User talk:Calton

; Archives
	Archive01 12:21, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC); Archive02 20:23, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC); Archive03 10:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC); Archive04 12:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC); Archive05 02:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC); Archive06 23:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC); Archive07 11:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC); Archive08 07:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC); Archive09 04:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC); Archive10 04:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC);

It's clean-up duty, mopping up after the dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that.

Some ground rules before you leave a message

I am not an admin. I did not delete your page or article, nor did I block you. I may have, at the very most, suggested or urged deletion of pages or articles but I have no power or ability to do so on my own. I'm just an editor.
This also means, of course, I cannot undelete your page/article, nor unblock you. I can, however, offer you a cookie.
If you are here to make an argument dependent on arcane or convoluted interpretations of Wikipedia guidelines or rules, note that Wikipedia is not game of nomic nor a court of law. Adherence to common sense and rational argument trumps ruleslawyering, as far as I'm concerned. I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt, thankyouverymuch.
There is no Rule 4.
Do not assume I'm stupid, especially when arguing for something obviously untrue. I do not respond well to having my intelligence insulted.
Don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams. Do I look like Montel Williams? Do I? NO? Then don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams.
Especially bogus, hostile, and/or trolling remarks are subject to disemvoweling.
Please post at the bottom of the page and "sign" your posts using the squiggly things (--~~~~).
Please extinguish all cigarettes, as this is a No Smoking page.

Thank you. -- The Management.

Open letter

Evv, Deiz, Calton and Luna Santin I really appreciate the help and support that you were doing lately on my articles but honestly there is no need for that. I would like to advise you people to take care for articles like Ratko Mladić, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic and others like them and help the general readers know the truth about their miserable massacres that they did to kids and insistent people in Bosnia and Kosovo .

There is not just Mr. Abazi’s article that has been vandalized by you but all the Kosovo famous and honorable people including the history of Kosovo. It has been so clear that all the editing that you people have done about that Country is just to make a bad propaganda now that finally Serbia will lose for ever Kosovo in its final status which for sure would be Independent country as it disserves.

I understand your feeling because you are grown in the communism system where everything was leaded by the dictator and you were their kids doing the same they did with people from Kosovo. Even now through the internet you wana talk about us believing in your fathers lies that Kosovo is yours. 7 is the century that we accepted you in that region to work, clean for us and 7 [2007] is gona be the number that you gona say Goodbye for ever to Kosovo. Listen people Wikipedia is free and you can create any network to put adds and protected your fake ideas but please put ones your finger in your head and ask your self how can this be yours when there was never more than 10% shkije - serbs in there And what right do you have to talk about it when you may have never been there and when the whole world knows that Kosova/o is not Slavic place . Tell your fathers that All the churches and abbeys where owned by chthonic Albanians before 1200 and Vatican has the property papers for that. Accept the truth.

For the end. There wouldn’t be any other respond on this desiccation page or any other like this from me. I just needed to tell you this. You can take it off if you feel like some none Balkan people will read this little truth. You do what you can to lie and I do what I can to tell the truth with my articles. Beni

Re: copyvio

I'm not sure I completely understand the comment you left on my talk page. I am pretty new to the 'New Page Patrol' and if I see something that looks suspiciously cut and pasted I stick the first few words of the article into Google and see what I come up with - if its positive then I copyvio it no matter what, even if the author claims to have permission from the site in question. Didn't realise there was anything more to it than that--Edchilvers 17:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You win

Congrats. --Jayron32 02:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Frequency Quadrupole

The context?? what do you mean. A radio frequecy quadrupole accelerates electrons. What more do you want? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjspe1 (talk • contribs) 04:36, October 19, 2006 (UTC)

How about: "A radio frequency quadrupole accelerates electrons." ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjspe1 (talk • contribs) October 19, 2006 (UTC)

Lobbying in AfDs

Wow guys, wow. I think I get the message. Maybe. Just a little. Thank you Wikipedia Administrators. No more consensus building. Yeesh. Smeelgova 05:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

No more consensus building. That indicates to me, at least, that, no, you didn't actually get the message, but press on regardless. --Calton | Talk 08:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not pressed on or done anything of the sort. And yes, I did get the message. Perhaps I do not understand, can there be consensus building? Please, attempt to be kind and polite, and I will listen and obey. Smeelgova 09:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Perhaps this is what I do not understand: How exactly does one "consensus-build", and not risk being summarily blocked by a Wikipedia Administrator?

