User talk:Daniel Olsen/Archive1

nicole richie

Daniel Olsen, Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this. HabaneroMan 10:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Please give a valid reason in the edit summary or talk page blah blah blah"

I DID give a reason for removing that "Her Dogs" section, on the talk page! The section was irrelevant crap that only fans would care about. Not only that, but it read more like The Simple Life (tv show) trivia than Nicole Richie "trivia" and again, I mentioned that on the talk page. But that's fine, keep the stupid dog section. I don't care if it stays, I was just trying to make the page look less like a fanboi article but whatev.

thanks

thanks for the vandal reversion !paradigm! 03:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)!paradigm![reply]

_____

Dude, that _______ guy is a fag. Bad luck about them deleting ur page, that would have taken ages to make. Edit: ____ made me remove his name. damn. --Javsav 07:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name change of article

Hi Daniel, I suggest changing the name of 100 greatest guitar solos to Guitar World's 100 top solos. Much less POV. Comments? Moriori 08:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

seems perfectly fine to me Daniel Olsen 08:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not how it's done, my man

i noticed on Guitar World's 100 greatest guitar solos you committed two rather major wikipedia faux pas' - you left a page half finished, and you directly addressed the reader as yourself. for the former, a common convention for articles one is working on is to create a user subpage for it. you create on by making a (username)/(subject) article. in your case, this could be User:Daniel Olsen/Guitar World's 100 greatest guitar solos. for example, take a look at mine (but don't edit it, please). i tend to just use it for infoboxes, and getting the hang of formatting, etc. also, one should discuss any changes on the discussion page, not the page itself. you're pretty new here, so don't sweat it too much. comment me if you need some help, or, of course, just take a look at the wikipedia policies and guidelines Mysekurity put at the top of your page. happy editing! :) Joeyramoney 02:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what i meant was that you were discussing the article on the page itself, rather than the discussion page. Joeyramoney 04:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, we have permission to use this Guitar World material?

Do we? Moriori 08:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's from an old issue, so it's not for sale anymore, and I don't this will take away from the success of Guitar World in any way. I'd say it's fair use in one sort or another. Daniel Olsen 19:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. If it was copyrighted when published it is still copyrighted and we can't claim fair use. We would need to seek permission to use it, or drop it. No? Moriori 20:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, can we just put quotes around the whole thing instead? It seems they don't mind people copying the list, as about.com has the same info, and that's actually where i got the info from... How would we go about obtaining permission? --Daniel Olsen 23:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it's a copyvio from about.com as well! Check their website and you will see "©2006 About, Inc., A part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.". You could e-mail Guitar World directly and ask them for permission to use it. Moriori 23:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, I have placed the article on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion so that we can get the opinion of others regarding this. Moriori 01:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed Guitar world, hopefully someone will get back to me about permission --Daniel Olsen 03:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, copyvio is only part of the problem. Have you visited the entry for Guitar World's 100 greatest guitar solos at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion yet? If not, you need to give your opinion fairly quickly. Moriori 04:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop recreating the article. It was decided at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guitar World's 100 greatest guitar solos that we cannot keep this article. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig pages

Great work on the disambig pages. One note: When you finish a set of links and copy it to to the Done list, you should then delete it from the "To Do" list. See the history file for many examples of this. Simon12 03:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Daniel Olsen! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Computerjoe 's talk 18:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page vandalism

Cheers for that...! Budgiekiller 22:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All in a day's work. --Daniel Olsen 22:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please help protect this article from unfair deletionists?

Hi Daniel! I found you through Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. I was hoping if you can lend me a helping hand with International Institute of Management article. On August 10 an unknown person marked it for deletion. Then a group of 4 deletionists gave a delete vote claiming non-notability. Inspite of the fact that nn is not an official reason for deletion, I provided a clear evidence of notability and verifiable references and won a stong keep vote from Ephilei (another inclusionist). However, my concern is that we are only 3 votes against 6 votes . Therefore, I kindly ask you to check the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_Institute_of_Management (if it is too long you can check keep-comments). I’m not asking for anything more than an ethical vote. I’m willing to return the favor and review a similar articles. Every keep vote counts, please help! Miro.gal

It is against the rules to seek votes like the one above. You wrote, "Keep and Clean Up. At the most basic level, this is not just a website, and thus the nomination has no basis. Whether this is a research institute, school, or whatever the hell else it may be, it deserves to have an article here." Shouldn't you know WHAT IT IS in order to decide IF IT IS NOTABLE? Please consider withdrawing your solicited vote by this user who's first ever edit was a keep vote on the AfD. Nickieee 08:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:My userpage

No problem :D °≈§→ Robom æ yhem: T/←§≈° 05:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:IIM

Thanks very much for the message.

I'm not really an inclusionist or a deletionist (maybe I lean toward deletionism), but I agree with you that some editors don't consider things like this carefully. If someone took the time to register and create an article, they deserve to know why another someone believes it should be deleted/edited/split/merged/whatever. If someone else points out new evidence, that evidence should be weighed and considered.

I know the IIM people aren't experienced editors and that's the main reason why I laid out my process - I wanted to assure them that I do take it seriously and that I gave it a great deal of thought. That's all I can do. Thanks again - I appreciate your kindness! Baseball,Baby! ^balls^•^strikes 06:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How strange...

