User talk:Arcayne

This user values third opinions and occasionally provides one.

File:Skull logo.jpg

CruftEater™ Local 665 Eating cruft since 2007

This user thinks huffing kittens.cannot end well

Howdy! Click here to leave a new message. Rude messages will be deleted at my whim.

♦My Spellbook♦ (Or, "How I Learned to Stop Hatin' & Love All the Crazy") Arc 000 Arc 001 Arc 002 Arc 003 Arc 004 Arc 005 Arc 006 Arc 07 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Interlude: Textboxes What was archived What has gone before... FYI Please see this post. Thank you. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 01:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Re:Hiya OK, thanks. Just curious! And btw, I think the Googoosh page is excellent. ЩіκіRocкs talκ 04:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC) You and your ego. I never said you made it excellent! Geeeeeeeez...lol...just joking. ЩіκіRocкs talκ 04:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC) OK this conversation is going on quite a bit, but I just wanted to say that it's nice to see some editors actually have a personality and sense of humour. I think some editors are actually robots!!!! :O ....and I'm not talking about the bots.... ЩіκіRocкs talκ 04:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films January 2008 Newsletter The January 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC) Sorry to ruin your day but.... DG is back...(as a number - no prizes for figuring out which) Colin4C (talk) 21:58, 3 February 2008 (UTC) Hi, not under this IP...but how many does he have? Jack1956 (talk) 20:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC) Dreamguy anon IP has been blocked for 3 months [1] Jack1956 (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC) If only that were an effective corrective tool... - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC) IP user and Nancy Reagan Hey I just wanted to thank you for defending me and the article with this posting on the IP's talk page. He is whacked! He's crazy! According to him, all edits must be discussed on the talk page and there are mutliple users (namely User:Wasted Time R, User:Tvoz, and especially myself) that are out to get him and have been bullying the NR article nonstop. He seems to be digging up supposed dirt on me and why the NR FAC was "problematic" and "unjust", and how multiple users have bullied him because we (namely me) own the article. It's insane. And I've ingored most of it. Unless I am attacked specifically in this upcoming medcab request (which is completely uncalled for), or the FA status of the article is placed in jeopardy, I'm going to ignore it. We (Wasted, Tvoz, me) told him that not all the content he wanted to add is suitable for an encyclopedia, and those that are not completely topic specific to NR should go in other articles. Well he didn't like that. He didn't get his way, so he's called a medcab, a Wikiquette on me, and contacted User:Raul654 to try to get him to intervene. You're right: he's acting like a fourth grader. --Happyme22 (talk) 02:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Please be reminded of this comment. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 03:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Hap, you are welcome. Anon user, I don't need to be reminded of anything, as I am well aware of the situation. Consider that you might be better off seeking other people's input rahter than offering it yourself. Keep your ego in your pants. If you don't you might find something rather important excised. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Ronald Reagan is set to be featured on the main page in about five minutes. Just be alert when you log on, because there is going to be some heavy vandalism! I requested protection and it was denied because it's going to be featured, but here is only some of what happened when Nancy was TFA. As for Nancy's current situation, it appears the medcab mediator called it off - haha! Thanks again, Happyme22 (talk) 23:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Heroes.S1.full.cast.jpg Thanks for uploading Image:Heroes.S1.full.cast.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. This is because it is an image depicting living people, which is easily replaceable. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC) With respect, is it your contention that the image is in fact readily replaceable? I ask, because I haven't seen a cast ensemble grouping image anywhere on the web. Perhaps I am in fact mistaken in my research, but I uploaded it with the conviction that an alternative image does not exist. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC) No, it is my contention that there is a free equivalent that could be created. WP:NFCC #1 requires that no free equivalent is available or could be created, it says nothing of "readily replaceable". Apologies for the poor choice of words in my original message. Just about any fair use image of any combination of living people is not permitted on Wikipedia. Stifle (talk) 17:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC) (You don't need to duplicate a response on my Talk page; for the duration of this conversation, I've watchlisted your page) I am puzzled at your idea that a free image of the vast ensemble exists or is "readily available". Perhaps you have come across such a thing, and could point me to it? Wikipedia use cast ensemble and band group images all the time, as evidenced by just a cursory glance through the 'pedia: Film & Television Smallville, Blake's Seven, Fr. Who, Stargate (FA), Carnivàle (FA), The Office US (FA) (as well as the other versions of the series) Our Gang (FA) The West Wing (FA) The Wire (FA) Music Motörhead (FA) Pearl Jam (FA) Pink Floyd (FA) Pixies (FA) ...the list goes on and on, but I think I've presented fairly conclusive evidence that "just about any fair use image of any combination of living people" is in fact permitted in Wikipedia, and in fact is utilized in many, many FA-quality articles. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Harold Washington The Mirth and Girth topic is better handled in a separate article than the statue.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC) There is a whole RFC on the matter that seems to be endorsing my removal of the {{seealso}} and omission of the image. Just follow along on the talk page. However, if you have a strong interest in the article, you may want to nominate it at WP:GAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Read WP:BLP and reconsider the necessity of the actual image on the article. I was merely mentioning GAC because you seem to have an interest in the article and as you can see from my web page I like to help articles at least get up to GA status.