You DO see the difference, right? Your "no more consensus building" makes it sound as if you believe that a couple of comments to you suddenly brought the practice to a grinding halt; it is not and never has been the case that actual consensus-building is or has been discouraged.

And as for the "all-knowing" admins -- well, there are about 1,000 admins, so if one blocks you unfairly, there are 999 others you can make appeals to. --Calton | Talk 05:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does one discuss issues with other editors of of like-minded opinion on their talk pages, without the risk of being blocked? How does one make other editors of like-minded opinion aware of issues that are important to them? I have started to add caveats to talk pages of other editors when I post to them, to make sure that watching Administrators know for the future that I am being VERY CAREFUL to avoid "recruiting" or anything of the sort. Thanks for the discussion and advice, but please, try to be more kind in your language to me, I am still relatively new and trying to learn and listen. Yours, Smeelgova 05:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please, at least acknowledge a few things. I stopped the actions in question after being warned by User:Jossi. Everything after that was just Administrators getting upset at my discussion, not further actions. I will try my best to not do this anymore, and will tread very carefully when talking to other editors on their talk pages. I would appreciate it if you try to have a kinder general attitude towards me, I am not playing the martyr, I simply want to have a better editing relationship going on here. Thank you for your time. Yours, Smeelgova 05:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

- Thank you for the advice. I really wish you'd calm down a little bit though and act a little nicer. Let's all agree that this episode is over, I've learned a bit from all of your commentary, and try to edit my POV/contribution patterns in the future. Yours, Smeelgova 06:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy deletion criteria A7

You should realize that criterion A7 refers only to articles that don't explain the importance or significance of their subject at all. Articles that do explain significance or importance may not meet various notability criteria such as WP:BIO, WP:WEB, WP:MUSIC, et cetera, but failing to meet those criteria is not grounds for speedy deletion. You seem to have a bit of confusion on this point. Non-notable subjects shouldn't be deleted speedily if their importance is explained, because then it becomes a matter of opinion and some community involvement is important. Just a friendly reminder. Cheers! Mango juice^talk 17:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smile

Smeelgova has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Let's all try to get along better. Thank you for all of your informative commentary. Hope you are doing well, and have a good weekend. I'll probably be taking a short break because I've got ambulance training and filling in on a volunteer shift. Warmly Yours, Smeelgova 12:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The sideshow

Hey Calton, I've been watching the Gene_poole/Centauri sideshow on Elonka's RfA. I just noticed that Taxman struck Centauri's !vote with the comment, "One per customer please." I don't know much about the situation, but do you think it would be worth listing at RFCU for vote-stacking? It seems a bit ridiculous that this has continued on and I think the links you posted where quite compelling. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 15:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Cruz Yachts - Spam?

Calton,

You marked an article which I have been developing as spam. I disagree!

There is a fine line between promoting a product (spam) and documenting a company which produces products (viable Wikipedia articles).

I began that article yeasterday and have improved it today. However, I had to request reinstatement of my work-in-progress.

I suggest that rather than jumping to the "spam" conclusion in the future, that you post your concerns at the discussion page, and or contact one or more of the major contributors.

I'm sure that you are zealously editing with the best of intentions, but please be respectful of other people's hard work.

Thanks.

Kevin

Tagging Alex Machacek

Why did you tag the article ? Just because of inclusion of "jaw-dropping" word ? You could've just deleted that word. Why tag the article ? Just read the full article. Where do you feel, it is like an advertisement. Don't sabotage other's hard work. By the way, Alex Machacek is a leading fusion guitarist and he is in no way related to me. Where does the idea of advert comes in ? I am removing the tag. If you have any issues, please tell me first. Don't tag articles just like that.

--N R S | ^T/_M\^B 09:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Type specimens

Hi, thanks for the comments. Please feel free to borrow the design. I love Johnston, great face. Is it the same face as that used on the London Underground? Scotland yard commissioned a proprietary face a few years back that owes much to Johnston, right down to diamond shaped dot on i and j. See you live in Tokyo. Great city, I have visited twice. Amazing. Will look for your newly formatted Johnston. Best, Jim CApitol3 01:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: great printing museum in Tokyo, in ground floor of a beautiful contemporary building with a concert hall and offices above.