I know somebody called Daniel Olsen, but he's not you! :) --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 23:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking dolphin

Apparently someone took offence at your ability to communicate (albeit on a basic level) with dolphins. I reverted it. Clearly I'm not busy enough! Budgiekiller 08:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, I think you are being just a little unfair here. You say that it is "not my place" to modify your userpage, yet you take it upon yourself to modify other pages on Wikipedia without regard to the integrity of the content. However, if you claim to be willing to value the integrity of information presented on this website then you will uphold it on your own userpage. Please remove the dolphins. Delfinophile 04:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, your assertion that I "modify other pages on Wikipedia without regard to the integrity of the content" couldn't be more wrong. As for my userpage, I think you should take a look at WP:USERPAGE, specifically "The best option is to draw their attention to the matter on their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so"'. Editing another user's userpage is considered at best bad form, and at worst vandalism. If you have an issue to bring up you should use the talk page instead. --Daniel Olsen 08:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, at your request I will take my argument to your talk page, for now. As for your claim that it is "not my place" to modify your userpage, I refer you to WP:WWN: "Your user page is not a personal homepage, nor is it a blog. More importantly, your user page is not yours." Now that I've established that your user page does not belong to you, I want to reiterate that I take offensive to your claim that you speak Dolphin. It simply isn't true, nor is it verifiable. More importantly, it is inappropriate for your userpage: it is not relevant. I also refer you to WP:USERPAGE: "If you have material...that is otherwise inappropriate for Wikipedia, it should be placed on a personal website." You don't speak dolphin. If you want to say that you do, put it on your MySpace page, not here. Reading further, you will learn that inappropriate content is considered to be "other things pertaining to 'entertainment' rather than 'writing an encyclopedia'." You have that there because you get a kick out of it, not because it is relevant to Wikipedia's goals. If you still somehow feel that this should stay, then you ought to continue reading because the article goes on to say, "material that does not somehow further the goals of the project may be removed." Who may remove it exactly? Well, as you said yourself, it is often best to let the user make the change himself, but as you have now been made aware, "pages in user space still do belong to the community...other users may edit pages in your user space." I have the right to change that content, but I am asking you to please change it yourself. I do apologize for not having brought this issue up here in the first place. However, your duty is clear: If another user such as myself "lets you know that they would rather you deleted some or other content from your user space, you should probably do so". I await your response. Delfinophile 14:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you're really hooked on this dolphin thing. First of all, not everything on Wikipedia is 100% serious, least of all userpages. I refer you here, which shows many pages in the Wikipedia namespace that are humorous and not designed to be part of the encyclopedia. Furthermore, I find the fact that you created an account solely to remove content from my userpage very suspicious (4 of your 6 edits so far). I'm leaving it up there. Squeeeeeeeeak. --Daniel Olsen 14:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We can all communicate with dolphins. I have, in New Zealand, so I think you need to relax a bit about it. Daniel, you are not alone...! Budgiekiller 16:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can post on their userpage information about their areas of expertise. It says so here. If Daniel says part of his expertise is speaking Dolphin, then amen! Moriori 00:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

blog

This is for wikipedia not for the userpage, I'm allowed to put what I want on my userpage... And anyway you should have told me before deleting it, now I've lost all my recent edits... By the way, do you now any other place where I could write a blog and put the pictures in the text (and choosing their size)? Thanks -- Celine in texas 23:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Stephencolbert

Howdy! Any reason in particular why you removed the admin message on User talk:Stephencolbert? It has been reverted, but inquiring minds wish to know. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed an admin message? I reverted the page when a majority of the text was deleted. --Daniel Olsen 20:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AARGH! You're absolutely right, I misread the page history. Looks like I picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue. Best regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 22:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi, thanks for reverting that vandalism to my userpage :) M a rtinp23 21:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Vandalism

Hi, Daniel - thanks very much for reverting the vandalism to my user page. It's the price of doing CVU and AfDs, I guess. Thanks again - Baseball,Baby! ^balls^•^strikes 10:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandals beware, Daniel is here! --Daniel Olsen 17:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Hi -- I guess we got mixed up on the revert here. Sorry if that caused you issues, I know how the "race conditions" can be regarding RC patrol. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it happens, I'm just glad you were able to catch it. --Daniel Olsen 17:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assume I may remove my warning now? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! You don't need my permission to remove a mistake. I know if I tagged you it was by accident, you're the one who usually beats me to fixing vandalism, not the one who makes it. --Daniel Olsen 17:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dolphins again

Daniel Olsen, I was surfing around my favorite site, Wikipedia, again when I stumbled upon your community userpage. I see you have reverted your page back to claiming you can speak Dolphin.

Listen, Daniel, I can understand your buddy Budgiekiller's claim that you can communicate with dolphins. I am not refuting that argument; I know that people can communicate with dolphins. But I also know for a fact that you, nor any human being, can speak in the same manner that dolphins use to communicate. I would go into a long explanation about why you can't speak Dolphin, but I don't have to. The burden of proof is on you. If you could actually do as you claim, every marine biologist on the planet would want to meet you.

Despite Moriori's claims (and I can respect that he is an administrator, he just happens to be wrong in this case), I have already cited everything I needed to prove that you are obligated to remove that unnecessary, false, and irrelevant content. I can also see that other people are claiming the same thing on their userpages, they are also wrong.

I will check back in a couple of days (that means two, Daniel), and if I still see it there I will once again perform my duty as a Wikipedian and remove it. Also, I will warn you (much lilke you do to other people) with the specific template that explains exactly what you are doing and why you need to stop. I'm sure the anticipation is killing you. Delfinophile 04:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, Budgiekiller is not my "buddy" calling him that implies that he is only agreeing with me because he knows me already. He does not, he is a random editor who happened to catch your change to my userpage and reverted it. he agrees with me on principle, not out of friendship

Secondly, your assertion that you are right and everyone else (including an administrator) is wrong is rather disturbing. Wikipedia:About says "Wikipedia itself is run as a communal effort. It is a community project whose end result is an encyclopedia." Right and wrong are often nothing more than opinion. You have cited no "proof": you have made arguments to support your point but so have I. We disagree (obviously). Neither one of us can be labeled "right" or "wrong", but the concensus (as you can see) favors leaving the dolphin userbox.

