User talk:Calton

The Peggy Dylan page that you tagged is spam and it keeps reappearing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.37.76.152 (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi:

I just wrote the page "Sixth Dimension" and my understanding is that you feel it is a commercial or advertisement for the space.

We've modelled the page against existing pages like "Wipro Technologies" and "Infosys".

Can you please let me know about what is the difference between this page and the others mentioned. Otherwise, let me know if there are specific sections that I need to edit.

Thanks for your feedback.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixthdimension (talk • contribs) 06:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello:

I just wrote the page "The Union Theatre" and my understanding is that you feel it is a commercial or advertisement for the space.

The space is CLOSED and does not exist except as a piece of theatre history of Peterborough, Ontario. The intent is to have the history of this unique space noted.

I will place a "hangon" note at the top of the page.

Is there something in particular that I could add or delete that would make the entry more appropriate?

Thanks for your feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Germahughes (talk • contribs) 17:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

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) Archive11 00:20, 4 December 2006 Archive12 23:59, 31 December 2006 Archive13 07:20, 12 February 2007 Archive14 14:46, 4 April 2007 Archive15 23:59, 31 May 2007 Archive16 23:59, 30 June 2007 Archive17 22:59, 14 September 2007 Archive18 23:59, 31 December 2007 Archive19 21:26, 8 February 2008 Archive20 09:50, 25 February 2009 Archive21 15:03, 4 July 2009 Archive22 08:13, 19 April 2010 Archive23 09:20, 17 November 2012 Archive24 00:00, 6 July 2015 Archive25 00:25, 3 November 2016 Archive26 16:00, 13 June 2017 Archive27 07:54, 28 June 2018‎ Archive28 01:34, 16 March 2019‎ Archive29 01:20, 18 May 2021 Archive30 07:02, 15 February 2022 Archive31 00:00, DAY MONTH YEAR

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

1. 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.
2. This also means, of course, I cannot undelete your page/article, nor unblock you. I can, however, offer you a cookie.
3. 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.
4. There is no Rule 4.
5. Don't post when drunk. Seriously.
6. All communication sent via the "E-mail this user" link is considered public, at my discretion. Reasonable requests for confidentiality will be honored, but the whole "e-mail is sacrosanct and private" argument I do not buy for one solitary second. Do not expect to use that argument as an all-purpose shield.
7. Do not assume I'm stupid, especially when arguing for something obviously untrue. I do not respond well to having my intelligence insulted.
8. 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.
9. Especially bogus, hostile, and/or trolling remarks are subject to disemvoweling.
10. Please post at the bottom of the page and "sign" your posts using the squiggly things (--~~~~).
11. Please extinguish all cigarettes, as this is a No Smoking page.

Thank you. -- The Management.

Amazing...

I will ask, but one more time Ma'am, do not post on my talk page again. If you do so, I will ask for assistance from an adminstrator. I hope I will not have to do that, though. Good Day to you, Ma'am. - Flatsky (talk) 06:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: User:Flatsky

Out of curiosity - do you intend to report Flatsky as a Neutralhomer sock? JPG-GR (talk) 08:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind. Took care of it. Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Neutralhomer JPG-GR (talk) 09:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Temporary userpage?

Just curious about the use of the {{temporary userpage}} template when applying spam notices? As in: [1] .

Is that template transcluded in the tag you're using? Should it be there? Thanks for clarifying :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Grammy Reference

Hello Calton,

Nothing against you personally, but your reasoning for eliminating the Grammy reference: "fame ain't contagious" was a bit rash don't you think. Really it'a an interesting and relevant fact about Rhymefest that ties directly into why he was mentioned in the article in the first place- because he won that Grammy for authoring "Jesus Walks".

I have to insist that we change it back, no disrepect to you.

Thanks

24.15.22.244 (talk) 17:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Calton,

Are you really going to deprive people of information because your worried about it making someones accomplishments more credible? Rhymefest as a grammy winner is a fact and is something that someone reading thar article would care to know. You are being unreasonable at this point and I really don't think it's right. Your denying factual information, not opinion.