Printing Museum, Tokyo web site CApitol3 01:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Get your attitude correct, kid

Before trying to advise others, first try to rectify your own attitude, kid. You were told the same thing by another editor. You should've learned from that. By the way, he has the skill of shifting from legato to scacatto easily and it isn't my POV. Critics and jazz greats like McLaughlin alike, and others have said so. So please don't go on tagging articles, just like that. --N R S | ^T/_M\^B 04:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kiddie, that's what I am asking you. What is THE problem. Would you have the discretion to specify the problem. If you don't specify the problem, please remove the tags, since then they are useless and seem to be your own POV. --N R S | ^T/_M\^B 04:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I told you to provide me the problems in the article. How can I know what the problem is before you specify. As far as the link you've provided is concerned, I am the sole editor so far, so whatever is the problem you think is, that must be edited by me. So please provide the specific problems. --N R S | ^T/_M\^B 04:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chill out Calton. It's okay. The article looks just fine to me. Grand master ka 05:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I've no doubt that your intent was to improve the article, but you guys should tone it down a touch. -- Samir धर्म 05:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, my bad, the article has been improved since then (by New Rock Star.) But here's what you do next time: You fix the few offending sentences. Then there's no need to edit war over a tag and throw a HUGE hissy fit on the other editor's page. It seems pretty clear to me that the article is not being used for self-promotion, and it wouldn't have been hard to fix the POV. As for referencing -- well, most of the articles on Wikipedia need more references. I sometimes write articles before I add references. New Rock Star not only fixed the language in the introductory paragraph, he added a reference for some of the claims, and he is not owning the article, but reacting to the rude manner in shich you dealt with the situation. Like I said, cool down. Grand master ka 06:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever pleases you. I'm working on adding references to the article to make it better right now. That seems like the best thing to do. Grand master ka 07:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka

Thank you for expressing an interest in my recent RfA. As a followup, I wanted to let you know that unfortunately consensus was not reached, and the nomination was not successful. My current plans are to continue contributing in a positive manner to Wikipedia, and if there is anything that I can do in the future to help further address your concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. --Elonka 10:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to talk to me...

It might be better to use a talk page, not an edit summary.[1] My rationale is the same as I have already expressed on the article talk page - She is known publicaly for nothing else, so including her name does not tell our readers anything, and invades the privacy of her family. Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Michellejbuckley

It's perfectly acceptable to move a vanity bio to a userpage, per WP:USERFY#What_can_be_userfied. I do it regularly, when the subject's name is the same as the editor's username or when the article refers to the subject as "I". I find that vanity articles that are userfied aren't re-created as freqently as articles that are simply speedily deleted. While the editor probably didn't intend to make a userpage instead of a vanity article, saying 'you must have done this by mistake' gives the new editor a slightly nicer welcome than "I've deleted your bio, now don't do it again!"

Where did you get the idea that this was innapropriate? -- Vary | Talk 15:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for catching the link spam. --BostonMA ^talk 00:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not spam links

The Starwood Festival is the most notable pagan event in the US. Any neo-pagan being a speaker or a performer at that festival is a significant event in their career and it deserves mention. Mattisse and her sock went around adding fact tags to every mention, which is why there are citation. Those are NOT commercial pages, but archives of past events. Are you anti-pagan? —Hanuman Das 01:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't put them there, but I will defend them. I am not a Neo-pagan, I am an old school pagan, a Hindu. I am quite familiar with anti-pagan bias. And when I see someone systmatically removing all mention of the biggest pagan event in the US, I smell a rat. —Hanuman Das 01:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Your last message violates WP:CIVIL. —Hanuman Das 01:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't accuse you of anything. I asked you a question. —Hanuman Das 01:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your ethics

I was really beginning to wonder what was going on around here regarding all the fierce protection of Rosencomet! I had concluded that Wikipedia was seriously corrupt. So, thank you for having ethics. And not being afraid to stand up for them. Mattisse (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks + admiration

It's been my mission in life and you are the first person who has "gotten" it. Some people are crusaders -- that's me. You obviously are more level-headed and I admire that. But I have spent six months one way or another trying to draw the Rosencomet thing to someone's attention -- until I just gave up and felt hopeless. But when I gave up, my view of Wikipedia was seriously compromised. Still is. You don't have to accept my thanks. And you can call me paranoid or anything you want. Mattisse (talk) 02:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Hey, you get the spam (below), plus personal greetings from sunny California...