Finally, you ultimatum of two days time is not going to intimidate me into removing the userbox. Your "duty" at wikipedia is to contribute to the encyclopedia, and to do that you should know Wikipedia policy. When a dispute cannot be resolved, you may make an entry at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, but an edit war is not the answer. Your tone and threats aren't likely to help you if a RfC is filed, and could be considered as a violation of WP:CIVIL. Good luck! --Daniel Olsen 04:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Belated thanks for reverting vandalism to my user page. --Guinnog 09:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bondage Edits

I just wanted to tell you that it is likely unlawful in your area for minors such as yourself to view sexually explicit content such as that you almost certainly exposed yourself to when editing Breast bondage. Does your mother know what you are viewing?

Wikipedia_is_not_censored. I stumbled on the image by accident, but once I saw it I saw no harm in editing a page and including it. --Daniel Olsen 05:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legality and morality are not the same thing. "What's right is not always popular, and what's popular is not always right." Besides, I don't think kids today enter kindergarden without knowing about fisting and "inter-species erotica" in graphic detail. Wake up and get with the times. "Life isn't all beer and skittles." 71.162.255.58 05:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

o_O I don't know what kindergarten you went to, but I didn't know about those things at age 5. Whatever happened to learning about sex on your own (or with someone else in the back of a car)? --Daniel Olsen 06:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happiness quotation by Aristotle

Happiness is VandalProof, eh? :/ However, apparently another user has found that the quote in question -- "Happiness is the exercise of vital powers along lines of excellence in a life affording them scope." -- has questionable attribution to Aristotle, so I'll accept the reversion. (Also considering that Wikipedia has experienced a crack-down of demanding rigid verifiability to avoid deletion/reversion in recent months.) Still, I'd like to know why you were so quick on the draw with VandalProof and thus so terse in the edit summary. It, as part of a larger aggregate, not only this particular instance, gives me a chilly feeling that the Wikipedian culture has grown rigid and resistant to inclusion -- undermining the original "anyone can edit" appeal. Thoughts? 71.162.255.58 05:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I made a mistake while RC patrolling. It happens. It appeared that something with little to no importance was added in somewhere where it didn't fit with no citation, so as a reflex I rolled it back. The edit summary was put in automatically by VandalProof. My apoligies. Please re-add the quote, but in a place where it fits better, and with a citation. --Daniel Olsen 05:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is what we're talking about Olsen. You take this stuff way too seriously. You take a tone with people as if you actually possessed authority over them. That is why people consider you (and others in this place) a douchebag. Why do you think people vandalize and hassle you? Yes, Wikipedia is a great resource. It is much like asking a very knowledgeable friend for information on a particular subject or topic. But, it will NEVER be the be-all end-all source for information. You will never be able to cite it as a credible source, precisely because anyone can edit it. It's greatest strength is simultaneously its greatest weakness. Trying to regard it as something more is ultimately futile. I would suggest you do yourself a huge favor and take a leave from this place. Life has so much more to offer than patrolling for vandalism on Wikipedia. I hope you'll find something much more rewarding and valuable to spend your time on. Sincerely, an anonymous person who hopes you've picked up on the subtext this last week. Later on, Danno.

I'll assume that your use of "we" indicates that you are also BeerBoy and possibly also Delfinophile. As the rest of your message, it seems like your issue is mostly with Wikipedia, and not with me. Tell it to Jimbo, not me. I choose to keep an eye on the recent changes in my spare time as I'm watching TV or looking around the internet. I don't see how that leads you to conclude that I'm wasting my life, but I won't sweat it. If you aren't even going to sign your personal attacks, they're not worth my time. --Daniel Olsen 07:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never said you were wasting your life, amigo. Just suggested that there are perhaps better uses of your time. No, the issue is not with Wikipedia, you didn't read carefully enough. Anyway, you'll do what you want. If you continue these pursuits, you can be sure you'll continue to be the recipient of hatred in this venue. That's your choice. Good luck, with that. Oh, and you need not respond. Adios.

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo 05:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Courtney Akins

This user just got blocked indefinitely for trolling (see the block log if you don't believe me).--66.143.165.193 04:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I've seen vandalism like that before. --Daniel Olsen 04:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

delete

In case you need it again, to get rid of a mistake page mark it {{db-author}}. -- RHaworth 07:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was looking for. Sometimes you can't pull the tag names off the top of your head. Thanks. --Daniel Olsen 13:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Daniel, I edited my user page before signing in. A message said you reverted my edit because you considered it vandalism. Why?

My mistake, I saw an anonymous IP removing content from a userpage and I believed it was vandalism, so I reverted it. --Daniel Olsen 03:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KROQ question

Keep - I really don't think that leaving the articles here hurts wikipedia, and it certainly improves the KROQ family of articles. As for the copyright issue, is it really their intelectual property? The articles say that the list is established by caller's votes, and unless KROQ mind controlled all those callers then the results of the list are not theirs. Copyright protects the creative expression of material, not the material itself. In my eyes that means that while the broadcast of the countdown can be copyrighted, the voting results cannot be. Any more input? --Daniel Olsen 06:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see the AfD before it closed, but the answer to your question is yes. The simplest way to verify this is to go to any polling organization, Gallup, Pew, etc., and read their copyright notice. Polling organizations essentially make a business out of soliciting responses from individuals. The original contribution is not the answer by the repondent, but the conducting, compiling and presentation of the poll, and that lies with the poller or their client. Best, trialsanderrors 08:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from Alphachimp

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia.

With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you.

(Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp ^laudare 01:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

I've approved you to use it. Be sure to read the rules for use on WP:AWB, and enjoy. Regards, alphaChimp^(talk) 04:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ousmane Zongo

hi Daniel -- thanks for your comments on this AfD. I see your point, that WP:BIO says that reporting of a single event counts as one. In this case, however, the New York Times archive has some 33 articles over eight months, reporting on the death, the subsequent investigation, the settlement, the officer's trial, and even an article about a statement by another officer at the scene that he (the second officer) ignored the dying man. Fortunately, not many people are killed unarmed by police, and this was a very high-profile case. Would you reconsider you vote, and check the NYT or google around a bit? best, bikeable (talk) 04:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Daniel -- I appreciate your looking into this. bikeable (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for looking after my user page. -- Gogo Dodo 04:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, it's all in a day's work. I remembered to up the vandalism counter too. --Daniel Olsen 04:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude

your VP completely trashed the C article reverting it to a previous version of a different article. Did you realise this? Philc _T^E_C^I 23:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's odd, I was reverting vandalism to C++ and somehow the reversion got pasted onto C instead. I'll report it to the developer. --Daniel Olsen 00:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, cool, just thought you should know, so hopefully these glitches can be fixed. Cheers. Philc _T^E_C^I 15:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IIM

Daniel, I was discourages by such unreasonable and unethical deletionists, but thanks to your support and others', I'm regaining faith in Wiki . Miro.gal

Islam is a Destructive Cult, and saying so is not vandalism

Daniel, you wrote "Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Destructive cult. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Daniel Olsen 05:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)" Well, I believe my edit should not have been reverted. I think you reverted it automatically without even reading what I wrote in my comments when I put it back in after some member took it out. Please read what I wrote and get back to me.

You cannot simply add contentious material like that onto wikipedia. Your personal opinion that islam is a destructive cult is not fit for wikipedia. If you would like to cite some sources to support your statement and present the information in Neutral point of view, feel free to do so. --Daniel Olsen 06:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

gyros

Hello there. Why you reverted my edit in gyros? --85.75.233.92 02:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I felt that it read better before you changed it, and it included the Grrek and Turkish names. --Daniel Olsen 05:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gyros in Greece 'wasn't formerly (and still sometimes) called ντονέρ [don'er], from its Turkish name döner kebab (literally "turning roast"); γύρος is a calque of that name.' I live in Greece, I know better. Please don't revert the article again.

If you'd like to correct the article you could remove the photo of donner kebab and put one of a gyros rotisserie, but you must be biased. --85.75.233.92 05:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't live in Greece, forgive my location. Can you explain to me the difference between gyros and doner? From the articles, it seems both of those terms refer to meat roasted on a large rotating pole. Is there any difference between the two? If not, I'm sure there must be some people who refer to gyros as doner, especially considering the close proximity of Turkey and Greece. --Daniel Olsen 05:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gyros is not made up of minced meat and is not served with the same stuff as a donner. Plus the meat is spiced.

No they don't refer to it as donner. You should know Greeks don't like Turks. --85.75.233.92 05:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already told you that I don't live in the area. I don't know the local politics. The gyros and Döner kebab articles are very ambiguous about the terms 'gyros' and 'doner', and state they they are used interchangeably throughout most the world. Are you telling me that as soon as you cross the border from Greece to Turkey, people never again refer to gyros and always use the term doner? --Daniel Olsen 05:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California

Thanks for creating the new California geo-stubs. The next step is going through and redistributing the existing Cali and SoCal geo stubs. I'll try to do some of that this weekend.

As for your congradulations at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Joshua A. Norton. A Featured article review means that someone has recommended de-featuring an article, so it's not really the sort of thing that usually gets a congradulations. ^Blank ^Verse 04:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already started going through them, and I'll see if I can't get through the whole thing. Featured article candidate and featured article review shouldn't look so similar. --Daniel Olsen 05:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to thank you for your kind welcome

Hope you are happy, well, and in good health dear friend.

66.246.72.108 13:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And the same for you. Happy editing! --Daniel Olsen 01:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Toothpaste for Dinner

Firstly, thank you for not taking offense at my edits, as they were not intended that way. Thanks for the note – I now see your point about changing the image (at first I thought it was an unnecessary change; not so much now). I think that possibly an even better comic to put up would be this one, since it has the comic title in the actual comic, but that's just me. As far as changing the "characters" heading to "recurring characters" heading, I see your point in making that edit as well, but I think that section should be re-worded so that the "characters" title would be more appropriate. Looking at the section again, it sucks, and that's probably why you tried writing an introduction paragraph to it. I didn't like it because you used the phrase "poorly drawn", which to me is not a neutral point of view. I think redoing that section (or removing it altogether) would be appropriate. As far as the image, the comic... well, I showed you the comic I would choose, but I think anyone is fine. Overall, your edits didn't seem to be an improvement in my opinion, but now I see your side of it. I'm sorry of any of this is incoherent, but I'm pressed for time right now. Look forward to a reply, and happy editing. —EdGl 00:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know your intent when you wrote "poorly drawn", but it kinda comes across as being negative, even though it is technically truthful. Maybe we can rephrase it a little. Both of us agree that the article needs to be cleaned up, and I will work on it over the weekend if I can. (and I'm glad we agree on what comic should be displayed)—EdGl 01:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please help

Hi! I got your username from the Association Inclusionist Wikipedians. I'm trying to work against a band of linkocrites (see en:User:cochese8). You look as if you're a valuable editor and I could really use some help [preserving] a great link. I would ask you to review the discussion and vote keep if you agree with the link's value. Thanks for your help! Cochese8 00:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Vandalproof

I saw that you mentioned a solution to my problem in the sectioned warnings idea. Could you please give an example of the correct way? I don't know what to do. Scienceman123 talk 04:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned a solution that could be implemented by changing the code of VP itself (which is a task for AmiDaniel), not by anything you or I can do. Sorry. --Daniel Olsen 04:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my post on the project page. --Daniel Olsen 05:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TB2

You have a linux box? -- Tawker 05:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afraid not... the Windows version will come...... eventually......... like when the gift of time comes :) -- Tawker 05:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Angry Nintendo Nerd

Daniel, I know you're an Wikipedia inclusionist, and it's come to my attention that the Angry Nintendo Nerd's article has been deleted due to an ostensible lack of notability. Well, this is just plain and simply absurd; the guy is known by thousands of internet-users the world over. I think it absolutely reeks of biased selectivity to delete something like this. Isn't there something you can do?