24.15.22.244 (talk) 03:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Listen Calton, My information is improving Rhymefest's article, don't single me out, by you changing back my edit in rhymfests article you returned it back to having orphaned and unworking links, which again denies the public information. If your purpose is to clean up and improve wikipedia, your actions are contadictory. It's hurting...

24.15.22.244 (talk) 03:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it should remain

Hello:

I just wrote the page "The Union Theatre" and my understanding is that you feel it is a commercial or advertisement for the space.

The space is CLOSED and does not exist except as a piece of theatre history of Peterborough, Ontario. The intent is to have the history of this unique space noted.

I will place a "hangon" note at the top of the page.

Is there something in particular that I could add or delete that would make the entry more appropriate?

Thanks for your feedback.

Mary Spicuzza

Article in the San Francisco Weekly: [2].

I posted on WP:ANI about this: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Article_in_San_Francisco_Weekly. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Gindi holdings

Hi,

The Gindi Family of Israel is a very prominent family, among the wealthiest in the country. If you'd like we can delete the links, but Wikipedia is full of links, so I thought it was ok to add them. My only intention is to have the history of this family noted.

Gindi holdings (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)from: Gindi holdings

Fair use rationale for Image:Hediedwithafelafelinhishhand.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hediedwithafelafelinhishhand.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 00:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Printplast

Thanks for your WP:CSD work. In cases of users named the same as companies as in User:Printplast for example, it would be better if you reported them to AIV as they are in the user space, not main space as articles. Thanks for your help. Alexf⁴² 12:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Miss Tourism Queen International

I'm reviewing this article [3] and have noticed that you once voted for the deletion of a related article on Miss Tourism Queen International 2007, however, there are still remnants since the following editions are still existing: Miss Tourism Queen International 2004, Miss Tourism Queen International 2005, and Miss Tourism Queen International 2006. Please cast your opinion and votehere. Thanks. --Johnsoul (talk) 18:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Cavachon

Hi. Thanks for tagging. Did you mean to use the empty template? --Dweller (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I assumed from your reply that your tag must have edit conflicted with an expansion of the article, but it didn't. It wasn't a very good article, but I'm struggling to see how it fit the criteria of empty. Anyway, I've prodded it, because the last time it went to AfD it was deleted because of lack of RS, which I guess will lead to a similar result this time around. --Dweller (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Newyorklenin

I did this guy a favor by userfying his page. No good deed goes unpunished. :-) Bearian (talk) 01:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Alesana

I went to DRV and had it restored. Also, it has a raft of sources. And apparently they're well-enough known internationally to have an article on seven other Wikipedias. What gives? Chubbles (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I put the AfD notice in there for the sake of full disclosure. I went to DRV the day after the AfD closed and had the article restored. Chubbles (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Favor

Our journalist friend may have been made to walk the plank. Her name no longer appears on her paper's masthead.[4] I sent copies of the letter I sent to her two days prior to publication to her editors. I ambushed them, I think. I believe the editors were surprised by the revalation but had to print because cancelling was too late. Notice in the article that the sister stuff appears tacked on at the last minute. Maybe Wiki people stepped in for me. Maybe the editors had a fit. I don't know. A favor: Can you fix all links to my Talk page on "Attempted Outing"? "Attempted Outing" will go into archives soon and be uneditable. I would like the links to work, so can you make the links to archived versions of my Talk page as the current page is a blank? Two bloggers that I know of are going to write about the incident and maybe rival papers to the Weekly as well. I'm sorry for what happened but those yatches hounded me for a half a year and I had to take measures. Life without Wiki bullshit is pretty good. Lots of free time. Thanks for all. This message will self-destruct in ten seconds. 71.139.24.255 (talk) 02:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey Griot, aren't you banned indefinitely? Found another sock in the drawer? Boodlesthecat (talk) 04:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Spam on userpages

