User talk:Mike Selinker: Difference between revisions

Archives
	August 12, 2005 – February 28, 2006; March 1, 2006 – August 31, 2006; September 1, 2006 – December 31, 2006; January 1, 2007 – June 30, 2007; July 1 – December 31, 2007; RfA;

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 02:23, 29 February 2008

Say stuff here.--Mike Selinker 12:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

State Funerals

We now have Category:State Funerals and Category:State funerals. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Darn it! I totally missed the capitalization. The article State funeral is lowercase-f, so I've moved the contents of the uppercase-F category and deleted the other.--Mike Selinker (talk) 20:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When moving pages, as you did to List of Star Wars cities, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. If you didn't know, you can check for double redirects using the 'What links here' button. I fixed all the double redirects resulting from this move, but I just thought I'd let you know so you'll be aware of it in future. Terraxos (talk) 17:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Reqdiagram

Hi Mike. I discovered that pages like Talk:Skyline matrix, which use {{reqdiagram}}, are no longer automatically included in a category. This seems to be caused by these three edits to the template page, one by Cydebot and two by you. I don't understand what's going on here, and what the wikicode

{{{Category:Wikipedia requested diagram images|}}}

that now appears on the template page is supposed to do. Could you please look into this? Thanks, Jitse Niesen (talk) 14:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That should fix it. It seems some code was lost in the renaming. It should be fine now.--Mike Selinker (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CFDS

You recently moved several listings from WP:CFDS to WP:CDFW. While this can be helpful, please note that all of these categories were not scheduled to be moved for quite some time. As it says on WP:CFDS, "A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old." Accounting for the time at which you made the move, that would mean that no requests with a timestamp sooner then "19:54, January 10, 2008" should be moved. The oldest one had a timestamp of "21:59, 10 January 2008", and the newest was "01:03, 12 January 2008." While there was no harm done, please be advised that we keep them on the page for 48 hours, so that the community may see them, and contest them.--Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 01:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

WP:UCFD

If you have the time or inclination : ) - jc37 22:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not me this time. I'm taking a break from closing discussions, because of a few too many messages like the above. I'll be back closing discussions before too long, I expect.--Mike Selinker (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do understand. I'd recently been somewhat on a wikibreak from closing discussions myself. Though I think maybe you missed out on that "fun". If you're interested, I'll drop some links, but if not, no worries. Not everyone enjoys reading drama : ) - jc37 01:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've come here to ask the same. UCFD currently has 31 (soon to be 35 when the day changes) overdue UCFDs. I have asked on the administrator's noticeboard, and I regularly ask in IRC, but to no avail. I know you don't deal with UCFD anymore but I don't know where else to ask- we could really use you back (although I respect your Wikibreak from closing and/or UCFD in general, I still thought it couldn't hurt to ask). VegaDark (talk) 22:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:Schoolhouse Rock! episodes

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Schoolhouse Rock! episodes, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Schoolhouse Rock! episodes has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Schoolhouse Rock! episodes, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:30, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Fictional wetlands

I have nominated Category:Fictional wetlands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real-life Superhero Spam Link

Hi Mike,

New here. First time poster. Long time non-registered user.

The following link found on the Real-life Superhero Wikipedia page:

Zero to Superhero - The Superhero HowTo Zero to Superhero - The Superhero HowTo

It links to a website that has with an advertisement and order form for a book on body building and nutrition with no mention of real-life superheroes.

Whereas this page is not about real-life superheroes (in the media or otherwise) and it links to a webite which promotes a product (which qualifies it as spam), I would like to politely request that that link be removed.

I'd greatly appreciate your assistance in the matter, as the page is semi-protected and I can not edit it.

Thank you greatly for your time and consideration.

ForThoseWhoCameInLate (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mike,

Thank you for ammending the entry!