I think this is the third time some plea like this has happened. I hereby withdraw my AIW membership. --Daniel Olsen 01:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flicka

Hey, I am just removing the Future Film thing, because it is Friday and therefore the movie's release day is today, as I'm looking the at the times for the movie now. Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.107.18 (talk • contribs)

Sorry for the mix-up. Please use edit summaries next time, otherwise edits like that could be interpreted as vandalism or trying to disrupt wikipedia to prove a point. --Daniel Olsen 06:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the edit should have been as it was.

Userpage

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. I don't know where this person came from. They just sprang up all of a sudden. Where can I report this vandalism? As it has happened 3 times by the same person already. -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 04:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Thanks for the adoption. As you can see from User_talk:Jreferee, the Wikipedia bots are comming at me from all sides and need some help in fighting them off. Can you tell me why it deleted the List of Clergy page (or direct me to how I can ask someone about this.) Also, oneminor point, why do my user page and discussion page show the same thing? I tried to make my user page look like yours, but my discussion page changed, too. Can you help me fix this? TIA -- Jreferee 14:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daniel! I, too, thank you for the adoption. I promise to work hard to improve Wikipedia. The problem is that I don't really know what I can work on. I joined Wikipedia at the beginning of the year and for many months was too shy and bewildered to really do much. I can more or less find my way around now, but I still don't really know how I can contribute to Wikipedia in English. I'm far more active in the francophone version, mostly due to the large amount of articles needing translation into French. I'd love to translate for the English-speaking Wiki, but there doesn't seem to be much to do - mostly maintenance and correcting badly-translated articles. Can you give me any ideas as to which projects I could work on? A big merci, a gracias and a thank you! Marialadouce 18:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips. It looks like there's plenty of work for me in the stubs category. Now I'll just have to see how I'll balance the work on the French and English Wikipedias. There'll always be more work to do on the French one, but I don't want either of my accounts to stagnate. I'll be sure to ask you if I ever encounter any problems. Happy editing! Marialadouce 03:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for the help! I know how to edit templates, but that was an imprudent mistake. Again, thanks! Sakura Avalon 00:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Userpage

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. I don't know where this person came from. They just sprang up all of a sudden. Where can I report this vandalism? As it has happened 3 times by the same person already. -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 04:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Thanks for the adoption. As you can see from User_talk:Jreferee, the Wikipedia bots are comming at me from all sides and need some help in fighting them off. Can you tell me why it deleted the List of Clergy page (or direct me to how I can ask someone about this.) Also, oneminor point, why do my user page and discussion page show the same thing? I tried to make my user page look like yours, but my discussion page changed, too. Can you help me fix this? TIA -- Jreferee 14:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daniel! I, too, thank you for the adoption. I promise to work hard to improve Wikipedia. The problem is that I don't really know what I can work on. I joined Wikipedia at the beginning of the year and for many months was too shy and bewildered to really do much. I can more or less find my way around now, but I still don't really know how I can contribute to Wikipedia in English. I'm far more active in the francophone version, mostly due to the large amount of articles needing translation into French. I'd love to translate for the English-speaking Wiki, but there doesn't seem to be much to do - mostly maintenance and correcting badly-translated articles. Can you give me any ideas as to which projects I could work on? A big merci, a gracias and a thank you! Marialadouce 18:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips. It looks like there's plenty of work for me in the stubs category. Now I'll just have to see how I'll balance the work on the French and English Wikipedias. There'll always be more work to do on the French one, but I don't want either of my accounts to stagnate. I'll be sure to ask you if I ever encounter any problems. Happy editing! Marialadouce 03:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for the help! I know how to edit templates, but that was an imprudent mistake. Again, thanks! Sakura Avalon 00:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Vandalism

Hey, something you got involved in in the past has popped up again. Check out the history of my talk page as well as my user page. The guy you warned with a permanent ban has continued to abuse my pages. Thanks for looking into it.

-- Dopefish 17:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Office Holdings.

Having taken on board your comments regarding my Office Holdings page I would like to say in my defence that I am new to Wikipedia and am just getting to grips with it.

However I have edited my page to make it less 'advertisy' and in response to you Office not being on the Google News Search, it isn't on the Google News Search yet it is part of West Coast Capital Group owned by Tom Hunter which is on the Google News Search. Office is also on the West Coast Capital Groups website if you wish further reference.

Having hopefully justified my article could you please not try to delete it, thank you.

Laura davis

Chabot S&SC and some Wikipedia procedural stuff

Hi Daniel! I got your message re: merging the two Chabot pages. I am fairly new at editing, and although I understand the mechanics of basic editing well (and I've read Wikipedia procedural stuff), I have no idea how exactly respond to your comment. Not in terms of what to say, but I mean that I literally don't know how you commented to me there and I don't know how to reply back, so I'm taking a stab that this (editing your User talk page) is the right way! (Please do advise me if there's a better way to do it.)

Your comments regarding the two pages make sense and I'm all for them. I do think that the final result should be the ampersand version because that is what the center itself uses; but beyond that, I don't know which version is best to merge into which, and then how to redirect. Again, I understand basic "how to edit a page and use markups" pretty well; but more advanced (i.e., meta stuff, for lack of a better term) is still a bit confusing to me. Redirects are one such thing. So I'm 100% open to suggestions on the best way to handle the merge; and in the meantime, I'll happily work on the content piece by piece. (I'm a volunteer there so I have decent knowledge of it.) Migp 17:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got your other message, thanks! I'll work on it. I'll also include notes on the CSSC entries' discussion pages. Migp 17:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor editing

Hello, Daniel! I hope you are well.

