. You wouldn't believe how many people do that!

The best place to start is with the links in the welcome message that Kukini left on your talk page. If you're wondering what policies in particular I believe Alternative Living is in violation, check out WP:NOT and WP:SPAM. As for the POV tag, that is because is is, so far, reporting only one point of view. It reads more like an advertisement for a certain dietary lifestyle than a neutral article about it (or even an actual article, covering a topic distinct from the numerous other article in the "See also" section).

Listing an article as an Article for Deletion does not mean that it will necessarily be deleted. All it means is that the matter is up for discussion. An admin will review the article's entry and act according to the general consensus of Wikipedia editors who participate.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia. We all start out as newbies, but I'm sure you'll catch on in no time! --Icarus 08:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've read many other pages, not sure what's the benchmark for Neutrality is. For each topic has its believers and doubters, with both sides being equally passionate. In my humble opinion, most importantly is to ensure page creators don't set out to disparage or demean any individuals or their belief systems, but treat all with respect. --WikiSoul

Right now it's actually more about a lack of citing sources for the medical, so I went ahead and removed the NPOV tag. The part I thought was the most iffy is gone now anyway. --Icarus 09:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tomboy

I remember seeing it on a documentary a while back. PMA 16:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember the name of the documentary? --Icarus 18:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gender thing on Four Corners IIRC - i'll find an episode guide. PMA 18:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion

I created for all the commonwealth realms articles on the monarch of. See e.g. Monarch of Belize. I did this because every country has a Politics of series. In this series allways a head of state article is included. It helps to find your way quickly. It would be nice if these Monarchs of XX could be enlarged, but at the moment this is what I can offer. Now it is proposed to delete these articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monarch of Jamaica. Because of the consistency of the Politics of series, I oppose the deletion of these articles. Could you reconsider your opinion? Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 09:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

power walking

I've added a link to a typical web site and removed the 'unsourced' tag. Please reinstate tag and/or find more references if still unhappy. Bob aka Linuxlad 10:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Furniture

Just curious when 11,000 employees and 2 billion in sales is not notable? What the hell? WP:CORP isn't even policy yet, so no need to quote it. If you really doubt that it's notable, please say something in the talk page... for now I'm removing under the assumption that you made a mistake. ---J.Smith 16:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm always suspicious of new business articles (and bio articles), as they're very often vanity. I wasn't sure in this case, which is why I added then notability template instead of a nomination for deletion. Upon looking over the article again, I think you're right. The article is short and has only one external link besides the official site, which are sometimes red flags, but in this case it's because the article is a new stub and not because the subject matter is non-notable. The way I see it, adding the notability template is like asking a question, and you've answered that question, so thanks! --Icarus 19:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. Sorry for my tone... :( ---J.Smith 19:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Asian American

Hey, just wanted to thank you for re-redirecting Southeast Asian American and East Asian American to Asian American. I wasn't sure whether they should've been directed to the group of people or their origins. Admittedly, a big reason I redirected them to their places or origin was because User:Dark Tichondrias seemed less likely to begin an edit war that way (he's been heavily pushing pro-Asian, pro-racial categorization POVs lately). — Indi ^{[ talk ]} 12:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google rule

This article has now been listed at WP:AFD, please come and participate in the discussion, whatever your opinion. --Hetar 05:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paramita

Your tag's discussion wikilinke lead to nowhere. You might want to set the discussion up in Paramita talk page, explaining why you think the article should be deleted and content transfered to the main article. Vapour

Thanks for the heads-up! When I suggested the merge, The Ten Perfections was a brand new and very short article. Someone else changed it to a redirect to Paramita after that, which I agree is a better way to handle it. I'd have done so myself, instead of suggesting a merge, if I'd known that there was such an article to redirect to. I've removed the merge tag on the main Buddhism article now. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused! --Icarus 05:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FASD

Hi Icarus, thanks for trying to clean up Trisma's edits to FASD. I take the view that it's best to revert material like that, because it's potentially harmful, so I've done that. I'll look to see if I can find the name of the Surgeon General in 1981, but I wonder whether it matters because it was a warning issued by the office, not by the man personally. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

You know, you could always use the edit summary if you don't want to lok at the diff for every edit on your watchlist, the only things minor edits do in practice is weeding out non-vandalism for RC patrollers (vandals usually never mark their edits as minor) and determine the main contributors of an article if anyone wants to cite us [1].

Oh, and that's a help page, not a policy :) -Obli (Talk)^? 11:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the userbox

Check it out - I got your userbox lined up with the previous one using a table. I'm proud of myself for that lol. Good idea making that userbox. J. Finkelstein 17:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for giving me my first Barnstar. Believe it or not, I did actually follow the link to Bridesmill to see what else we were instigated to delete. --Lambiam ^Talk 20:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD and qif

Hi. Saw your question on my talk regarding AfD template. The problem is, the AfD template is subst'ed into articles. On older version of the AfD template had a call to {{qif}} in it. qif is now replaced by the built-in #if:. These are programming like constructs that emit one of two texts depending on a condition (see also m:ParserFunctions). This doesn't make that much sense when a template is substed as in the AfD template case. The problem is, substed templates make troubles for template mechanics like me, as we have to visit every page where a template has been substed if changes are needed.