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Ooopps!!! Well in general consider the necessity of the image and the way it degrades the article although factually correct if added. I think it might be like putting a picture of a JFK mistress in his article or something. It would an irrelevant inclusion, but probably unkosher. I would have to take time to find the right policy to send you to, but there are probably people active at the RFC who may better directl you. After the RFC is resolved, I encourage you to nominate the article at GAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Reagan talk page posts Definitely. Sorry for the inconvenience, I'm pretty new at this. xD (ApJ (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)) Ah, okay. Well, could you please explain to me why Wikipedia's definitions of things aren't good for references on Wikipedia? That doesn't make any sense to me... (ApJ (talk) 21:25, 6 February 2008 (UTC)) JFK That wasn't me. That's not my IP address and that was vandalism to my page. You'll see User:Rise Above the Vile undid it. --Happyme22 (talk) 03:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC) No worries! It was just a question :) --Happyme22 (talk) 03:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC) I've started an ANI discussion about your latest post Link is here. Benjiboi 10:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Re: Cruft Without a doubt, it's cruft. Maybe you could feed this to Betacommand's bot... good nourishing for it. :) The article could be more in line with the standard layout of film articles, like I just created a stubby The Fast and the Furious (film series) because of a fourth film article being repeatedly recreated. Dunno if you want to expend the effort to dig up all the URLs and numbers. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Crazy No problem. --Happyme22 (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Greetings Arcayne Hey man, Dan here. 'Hope all is well with you. I JUST got your message (relatively new to contributing to Wiki, so please forgive in advance). Your knowledge here is incredible, and literally "credible" if I might add. In-so-far as nesting, neither Elly, Woods or Rustin are nested within the dot com (Blair). This, for various reasons. Wait a sec, I can post this in discussion. I'll grab a beer and meet you there... - Dan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.115.225.54 (talk) 01:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Exhaustion Actually, I sat down to write the what's what on BLAIR but found myself getting too deep into it, too deep for what I can invest in tonight. I'm up to my ass in edits currently and am exhausted. I'll catch up with you later. Bottom line, the externals were all unique of which I'll explain why later. It's not that important they be included, and as I read your bio and learned more the protocol of WIKI it makes sense more and more. You know exactly what you're doing. Just keep our official site and "making of" site and it's solid brother. - Dan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.115.225.54 (talk) 02:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Barnstar The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar You have consistently edited on here with principles and done what you think is in the best interest of the project. You give deep consideration to issues. You are a defender of the Wiki. David Shankbone 18:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC) They are more strict in their interpretation of fair use on Wikipedia than a law court would be, far more strict. That's why it's important that people put in work in obtaining good, original, open content. Speaking of, listen to my recent addition to the Anger page. It is, quite possibly, my most favorite thing I have added to an article. I finally figured out how to do OGG files. It's brilliant - it'll cheer you up. --David Shankbone 01:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC) reagan what the hell is your problem 'sport'. i don't understand your objection to updating a succession box to a template and sorting the footers. --emerson7 04:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Well, let's look at this closer, then. To begin with, while the article is not the article o' the day, it is still a Featured Article. As well, the excessive categorization was correctly termed by another editor as non-necessary and a bit (he was more generous in description than I would have been) over the top. See WP:NOT in that we are not a list. Endless categories that accomplish the same task are unneeded. Add to that that some of the categories are simply false, and you have my reason for reverting it. When you see the same edit - unaltered - reintroduced without discussion after another editor reverted it, it tells me that someone is choosing to forego the idea of discussion. That sort gets zero rhythm with me, so I essentially told you such. Now, you can take the advice of two different editors and discuss your edits, or you can again reintroduce the edit and get reverted again. Your call. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 05:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC) i'm not sure i understand what you mean by over-categorizing. i added no additional categories...i simply put the items in order. i'm still looking for the applicable mos, but the correct order for the footers has FA tags following the categories. --emerson7 05:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC) if you'd first taken the time to figure out what i was doing....by maybe asking.... at any rate, your behaviour has been very unwiki-like. --emerson7 05:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Update Good job on your recent edits. I am impressed by your contributions at Googoosh. The article seems to have potential to become a Good article candidate. In the past we have been on the opposite side--and sometimes same side--of issues. You once said that my POV turns up in my edits. I have recently edited the Hadi Khamenei article [2]. A significant part of the article is authored by me. Please take a look at the article and offer any advice. I am particularly interested in its neutrality.--Agha Nader (talk) 06:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC) hello why did you say a swear word on egdars talk page? Alexoxo (talk) 14:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC) I presume you are referring to this post. Sometimes cuss words are used by people who don't have other words to use. Sometimes, cuss words are used to express extreme emotion. My usage of it was to indicate my level of disappointment with a user who had fallen off the good faith wagon, and I helped them back up onto it. If it offended your eyes to see, I am not really sorry for using it, but I am sorry you were offended by it. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Doczilla's RfA .: Oh, no! There goes To-ky-o! Admin Doczilla! :. File:Godzilla(01)reverse.jpg Thanks for !voting! Thank you for !voting in my RfA which resulted in the collapse of civilization with 92 (94?) support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral. Blame jc37 and Hiding for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and WJBScribe who closed without shouting, "No mop for you!" Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me. I am deeply grateful. Arcayne Thank you for casting the 90th yea vote and for the really special words of support. That meant a lot to me.      "The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." - Michael Althsuler