My query is rather minor this time: in the interest of aesthetics, I would like to know how to make text on my user page not push down my (far too many) userboxes. I have the same problem with my French userpage. I will soon cull some userboxes, but I would still like the page to look neater, with all of them directly underneath my Babel and the text to the left as usual. I have tried to copy and paste other users' similar userpage arrangements and preview the results, but it is never quite right.

Can you show me how, or point me to the appropriate Help page? Thank you and happy editing!

Marialadouce 19:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Daniel! I think you and I may be viewing the userpage differently. The userboxes are indeed to the right, but still a bit to the left of the Babel. The text saying "about me" and the top half of the first userbox are level with the bottom half of {{ru-1}}, if you see what I mean.

If the userboxes column can't be moved any further to the right, though, this is a good layout. The important thing was to avoid getting huge blank spaces due to the text pushing everything down. I'll go try it on my French Wiki now and see if it gives me the same result.

Marialadouce 12:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC) Forgot to sign due to sleeping late and feeling woozy, sorry...[reply]

Thank you, Daniel! The userboxes are now right under the Babel. Marialadouce 01:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movie Pages

I would like to try creating another movie page. I already did one, Doll Graveyard, but had only added bare bones information since I wasn't sure what was okay or not okay to add. (Such as how much, if any, details I can get from imdb.com.) The movie I want to make a page for is: http://imdb.com/title/tt0338769/ As for the movie cover, where (and if it is allowed) does one get the movie cover. From the same site? And lastly, the original title is "Beauty And The Beast" yet the USA DVD title is "Blood Of Beasts". Which one should I use for the title of the article? -WarthogDemon 18:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would I need to cite plot summary itself, or would the movie bascially be the source? (Sorry if that's a dumb question; I can get overly thorough at times.) ^_^; And thanks again. :) -WarthogDemon 06:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movie Pages

I would like to try creating another movie page. I already did one, Doll Graveyard, but had only added bare bones information since I wasn't sure what was okay or not okay to add. (Such as how much, if any, details I can get from imdb.com.) The movie I want to make a page for is: http://imdb.com/title/tt0338769/ As for the movie cover, where (and if it is allowed) does one get the movie cover. From the same site? And lastly, the original title is "Beauty And The Beast" yet the USA DVD title is "Blood Of Beasts". Which one should I use for the title of the article? -WarthogDemon 18:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would I need to cite plot summary itself, or would the movie bascially be the source? (Sorry if that's a dumb question; I can get overly thorough at times.) ^_^; And thanks again. :) -WarthogDemon 06:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with subsections

Hi Daniel, you adopted me.

I am working on a mini-wiki to do publishable collaborative research for the Street medic article. I am trying to create subcategories within its top-level category, Medic. These subcategories will allow me to group together Protocols with each other, Action reports, Historical events, and Templates. I don't know what magic word or category tag will create these subcategories.

I haven't released the mini-wiki in the street medic community yet. If you need to look at it to answer my question, you can see it in development at its scratchpad wikia. Thanks.

Gobblehook 22:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with the subcategories, Daniel. I'll let you know when I get terribly confused again.

Gobblehook 11:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for adopting :)

Thanks for adopting me :) I've some guys (User:Tankred, User:PANONIAN) dumped on me. They'll (at least one of them) will soon be seen here on your talkpage, to prove how evil I am. Then I prove how misleading and hostile they are, and that their charges simply does not fit, except edit warring. See, what you'll get here soon, I'm sure, it will happen less in a day. Tankred an PANONIAN managed to drive me into edit wars several times. Now I stopped, but I want to take actions preventing him/them to stop harassing me. Yet, I always choosed the wrong stair of wiki-administration to resolve this problem, and get a peaceful athmosphere around me to be able to contribute. To achieve this, I need to fill a Wikipedia:Requests for mediation, for what I need some help. This is the situation around me.

So, in a nutshell, this is what you'll get, if you adopt me. Are you still in? :-)) --VinceB 01:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Dvd Cover Image

I've uploaded a dvd cover image Image:Bloodbeasts.jpg. Does everything seem alright with it? (Or does it need to be resized and/or sources made clearer?) -WarthogDemon 06:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Different Spaces

Hiya, it wasn't a malformed nomination... It had been deleted by a new user. I've reverted the page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Different Spaces, but wanted to let you know in case you wanted to !vote again. --Elonka 23:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Adoption Criteria

I'm sorry for slapping it on there, and now have revised it in the proposals page. Take a look and speak your mind about them. You can even make a new one if you wish. Just wanted to up-date you and say sorry. THANKS! Randfan 22:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adopting

Hi Daniel thanks for adopting. I plan to rewrite the article Colors of chemicals. I would need some help on how to proceed. Since I would concentrate on the colors of inorganic compound as MGM sugested on the talk:Colors of chemicals I wonder if I can edit the article as I think or should I start another one with reference to the original article?

Again thanks a lot for adopting me -- FriedrichB 22:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A kind of request for third opinion

I've just made some cited and easy to verify contribs to the Anti-Hungarian sentiment page, with comments on the discussion page, and the editorial resume box, why parts were cut out. Please, check if they are reverted without any notice (as usual). Thanks.