Please accept my thanks for your support in my successful RfA, which I was gratified to learn passed without opposition on October 25, 2006. I am looking forward to serving as an administrator and hope that I prove worthy of your trust. With my best wishes, --MCB 06:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you grow up. You don't even know anything about Gaither High School. I'm a student there. Don't try and tell me what is and isn't true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhythmnation2004 (talk • contribs) 09:29, October 26, 2006 (UTC)

spam link noticeboard?

Hi Calton, do you know if there is a spam-link noticeboard? --BostonMA ^talk 19:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was just hoping there was a more or less painless way to put an end to this. --BostonMA ^talk 00:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rubrey, et al

Speedy delete the lot. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CSD A7: Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:00, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not spam

The links have been approved as valid reference citations by Samir, see his talk page. Please do not go against the rulings of admins. Thanks. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 16:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then please use valid dispute resolution processes to determine the validity of each instance, individually. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 16:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween Train proxy check requests

I haven't so far been able to confirm any of the IPs from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yamanote Halloween Train which you listed at WP:OP as proxies. However, 221.187.93.210, which you didn't mention on WP:OP, is listed on dsbl.org as a socks5 proxy, and I have blocked it accordingly. (Also, 87.75.6.127 is a pretty odd case; I'm not quite sure how someone managed to edit Wikipedia from what appears to be DVR appliance.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:05, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page tagging

Well done for tagging the Xicast userspam spampage. I was considering doing it along with all the rest of the stuff (which I did with nary a pang of conscience). I didn't know you could do it though - after scrutinising the CSD for all of a few minutes. ;) Bubba hot ep 00:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween train page

Have a look at the VfD page and you'll see that the consensus is to keep it. I don't know who deleted it. Vincent 01:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need to should Calton. You're right of course, I wasn't careful enough, and the deleter ID'd himself. But that's still 10 keeps to five deletes. Shouldn't be deleted. And I live in Tokyo, I've know of the party for twenty years. It's a real even, like it or not (and I don't). Vincent 01:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bold face is better than all caps, but still no need to keep you're voice at such a raised level. It is not a closed debade. Not a debate I partticularly want to join. But admin abuse is, well, wrong. (and BTW, I apologize for the comic strip euphisms (i.e. f*&%*7g ) the article talk page. Cheers, Vincent 01:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read the notability criteria and the reason used to justify ending the debate and deleting the page is wrong. The even is notable among members of the foreign community in Tokyo. It is documented on the net, and what I read matches what I know. This article is being deleted simply because the admin does not like it. Guess what, I don't like it either, but I won't bury my head in the sand and pretend that this annual tradition (20+ years old) doesn't exist. Vincent 01:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My view is that the admin abused his power so I do not feel bound by his request, until other admins participate. Vincent 01:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments to User:Vfp15

With regards to your comments on User talk:Vfp15 about this user's "reading-comprehension problems": Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —Psychonaut 01:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was being quite literal, so try a little research before slapping templates on user talk pages.

Recap: he left a message on my page:

Have a look at the VfD page and you'll see that the consensus is to keep it. I don't know who deleted it [emphasis mine]. [2]

I pointed out that this information WAS AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE he referred to, AND pointed out -- using a quote from that page at the main AFD page -- why IP comments are discounted and consensus wasn' what he claimed. [3] Despite the latter, his response was:

But that's still 10 keeps to five deletes. [4]

So I repeated the quotes, with the most important sentences boldfaced. His response was to harp about about "not shouting" with boldface AND claiming "It is not a closed debade [sic]" despite it saying so, again, right at the top of the page.

That's THREE things in a row that are stated plainly on a single page (one of them extracted and repeated for him) and which he misses (or ignores), so yeah, he objectively has a reading comprehension problem.

Or worse, as he's the main antagonist in the WP:LAME Hall of Fame edit war over the Charles Darwin/Abraham Lincoln trivia mention (something I had no idea about until HE brought it up), so I have no expectation whatsoever of him being reasonable. --Calton | Talk 02:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)--Calton | Talk 02:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am familiar with User:Vfp15 and was involved in the arbitration case about the Charles Darwin/Abraham Lincoln dispute. I think his behaviour was ludicrous then. However, that doesn't excuse the tone you adopted with him. I've seen no evidence since his unbanning that he has been anything other than a conscientious editor, so remember to keep civil and assume good faith. —Psychonaut 02:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Steere

Do you remember him?