ForThoseWhoCameInLate (talk) 17:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Borg

I left a comment on my own talk page. In a few words it says "references would be welcome to help the effort." :) --Craw-daddy | T | 20:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know you can't edit the page because you know Richard (and therefore would have a COI that you clearly want to avoid), but thought I'd let you know that I've started a page for him at Richard Borg. When I have some free time I plan to try to expand it with more info other than just a list of games. However, at the very least, I think that I've clearly established his notability. :) If you know of some (free GFDL-suitable) image of him somewhere, please don't hesitate to let me know, or some other non-controversial information like his date of birth, etc (or other references that I can check, and therefore verify myself) would be appreciated. Cheers! --Craw-daddy | T | 00:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review for Category:Poker Hall of Fame

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Poker Hall of Fame. Since you closed a realted deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Balloonman (talk) 10:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mike, I hope you are willing to reconsider... yes, 2005 is being a little... I don't know the word for it... obstinant? But his bullheadedness shouldn't dictate a valid category that has valid raesons. I should add that I've been in a number of discussions with 2005, but this is the first time that he's argued so emotionally. Usually, his reasonings are a little better.Balloonman (talk) 04:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so. I'll abstain, if only to get myself out of this conversation. Meantime, if you care about it, you could let him know that his obstinancy has consequences. I've got very little interest in interacting with him.--Mike Selinker (talk) 04:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Understood.Balloonman (talk) 05:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon (magazine)

how is Category:Games magazines a redundant category? shadzar|Talk|contribs 17:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Shadzar#Dragon

yes that does make sense, thanks for explaining it to me. shadzar|Talk|contribs 17:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

award-winners - category & template

Hi Mike Selinker -- Working with awards and award-winners and CFDs -- and now TFDs! -- all this time it occurred to me that perhaps the best solution is a single compressed template. So, I drafted Template:Awardwinners; your thoughts would be appreciated. Maybe it'll work, maybe not, but I thought I'd at least ping some other folks involved in award-winner discussions for their opinions and thoughts. --Lquilter (talk) 19:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD Armenian Genocide Denier.

I don't understand where you get the logic that the Armenian Genocide is a fact. It is simply an accusation supported by a large majority of Armenians and Diaspora Armenians. Please show me the proof it is a genocide and please wikipedia is not a place to decide history, when it is under dispute by many historians. Calling someone a denier such as the respected Dr. Bernard Lewis is simply bias POV and political labeling, please read my arguments again. And since you decided that the Armenian Genocide is a fact and that this category should be allowed then I can go ahead and make a bunch of categories that say "Azeri Genocide Denier" or "Turkish Genocide Denier" or "liberal lover" or "Christian lover" or whatever, if the Armenian Genocide is a fact, then historians especially Armenian historians should be able to prove it, but it's not a fact, it is a point of view based on circumstantial evidence as expressed in the Armenian Genocide article. Tell me what you think, I respect your decision but I believe it is a little hastily made. — ^talk § _Arsenic99_ 20:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I see it, it doesn't matter if Armenian Genocide is fact or not. The category is not Category:Armenian Genocide, but Category:Armenian Genocide deniers. It's not about the genocide, it's about people who deny it happened. Whether or not it did happen is immaterial. --Kbdank71 20:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, but it doesn't change the fact that it happened. I appreciate the courtesy of the email, Arsenic, but it's clear to me from the article (and many other such articles) that the massacres, which everyone seems to agree happened, were orchestrated by government order and directed at an out-of-favor group. That's a genocide, and those who make a career out of denying it occurred can have the label of "Armenian Genocide deniers."--Mike Selinker (talk) 22:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one denies that massacres of millions of people (Armenians, Turks, Kurds) happened in Eastern Anatolia, it was a war, and a brutal one! What's disputed is whether those massacres qualify a) as "genocide" based on UN convention adopted some 30 years later and is not applicable to past; b) as "Armenian genocide", essentially isolating victims by ethnicity. This stands apart from Holocaust, in which Jews, which perished, were not known to have organized armed resistance to Nazis and didn't have a country fighting against Nazis, alike Democratic Republic of Armenia came to be with Ottomans.

Any form of serious accusation of a crime against humanity with respect to an entire modern nation requires an impartial look into a historical account. Such were the Nuremberg trials, which set the record straight on Holocaust. No such trials, apart from failed British attempt to hold and charge bunch of Turks at Malta, were ever held in respect to events in Anatolia.