Hello Calton, while I admire your drive to rid Wikipedia of spam, I'm not sure tagging user pages with WP:CSD is the way to go. Have a look here for the right procedure. I know you've tagged a lot of these and may have had this discussion before, so please forgive me if you already know this. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 00:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Clarifying my own thoughts - and per an exchange I just had on my talk page - I think it's clear that obvious advertising can be deleted per CSD. Blogging or using the user page as a personal MySpace would still need to be MFD'd though. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 00:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G. Edward Griffin (2nd nomination)

Hoo boy! I've never seen the s.p.a.s come out in force quite so eagerly as for this one. He's got a pocketful of The Truth, don't he? --Orange Mike | Talk 04:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

World Without Cancer

In answer to "what part of 'empty' was unclear?", the simple answer is that the article was not empty in the terms of the speedy criteria you sought to apply to it - A3 covers articles with no content, which consist primarily of links, etc., but specifically excludes stubs which have valid context, which this did. Complain about pointless bureaucracy all you like, but the policy is quite clear on this, which is why your tag was rejected. Twice.

If, in the future, you have an issue with a decision of mine, kindly leave me a message on my talk page rather than a snarky comment in an edit summary. Thanks. _GB^T/C 08:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Did I say I had a problem with legitimate criticism? Irrespective of the question of whether your "criticism" (a) even constituted criticism, as opposed to a snide one-liner, and (b) was legitimate or otherwise, its method of delivery was, put simply, uncivil. I would suggest you follow the link you provided me with and read the paragraph below. _GB^T/C 15:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

No matter how much you may wish to obfuscate, this conversation is not about me, it's about you, and in particular it is about your lack of civility. To save you having to re-read the paragraph I linked to first time around, and lest you fail to spot the relevance to your own behaviour, allow me to quote (with added emphasis to make it as clear as can be) the pertinent sentence. "Every user is expected to interact with others civilly, calmly, and in a spirit of cooperation".

Your edit summary failed in that regard, and I would ask you, again, to be civil in your future dealings with myself and others. As I cannot be clearer than that, this discussion has nowhere further to go. _{The public face of GB}^T/C 17:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

What, in any of the foregoing, has been in any way remotely uncivil? Clearly nothing, if you are reduced to the hyperbole of "endlessly pestering" (for which read "replying to your posts") and "wielding link after link" (for which read "pointing you to the same two links on civility twice"). As for ending this discussion, well, I did - just one paragraph above here. Tell you what, since you clearly didn't see it first time around, I'll do it again. This is the end of the conversation. Period / full stop. _{The public face of GB}^T/C 18:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion request

I was using my user page to temporarily draft an article before posting it and then deleting it from my user page. This is acceptable. Leave me alone. Ununtrium (talk) 13:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:NPA

Please do not lash out at other editors on topics you are not involved with simply because you have a personal grudge against an editor, which you did here. If your thinking is that you are going to follow me on Wikipedia to attack me (replete with such violent imagery as needing a "two by four") as part of your personal, irrational, and childish grudge, let me strongly disabuse you of that notion now. Please do not make me have to revisit this issue again. This is your first and only warning. Boodlesthecat (talk) 15:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Gratis Internet

If you are going to tag an article with Articleissues please address your complaints on the talk page. Without any additional information explaining your concerns the tags will be removed. For example, you've disputed the neutrality, but without any discussion there is no actual dispute. 69.143.164.143 (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

that article is a disgrace and needs a lot of work (or deleting) I second Calton's actions in this matter. --Fredrick day (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:temporary userpage

Hey Calton. I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind stop putting {{temporary userpage}} on every user talk you tag with a first warning. I've just seen you tag someone with a promotional username for creating an advert - yeah, I blocked them, but the block message automatically transcludes the page into temporary userpages. It's just that the template isn't all that friendly and really isn't that helpful for most of the time. If you really want to tag them still, could you just use Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages? Thanks, Ryan Postlethwaite 18:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

WQA

Hey, just so you know...I noticed this WQA thread was just created right after the ANI thread closed. --Smashville^BONK! 21:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Eva Evangelakou

Hi, I removed your speedy G11 tag from this page although it was a perfectly legitimate tagging. I am currently trying to help this good faith cooperative user make their overly promotional article into some more appropriate. See User talk:CIreland, User talk:Eva Evangelakou, [5] and Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 February 22 for background. CIreland (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Moved here from your user page

The SUNDOOR and Peggy Dylan entries are spam. They get deleted and then re-posted.