I've reverted my talkpage due to a previous agreement between me & User:Durova. I'm really intrested how do you see my case, to better know what do/did I do wrong, or at least wich part stands of those accusations (notice, I've answered to all of those). Thanks, if you take the time! (you can write me it e-mail also)--VinceB 01:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Feel free to warn me whenever, when you look at me and find me agressive or someting wich violates WP:CIV or WP:NPA or similar rules or not violating, but at least you feel that I should hold myself back a bit. Did anyone said, adopting is a joyride? :) (I'm a bit -?- short tempered) Thanks again. --VinceB 02:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Thermophobic

Removing AFD notices is vandalism, do not do that again. TJ Spyke 03:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I reverted the vandalism and forgot about the AfD notice. --Daniel Olsen 03:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

adopt-a-user criteria (exact rules/guidelines and discussions for them)

I added a new page for the exact rules/guidelines I used the rules from Prop. #3 and Prop. #4. The link can be found at the top of the criteria page. Feel free to add to! Cheers! Randfan 22:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cybercafe.com

I made the Afd page for Cybercafe.com: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyberpunkcafe.com. Should I not have done so? I only did because I wasn't sure if the user's claims of notability were actually valid or not. -WarthogDemon 07:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Welcome to VandalProof! 1.3

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Daniel Olsen! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page and please note this is VP 1.3 not 1.2.2 see this for the approved list. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 18:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Hrm, that's odd.

No, I didn't mean to. I'm using a report script which has a bug, I'm assuming. Sorry about the confusion. (When I saw it, I didn't think it was right, but I didn't question the script.) [Iridescence] talk • contrib 05:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your anti-vandalism work!

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar goes to Daniel Olsen for his tireless work in combating vandalism on Wikipedia. –- kungming·2 \| ^(Talk·^Contact) 06:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting an article

Congrats on the RfA!

I am still working on my medic wikia research project, which will provide me with the information to do good work on several wikipedia articles. It's still in development, but I'm trying to split http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Police_dog_bite into "Police dog bite (protocol)" and "Police dog bite (medical issue)", and leave a disambiguation page at "Police dog bite".

Problem is, I don't know how.

Thanks! Gobblehook 22:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Congratulations!

Well done on passing your RfA with 100% support! I hope that you enjoy your admin tasks when you are given the tools! If you have any questions about adminship then I will do my best to answer them. Regards, (aeropagitica) 10:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well done from me too...! Budgiekiller 13:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It ain't over till... - wait, does that make me fat? Oh well, congrats on your unanimous support which is all the more impressive as a second nomination as it means you stuck with it. Keep up the good work, and dig in and help out with the backlogs as you get comfortable. Stay conservative with the tools though, especially blocking, and see if another solution works first. Again congrats - Taxman ^Talk 13:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.

KillerChihuahua^?!?

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.

Hello Daniel. I wanted to thank you with flowers (well, flower) for taking the time to participate in my RfA, which was successful. I'm very grateful for your support. Congratulations also on acquiring a mop of your own. Lets see who manages to accidently delete the front page first, eh? Thanks again, Rockpocket 07:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oakland Zoo article

The photographs on that page do not appear to be no rights reserved. On the flickr page, it states they have all rights reserved. Correct me if I'm wrong - I simply do not want copyrighted images used without permission here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.104.216.232 (talk • contribs)

Well the on the flickr page, the uploading user is name "Tree hgr", and the name of the user uploading images here seems to be one and the same (Treehgr). Even though flickr places the copyright tag in all images automaticallly, the original author can publish his photos here with whatever license he likes. --Daniel Olsen 17:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crash_My_Model_Car on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Crash_My_Model_Car. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Stephenmcleod 09:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Help

Hello again its jay can you help me design my user page and such. Thanks Jaymac407 17:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crash My Model Car

This article has been put on WP:DRV after you speedy deleted it. When you deleted the article a large amount of text had just been removed, which included some claim to notability, and the article had survived an AfD previously (albeit by default after no consensus was reached). Could you clarify on DRV whether you realised that blanking had taken place when you deleted it? I think that if this was a simple mistake due to the blanking we shouldn't have to go through the full DRV period. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 13:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Shiny new buttons

Two weeks ago I couldn't even spell administratur and now I are one (in no small part thanks to your support). Now that I checked out those new buttons I realize that I can unleash mutant monsters on unsuspecting articles or summon batteries of laser guns in their defense. The move button has now acquired special powers, and there's even a feature to roll back time. With such awesome new powers at my fingertips I will try to tread lightly to avoid causing irreversible damage and getting into any wheel wars. Thanks again and let me know whenever I can be of use.

~ trialsanderrors 06:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Re: Help

I need help putting User Boxes on my userpage, if you could help me do that I would be thankful.

Thanks Jaymac407 19:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion?

Can you give reason as to why Crash My Model Car article was deleted please? There was already an AFD discussion, which resulted in the article being kept - why did you over-rule this completely months after the event and just delete it? 09:10, 13 November 2006 (GMT) - StephenMcLeod

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page. User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward1

Thedrunkendialer.com

I am wondering of this site could be considered an internet phenomena or not. I know it is rather popular and extremely humorous. It features a guy who holds a weekly contest offering $100 via PayPal to the individual who leaves him he best Drunk dialing message on his voicemail.

I did not add this site to this article yet for fear that people would think I am self-promoting. I have no affiliation with the site and can’t find any direct marketing used to purchase products. I just think it is very funny and well known around my area.

I look forward to some objective input before I add, or do not add this site to the list. Take a look for yourself, you be the judge…

Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Promotional articles about yourself, your friends, your company or products; or articles written as part of a marketing or promotional campaign, may be deleted in accordance with our deletion policies. For more information, see Wikipedia:Spam. (Would this apply?)

http://www.thedrunkendialer.com/drunk-dialer.html

Thanks, 69.167.102.181

P.S. I posted the same message on User_talk:Wavy_G for more opinions. Look forward to hearing from you...

Thank you for your input

I greatly appreciate you opinions and value your perspectives. Your vantage point enables me to better conceptualize Wikipedia’s purpose. I will watch this site in the future to determine if it becomes more notable, however I won’t lose any sleep if it is not included in that particular article. However, I did find it to be quite hilarious, yet I understand that humor is not a criterion for adding a link to an article.