Something that I found on him at BoardGameGeek:

My recent experiences in SDG were terrible: I had a weird discussion on the *true* meaning of the word "simultaneous" as if there were just one truth, one *true* definition. This reminded me rather of the world view of religious cults who want to save you and who claim that just they can do it. This was followed in other threads by a deliberate misquotation to make me look ungrateful, and, instead of real arguments, the other side was called "ridiculous", "megalomanic" and "pseudo-intellectual". I got an e-mail that warned me against a "troll" who dominates all the discussions and, I should add, is permitted to insult everybody. I met him soon. There is an atmosphere of fear generated by the owner of the group who supports this kind of behavior and then exclude those from the SDG discussion forum who defend themselves. So, take care of yourself and keep a low profile if you chose to play there. If you want to know more, just write me privately, join the group stacking games at Yahoo! ( http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/stacking_games/ ) or just take a look at the recent discussions in SDG forums to see how this (pseudo-)community ticks; e.g. http://forums.superdupergames.org/viewtopic.php?t=427 http://forums.superdupergames.org/viewtopic.php?t=429 http://forums.superdupergames.org/viewtopic.php?t=431 http://forums.superdupergames.org/viewtopic.php?t=434 http://forums.superdupergames.org/viewtopic.php?t=436

Thank you for posting the links to the discussions. I think they will speak for themselves. I remain deeply saddened by the actions I felt I had to take but still feel they were the right thing to do. SDG remains an open, free, and above all safe place to gather and play abstract strategy with others around the world. All are welcome. The above list of relevant discussion threads should also include the following: http://forums.superdupergames.org/viewtopic.php?t=438

Any place in which Mark Steere is allowed to intimidate other users can hardly be called "safe" (especially if he is supported by Aaron Dalton): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mark_Steere http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive50#MarkSteere http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_July_3&diff=62194693&oldid=62193047 http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/stacking-games/message/1... http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/abstractgames/message/91... http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/abstractgames/message/86... http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/abstractgames/message/85... http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/mancalagames/message/130...

Removal of citations and formatting improvements

Please stop being a Dick. At least check the diffs before reverting article improvements. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The answers to your specific questions, "Accredited by whom? According to whom?" Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and that's stalker girl to you, Calvin. Try to mind your manners in the presence of a lady. :-) Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An accredited educational institute authorized by the state to confer a Master's degree is notable, unless you can provide a different official standard for notability for institutions of higher education. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like the topic for an article about education in Washington State. Feel free to research and write. However, the precise definition is not needed to establish that a school is reputable and notable within its field and state. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I tend to agree that many of the links to Starwood count as undue weight I found your comment on User talk:Ekajati Grow up, Stalker Boy. a violation of WP:NPA. I'd like to remind everyone that I'm still thinking of taking things to WP:DR and these sorts of comments don't help your case. --Salix alba (talk) 08:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Looks like you just earned yourself a block for 3RR unless you revert. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 20:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good ol' Brad. :)

I don't know what the heck to do about this. :) He seems at least semi-notable, but the user asked me to let him take another whack at establishing notability. Guess we'll have to wait and see. Thanks for the update. Been a long time since I've heard from you! Don't be a stranger. - Lucky 6.9 07:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, what the hell? This new world of wikipedia seems very strange to me. Anyway, I don't really get this, the references are there. Have you heard of EVERY signle person on wikipedia? Please leave this one up, he is known for being a key player in the domain name industry, a young ecclectic entrepreneur who has helped out others, and an philanthropist for the arts as well. Take my advice, leave it up, he'd only become more noteable : ) --Utzchips 19:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it was established earlier today by other admins that Brad Hines is noteworthy enough. He seems uninteresting because there is so little information on domaining on wikipedia. We are changing that. Please leave this entry alone.

--24.203.42.57 00:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that Wikipedia needs your Cleaning Firm!

Calton,

You are like the cleaning firm that decides what furniture to throw out when cleaning dust. And then that you also bring your friends for a cleaning party and totally empty room after room does not look good even if you seam to enjoying your self like a King!