So, misinterpretations of historical scale like 1) "Armenian genocide" is the first genocide of 20th century - ERR, NOT TRUE - see Herero and Namaqua Genocide, 2) Armenia was the first Christan state (as if that's supposed to mean anything or have influence on Western public opinion) - ERR, NOT TRUE - see Osroene/Edessa, Mesopotamia, 3) Armenian people were the only victims of World War 1 in Eastern Anatolia and Caucasus - ERR, NOT TRUE - see March Days, Caucasus Campaign in which Armenian armed units(!) participated. And perhaps, this [1] will give you a flavor how POV pushing works, when any evidence against these "principles" is being presented. And let's see who they refer to as expert third parties - representatives of Entente powers, sides which had a primary interest into demolishing and demonizing of Ottoman Empire and were actually fighting a war against it. That's brilliantly "neutral".

I think the roots of Armenian-Turkish problem lay in exactly this unfair approach, of simply being cognizant of a single side in what was two-sided conflict. Instead of trying to present only one side as victims, it would be fair to at least recognize that those who died at the hands of advancing Armenian and Russian units (during 1916-1917) were humans as well in Eastern Anatolia, and they do have descendants too. One-sided recognition imposed from abroad in fashions like this will never bring healing to people and/or so much needed peace to this region. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 02:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 02:21, 29 February 2008 edit Atabəy (talk \| contribs) Pending changes reviewers 7,348 edits →‎CfD Armenian Genocide Denier. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:23, 29 February 2008 edit undo Atabəy (talk \| contribs) Pending changes reviewers 7,348 edits →‎CfD Armenian Genocide Denier. Next edit →
Line 111:		Line 111:
	So, misinterpretations of historical scale like 1) "Armenian genocide" is the first genocide of 20th century - ERR, NOT TRUE - see [[Herero and Namaqua Genocide]], 2) Armenia was the first Christan state (as if that's supposed to mean anything or have influence on Western public opinion) - ERR, NOT TRUE - see [[Osroene]]/[[Edessa, Mesopotamia]], 3) Armenian people were the only victims of World War 1 in Eastern Anatolia and Caucasus - ERR, NOT TRUE - see [[March Days]], [[Caucasus Campaign]] in which Armenian armed units(!) participated. And perhaps, this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Osroene&diff=194333513&oldid=194070894] will give you a flavor how POV pushing works, when any evidence against these "principles" is being presented. And let's see who they refer to as expert third parties - representatives of Entente powers, sides which had a primary interest into demolishing and demonizing of Ottoman Empire and were actually fighting a war against it. That's brilliantly "neutral".		So, misinterpretations of historical scale like 1) "Armenian genocide" is the first genocide of 20th century - ERR, NOT TRUE - see [[Herero and Namaqua Genocide]], 2) Armenia was the first Christan state (as if that's supposed to mean anything or have influence on Western public opinion) - ERR, NOT TRUE - see [[Osroene]]/[[Edessa, Mesopotamia]], 3) Armenian people were the only victims of World War 1 in Eastern Anatolia and Caucasus - ERR, NOT TRUE - see [[March Days]], [[Caucasus Campaign]] in which Armenian armed units(!) participated. And perhaps, this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Osroene&diff=194333513&oldid=194070894] will give you a flavor how POV pushing works, when any evidence against these "principles" is being presented. And let's see who they refer to as expert third parties - representatives of Entente powers, sides which had a primary interest into demolishing and demonizing of Ottoman Empire and were actually fighting a war against it. That's brilliantly "neutral".

	I think the roots of Armenian-Turkish problem lay in exactly this unfair approach, of simply being cognizant of a single side in what was two-sided conflict. Instead of trying to present only one side as victims, it would fair to at least recognize that those who died at the hands of Armenian and Russian units were humans as well, and they do have descendants too. One-sided recognition imposed from abroad in fashions like this will never bring healing to people and/or so much needed peace to this region. Thanks. [[User:Atabek\|Atabek]] ([[User talk:Atabek\|talk]]) 02:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)		I think the roots of Armenian-Turkish problem lay in exactly this unfair approach, of simply being cognizant of a single side in what was two-sided conflict. Instead of trying to present only one side as victims, it would be fair to at least recognize that those who died at the hands of advancing Armenian and Russian units (during 1916-1917) were humans as well in Eastern Anatolia, and they do have descendants too. One-sided recognition imposed from abroad in fashions like this will never bring healing to people and/or so much needed peace to this region. Thanks. [[User:Atabek\|Atabek]] ([[User talk:Atabek\|talk]]) 02:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)