Googoosh

Why won't you leave the Googoosh page alone? You're like a cyber bully. Who the hell are you to tell people what they can and cannot put on that page. If someone wants to improve the Googoosh page by helping people to know when upcoming concerts might be, let them! It doesn't matter if we're not ticketmaster. What is your problem? Are you even Iranian? Let Iranians, who know much more about her, deal with her page. Go be a annoying somewhere else and leave the editors the heck alone. Nobody likes or wants your input on what should be on the page. It's like there's a whole system of you and your friends who go around messing up pages. You should be blocked for vandalism. GO AWAY! - unsigned comment left by 76.239.18.123 ([[User talk:76.239.18.123) 13:43, February 18, 2008 (UTC)

What's funny here is, that the above is the re-factored "nice version". Hi Arcayne, feel free to delete my comment along with the above should you choose to do so. And one more thing, we aren't ticketmaster. R. Baley (talk) 19:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that wasn't lost on me, and gave me a chuckle, Apparently, he thought that saying swear words was going to get him in trouble. As for deleting this, that's okay. If Shankbone can take worse criticisms on his User Talk Page with aplomb, I can cowboy up and try to do the same. Thanks for pointing our the user's absurdity and clarifying that we aren't a ticket agency. I've since reverted the user's changes on the Googoosh page which, according to the anon, makes me a bully - so maybe I will also steal the anon's lunch money and give him atomic wedgies in the schoolyard. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied at my talkpage. R. Baley (talk) 20:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Appropriate?

Hey man is Operation Spooner's user page entirely Wiki appropriate? It doesn't put down any specific people, but it puts down the idea of concensus, votes, and using discussion pages. Any thoughts? Happyme22 (talk) 02:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Its been addressed before. He will eventually screw up and break the rules,and then his page will serve as the concrete overshoes that send him to the bottom of IndefiniteBanned Lake. Some of this is a waiting game, Hap. And yes, it does violate wiki policy, but until there is a recent reason for pursuing an addressing of his behavior, its prolly better to leave it alone for the time being. Spponer cannot help himself - he will self-destruct all by himself. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 06:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

As I think about it, if you want to bring the problem to a wider audience, you should post on the discussion page for WP:NOT. They might be able to offer some advice or - if nothing else - will be aware of the pov attack page. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 06:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I don't plan on doing it right this minute, but probably will eventually because it really bashes all the established Wiki policies. Happyme22 (talk) 03:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

If you are going to post, don't wait too long, as I know that some admins tend to split hairs over what is stale. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Why...