Please delete the Peggy Dylan page as spam.

Magazines and books

and creative works in general cannot be deleted under speedy A7, per WP:CSD In any case, I think Railfan and Railroad might be one of the two leading magazines in its subject. did you check that? Please do not use speedy when not strictly within the specifications. DGG (talk) 16:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Bagamoyo

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Bagamoyo worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Calton | Talk 15:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - I see the problem - but was this really necessary with your placement of the template on my talk page? Thanks. Shoessss |  Chat  16:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

My e-mail

Calton, did you really write this?

If you'd been paying the slightest attention (which I'm doubting) I've already said -- twice or more -- that I didn't write such crap. That you'd think so even after that is insulting. I'd have thought you'd have the slightest familiarity with concept sockpuppetry by now.

If you have anything to say to me, do it publicly on my User Talk page. Your next e-mail to me gets reproduced in full here, complete with headers. --Calton | Talk 02:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been paying very close attention thank you very much. And I'm sorry if you were insulted by my query but I only saw you deny making posts on the SFweekly page other than the highly offensive one directed at me, which I've quoted below. I am glad however that you are now stating that you did not write it.

“ BillyTFried, as you slovenly pickananies should know, is a well known troll,

libeler, and character assassin on Wikipedia. His parents were more than likely related before they got married, and I would not be too surprised if his father in fact, forced himself onto his "me so hor-ney" mother. Bad trash breeds bad trash, as BTFried is evident of. I also see this thread has not been taken down. Fine. Lawyers contacted period/full stop.<br\> Comment by Calton — February 18, 2008 @ 04:02PM

”

And yes I know exactly what a sock puppet is and have witnessed the fullest extent of such abuse by your now permanently banned friend Griot, who you so passionately defended to the very end. BillyTFried (talk) 03:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

He's not my friend, to know that, you'd have to be paying attention (which I'm doubting even more). As for the sockpuppetry, a modicum of common sense would have saved you from asking the insulting query in the first place, so no, I don't think you really understand the whole "sock puppet" thing.

It's interesting how I'm libeled, insulted, attacked, and my character assassinated by crude forgeries, and your only concern is whether I said something mean to you -- which common sense should have told you otherwise. That, and the hypocritical dig about "my friend" -- boy, you had no trouble whatsoever sucking up your own abusive sockpuppet friend when it was convenient. Your complete lack of shame and principles is hereby noted. --Calton | Talk 03:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Calton please be civil and refrain from insulting me and making anymore accusations that I am a hypocrite or that I lack common sense or shame or principles. Also please stop falsey accusing me of "sucking up" to this user Telegen whom I have never been involved with in any way whatsoever. That is unless you'd like to show even the slightest shred of evidence to the contrary (though none exists and you know it). I'm warning you Calton, do not insult me, harass me, or make false accusations about me on my talk page or anywhere else on Wikipedia. You saw what happened to the last guy who made that mistake. BillyTFried (talk) 04:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Tagging user pages of unblocked users

Why did you tag this page to be deleted? John Reaves 17:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

My mistake, I thought we only deleted the pages of indef blocked users. John Reaves 17:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Therese Dvir

Hi, I've removed the speedy tag again on this user's user page. The assertion that it is a spam page has been challenged twice now, so speedy deletion is inappropriate at this time. If you believe the user page is spam, please list it at Miscellany for deletion. Thanks, Resolute 17:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate content removal

As for purging another user's user page, that is in my opinion, and as far as I know also considered by applicable guidelines, quite inappropriate. Also, purging my notice on the same user's discussion page I believe is covered by the same characteristic. If you find it unacceptable that, as I enter a message, I concurrently purge a one year old bot warning about an uploaded image that has already been deleted, well, I won't object if you find it necessary to restore that bot warning. Removing a message entered by a user in the same swipe, is at best careless. If done intentionally, it warrants censuring. __meco (talk) 17:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)