{{qif|test={{NAMESPACE}}|then=|else=}} has no effect, as both the then and the else text is empty, so it can be safely removed. qif is deprecated and may be even deleted (there is a delete discussion going on, see talk on qif).

Maybe it should be rethought if substing the Afd template is such a good idea. OTOH, with the new #if: it is a bit less painfully, and maybe the substing of templates will be improved in the future (currently the #if: constructs are just copied unoptimized (not evaluated) into the articles, which is indeed not optimal, because the conditional expressions are constant at substing time and could be evaluated at substing time.

Bah. I hope I didn't increase your confusion with all this :-). Just ask more if needed. Cheers! --Ligulem 08:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acne

You added a warning re Benzoyl peroxide causing bleaching - which is true enough. I wondered though if this info should not be transferred to be under Benzoyl peroxide article itself, (rather than Acne). Whilst it is an issue for BP use, it is not a factor that generally affects whether or not it is appropriate for a given severity of acne, or in a patient deciding on choosing between treatment options. Similarly the antibiotic section does not mention for the tetracycline antibiotics that they may cause sun photo-sensitive rashes (yet the specific article on the drug group does). I thought I'd ask you directly rather than seeming to just blank your edit and transfer it elsewhere :-) David Ruben ^Talk 00:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for comments. I would point out that wikipedia should not be giving out medical advice, so no one should "only check the main article on acne before going out and buying over-the-counter products". You also mentioned that a doctor would discuss side-effects on prescription drugs, which lead me to wonder (seriously for a moment) - are there not patient information sheets provided inside each pack of benzoyl peroxide that gives out appropriate warnings - its a legal requirement in the UK/Europe ? Of course people often don't read instructions, but similarly wikipedia does not give precise warnings over use of chain-saws, but would be very stupid not to read the copious warnings that come with there instructions.

Now for my most important (not) concern for your comments: re your bedsheets being stained - I rather thought that BP was quite useful at keeping white sheets free from any stains, saving on any additional Vanish (or equivalent) stain-removers and the amount of washing powder needed to achieve that crisp clean look :-) Of course that assumes one starts with having white sheets in the first place, but otherwise I'm sure you are by now the proud possessor of hospital-white sheets at no additional expense :-) Ok, I giggled too much over this and so surrender - I'll leave your added comment in Acne for now :-) Yours David Ruben ^Talk 10:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film); Fingering (sexual act); Anticipation (emotion); Unauthorized Chinese Harry Potter books; The Harry Potter Lexicon; Hog's Head; Adrian Rawlins; Gillyweed; Rifampicin; Phineas Nigellus; Harry Potter and the Toenail of Icklibõgg; James and Oliver Phelps; Marvolo Gaunt; David Holmes (actor); Remorse; Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (video game); Rodolphus Lestrange; Bane (Harry Potter); Hogwarts headache

Cleanup: Jamie Waylett; Geraldine Somerville; Chris Rankin
Merge: Obliviator; Minor characters associated with Quidditch; Eileen Prince
Add Sources: Bellatrix Lestrange; Filius Flitwick; Durmstrang
Wikify: Shambuka; Vidya Shilp Academy; Plasmapheresis
Expand: Crash test; SEPECAT Jaguar; Potassium hydroxide

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

red hair

Red_hair The avatars are a social function of Red_haired_people, and the "See also" correctly is about the hair. (you call it "stretching it"). However it really suits the article about the people, and it is a public service, you/anyone can have a redhead avatar today, and owe nothing for it (it is not a commerical advert).

I do not know if it makes sense to remove my links, but it is worth trying (as i make mistakes of course). It is not an article i created myself, and i do not like it the way it is. Probably you can help out re-write it? Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 14:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

suggest bot

by the way i subscribed to the suggest bot i found on your talk, hope you do not take it personal (as it is not good style to browse people's business by random) Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 14:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert by automated bot

Your recent edit to Seth Bohstedt was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept our apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 19:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This revertion was in error, and I have notified the bot's owner. I can understand where the mistake came from, however, as the article in question was nothing more than the article name repeated over and over and over again. When I added the speedy deletion tag, I also removed all but a dozen or so lines of this. The bot mistook this for blanking. It's totally understandable, so I just re-did my edit and no harm done. --Icarus 19:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Icarus

Thank you for that tip of advice, but please anything that was derived from the "defiinitions" was entirely for the purpose of clarification because It does not seem logical to have something like "corporeal" as exclusive to one article, but a general link

It's a reflex

Well I'd be damned, the things I'd learnd if I bothered to read things like those carefully :). I must unfortunately report that my minor-marking is still reflexive and rampant, but I'll try to keep it out of the way when dealing with prods and afds. (This message was marked as minor) -Obli (Talk)^? 06:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Childwithdimples.jpg

Image:Childwithdimples.jpg: what's wrong with this image? I made it myself...why can't I put it up there? (Oahc)

If you really are the person who took this photo, then there's no problem. However, we need some kind of evidence to show this. You were notified about this on your talk page back in February, but did not respond either on your talk page or on the talk page of the person who notified you. If you can provide such evidence now, the image will be removed from the list of possibly unfree images and will not be deleted. If you cannot prove that you are authorized to grant GFDL permission for this image, then it will be deleted to protect its copyright. --Icarus 21:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do I provide the evidence? (Oahc)