should I care what you have to say. Parable1991 (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Because I can report you for vandalism and you will end up getting blocked, like you have now. When someone tells warns you that a certain edit is vandalism, either stop making the edit or start asking questions. Flip answers on my talk page before committing the same vandalism again is probably not the smartest thing you've ever done, but then, I don't know you. Enjoy the block, sunshine.- Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't care because you do not have the power to exercise authority so I don't have to answer to you. Do you really think that you will make a difference in what I edit. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, moonshine but you've been drinking too much. Parable1991 (talk) 07:05, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, sure. Tell, me, how long were you blocked for vandalism last time? Listen carefully: I don't care what you edit, so long as you do it within the scope of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Every single time you make a bone-headed series of edits like the ones that resulted in your block, I will be there to revert it and report you. Now, if you edit like a grown-up, you and I will - joyfully - never interact, and you can get back to your Driver's Ed and popping zits in the mirror. I think we're done here. There is no further need for you to write back to me, unless it is a tearful apology. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 07:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I've brought the situation up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disturbing edit summaries by User:Dumrovii.2C possible sock case, if you want to comment there. VegaDark (talk) 15:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I suppose that will be for deciding at the AN/I discussion. I wouldn't oppose it given the evidence. VegaDark (talk) 21:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Don't feed the trolls, man... maybe you're getting a kick out of your own personal snideness, but it's definitely not going to help matters. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Point taken, Erik. I'll add a comment on the AN/I posting, but the postings I made in response prolly fed the trollish behavior. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I have not the time or energy to listen to your complaints about your automobile accidents and oral herpes. I do not what you think or what you write. I take you not a shred seriously and since I have no respect for you and your griping about how you can tell other people to do things for you, I won't listen to your banter. At least until you mature somewhat. Parable1991 (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, yes. Erik, you were most certainly right. This fellow is doing quite enough to get himself removed forever. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Didn't say that. :-P He's just not worth responding to, as it only encourages him. Hopefully he (and you, pal) can learn not to start up pissing contests down the road. :) Not totally out of the realm of possibility, in my overly optimistic opinion... —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Show/hide

There are several problems with using show/hide in an article. One BIG problem is that people using certain scripting in their browsers can't make the show option work at all. Ah, well. I will commend, though, for a really clever idea. Doczilla _RAWR! 08:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Dreamguy

Quite right, and not before time. Jack1956 (talk) 23:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability question

The best answer I can find is at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#Red links which states: A link to a non-existent article (a "red link") should only be included on a disambiguation page when another article also includes that red link. There is no need to brainstorm all occurrences of the page title and create red links to articles that are unlikely ever to be written, or likely to be removed as insufficiently notable topics. (My emphasis). I think that answers your question, in that yes, it seems notability does apply to dab pages. There's more about adding links to redlinks in the section, so you might want to read it all, but the broad thrust is most certainly that items deemed of insufficient notability can be removed. You might also want to raise the issue with Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation, they'd likely know more than me. Hope that helps. Hiding T 17:24, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

• No problem, you're very welcome. Hiding T 17:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice

comment. :) -Hap Happyme22 (talk) 07:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL. And if he brings one with anchovies or pineapple, he's out of the club. ;) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 07:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Persian gulf mediation

All I did was to change the box format to the coffee-roll standard. I've got nothing to do with the mediation request. Incidentally I'm updating the main template now - do you have a cabal-related image you'd like put onto the new notice? Happy‑melon 17:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, is there any reason why the template has to be substituted? It does make rather a mess of talk page wikicode. Happy‑melon 17:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Him again

Check this: It's the Kodster!, and this: Sexybabe10. I think they're both the same. Sorry and all that...--andreasegde (talk) 16:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Him again

Check this: It's the Kodster!, and this: Sexybabe10. I think they're both the same. Only been on three days. Sorry and all that...--andreasegde (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Page blanking

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I am Tony Sidaway (see this edit for confirmation). I don't want to get involved in the disambiguation issue you raised at the moment, but I'm continually monitoring the situation. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 23:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

re: hi

everything is fine i just havent been on much, thanks! SJMNY (talk) 04:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

My talk page

Do not bother posting all the same nonsense you've said in the past to my talk page, as I will just remove it. At no point have you ever demonstrated an accurate understanding of Wikipedia policies, actual knowledge about the topics of articles you insist upon blind reverting whenever I make even the most unobjectionable change, or even a true willingness to work with anyone, so there is no reason for you to post to my talk page. You have nothing of any value to say, and insisting upon posting there even after it has been made clear to you months ago that doing so was pointless is nothing but continued harassment. Please demonstrate some good faith for once in your Wikipedia history and stop your nonsense. DreamGuy (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Awww, I think the little guy likes me. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 17:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Funny how he asks for good faith, isn't it? --clpo13_(talk) 21:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Funny how both of you are acting all high and mighty about this. No matter the past transgressions from any parties involved, I highly recommend focusing on editing and saving the quips for amicable exchanges, lest you want to be painted as uncivil and cocky down the road. Wikipedia's not the place to play Internet tough guy, so just acknowledge the other side and move on. My $0.02, if you'll have it. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

DG has a history of ignoring calls for consensus and pushing his own view of how an article should read. --clpo13_(talk) 21:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)