Maybe you should offer your services to CIA or simular organisations instead (heard that Google does)? --Swedenborg 10:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American Greetings on RfC

Please leave this listed on RfC for now. This was listed as a formal step per WP:DE guideline. I don't consider it much of an issue either, but I want to establish firm consensus in case I have to move to the next step with the editor who is continually adding this Merge tag. Thanks.--Isotope23 14:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not edit pages you have no business poking around in

Calton, There is no need for you to discrace this potentially great site by your seemingly asinine desire to rule everyone's life. Wikipedia does not need any person like you on this site to disgrace its good name. If I choose to write an autobiography, it is my wish, not yours. It is people like you who try to negate the ability of freedom of speech, which I am constitutionally protected to practice. Further, I feel you do not deserve the right to exhibit such tyrannical behavior. Please stop the nonsense, or I will be forced to take affirmative action, and see to your removal from Wikipedia, if possible. With justice,--Dakltit 1:05 pm, 8 November, 2006

To Calton

Calton, If you find it hard to grasp multi syllabic language, choose not to read it. They are not comprehensive, so I feel you should have no problem with them, seeing as you seem like a smart person. It is as simple as that. Last I checked, you did not have administrator privileges, so I find your that your personal opinions do not matter. I choose to submit information to this site. I agree with you that it was extremely nonsensical and completely useless to anyone. But why should that matter? If you really feel the need to be childish, go ahead and contact the administrators of this website. I could honestly care less. However, this will not change the ability of me being able to access Wikipedia and express myself on it. As you know, there are computers everywhere in this world, so it is hard to ban every IP address. I won't be so petty as to continue attempts at ruining a site like this, for the attempts would be nothing short of futile. Further, please forgive my narcissistic nature and seemingly apparent superiority complex. Perhaps I do not fully understand the rules of this site, and perhaps you have the upper hand in this debate. But I still find it painfully unethical to give people to power to deface or remove the work of other people without their consent, whether their articles are considered unuseful or anything else. Just on the side, do you get paid to edit articles and such? I have heard that people actually recieve payments for doing various things on Wikipedia. --Dakltit 11:14 pm, 8 November, 2006

Okay, so I'm supposed to be civil

I don't have a lot of time to write this, but you seriously didn't get what I was talking about. I wasn't talking about my own article, I was talking about OTHER articles submitted by OTHER people, not mine. So, I'm going to leave you alone now, and it would be nice for you to leave me alone too. I know it's not in my nature to be nice, and I also know it probably isn't right to ask it of other people, but whatever. At this point, I don't really care. I'm not saying you won this debate by being right, I'm saying I give up because it's pointless. It gets me nowhere and benefits me in no way. So, yeah. --Dakltit 6:53 am, 9 November, 2006

AfD Nomination: Liza Wright

I've nominated the article Liza Wright for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. I am notifying you because of your previous involvement in the editing of this article. I do not feel that Liza Wright satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liza Wright. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of Liza Wright during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. GringoInChile 17:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't an apology

I wasn't apologizing...and there was no self martyring involved. You seriously need to learn when to stop. --Dakltit 4:42 pm, 10 November, 2006

Just kind of curious about Dakltit contributions. According to [[5]] the first edit was at 20:07, 8 November 2006, yet you posted a warning on his talk page at 00:27, 8 November 2006. Is this some software bug or is there some other explanation? --Salix alba (talk) 00:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted articles won't show up in a user's history. Rklawton 01:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Starwood and Mattise

RFC on me re Starwood & Rosencomet

I have just received notification that a Requests for comment/Mattisse has been opened against my behavior regarding articles related to Rosencomet and Starwood Festival. BostonMA ^talk suggested your name as a person who might be willing to make a comment on it. Would you be willing to comment on the RFC? Thank you! Mattisse (talk) 14:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I see above that you have already been notified. My apologies for the duplicate. Sorry! Mattisse (talk) 14:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movaya Wireless

re: [Movaya Wireless] article This article has been worked on a lot today, and discussed with three other editors. I ([user:jog1973]) have been working on this article for 3 hours tonight, please refrain from adding to delete list, and look at the TALK for this article. Two other WIKI editors have bee nworking WITH me t oget this article in shape.

Other Editors

TruthbringerToronto[User_talk:TruthbringerToronto]
JoeSmack[User_talk:JoeSmack]
ERcheck[User_talk:ERcheck]