Look forward to hearing from you, 69.167.102.181

About editing an user profile

Sorry about that, I'm Nicanor5 (I hope you can confirm that with my ip or something) I forgot to log in to change my user page. Anyway thanks for reverting the changes, and sorry for the trouble caused to you.

Thank you!

☻ Someone has poured you tea ☺

Admin tools

The mop

Congratulations on becoming an admin!

Enjoy your new-found powers, and remember to use them only for good, and not for evil. If you would like to try out your new mop, here are some spots that always need loving care:

All the best! - Quadell

The flamethrower

Congratulations

SUPER CONGRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Randfan 00:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User 203.143.254.76

This anonymous user has received two last warnings (actually three) from you and Persian Poet Gal. I think it's time to block the IP address. -- Rob C (Alarob) 03:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Question

I'm wondering if I can put [1] on my user page, but I want to be sure I understand the Creative Commons Attribution. Is it alright if I do so as long as I link it back to the page it's used on? -WarthogDemon 19:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks, Daniel

I think I will step away from this now. Back to something more productive. Best, Kukini 05:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, the user is trying to have the archive deleted now [2]. Any thoughts? Kukini 05:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi...and this [3]? Kukini 05:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The editor now is also requesting a right to vanish [4]. Kukini 05:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banner in pink

I hope you don't mind... I'm clueless about anything technical, so I copied the format you gave to the thank-you banner on your talk page to mine. I needed something to make my away message more visible OK, OK, and prettier, too. Congratulations on being elected admin, by the way! Marialadouce | parlami 02:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the adoption

I appreciate your willingness to lend a hand as I learn the ropes. I'm tryin' to puzzle a few things out for myself, but may soon be ready to call for help. --Jgilhousen 07:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you man

Thanks for blocking bigblackguy890 dam he is a pain how can i check what vandalism did he put? thanks--"P-Machine" 04:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Question on Conflict of Interest Issue

I could use some guidance on the guidelines regarding conflicts of interest. I have read all of the relevant articles I could find, and understand the problems that could arise from autobiography and near family members as subjects.

However, I am the director of our family association, and in that capacity act as custodian of historic records and photographs relating to many distant relatives, most of them deceased. Some are notable figures, for whom articles have not been written, and/or independent parties would not have access to the photographs. Although I share their surname, I am not acquainted with them, and am confident I could maintain NPOV.

Examples: Charles Gilhousen, early 20th century art photographer, and W. H. Gilhousen, Civil war photographer who taught him his craft; and still living, Klein Gilhousen, co-founder of Qualcomm and holder of several patents including some central to cell phone technology.

I certainly have plenty to keep me busy as a new Wikipedian which do not bump into this thorny issue, but it seems like an opportunity to make a unique contribution to the project, as long as I approach it with care. Whatcha think? ----J-M Jgilhousen 19:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply on my User page. Point about thorough sourcing well taken (I have primary and solid secondary sources). I'll work on some projects with less potential for such problems first, to gain Wiki experience. ----J-M Jgilhousen 23:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I have complains about User:VinceB. I saw that you adopted him, so I think I should tell you this. I believe that his previous disruptive behavior did not improved since he again engage in POV revert wars: I also believe that he deleting "name" sections from various articles simply to prove a point that such sections should not exist, despite the fact that numerous Wikipedia articles have "name" sections that further explain name of the articles. I have in mind his edits like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gardinovci&diff=89950609&oldid=89949728 He not only deleting "Name" sections, but with that deletion, he also delete "Contents tables" from the articles because these tables need 4 titles to appear and after his deletions of the "Name" sections, number of titles become 3 and thus contents table disappear (See "his" version version of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gardinovci&oldid=89950609 and now see "my" version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gardinovci&oldid=89951862 ). Because of his attempts to prove a point he also disrupting aesthetics of the articles. Can something be done about this problem? PANONIAN (talk) 03:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check them now, see my opinion abt this here: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Clarification needed, and see the contribs of them 212.200.175.214 (talk · contribs) & PANONIAN (talk · contribs) :-) - then see his ultimatum to me on my talkpage. Can you help me how to ask for a checkuser? Thanks! I like being adopted :) --Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 15:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look out, who you're agreeing! [5]. Someone takes wikipedia too seriously. --Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 15:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for moving my comment from Wikipedia:Sensitive IP addresses to where it properly belongs. I feel rather silly now. All I can say in my defense is that the page looks a lot like a talk page... :-) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 02:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I really appreciate you taking the time to adopt me :-) I actually have a question right now, if you're not too busy: could you tell me how to put up a single "citation needed" thing on a page? Thank you again! --Thereen 07:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I am not sure how you upload a file. I went through the procedure and clicked upload, but when i went back to the page it wasn't there. Can you please help me? Kitkatcrazy 09:25, November 26 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your help :-) See you around. --Thereen 07:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

RE:STREETS

Daniel Olsen, I read your message and a question came to me that needs to be answered; wouldn't it make sense if you kept those streets in the wikipedia database instead of deleting it, because they might be handy for directions in the far or near future. Please reply to this address. --SH4035 06:30, 27 November 2006 (PST)

From one new admin to another

I wasn't going to send thank-you cards, but the emotional impact of hitting WP:100 (and doing so unanimously!) changed my mind. So I appreciate your confidence in me (and the bit about useful edit summaries), and hope you'll let me know if I can do anything for you in the future. Cheers! -- nae'blis 21:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your ~~first~~ second support at my RfA :). I've got a lot to learn, but your words of support mean a lot! Any advice is welcome as I learn to use the new tools, and as a fellow administrator would be much appreciated! Also, congratulations to you as well on your recent promotion. Thanks again, and forgive my use of this dorky message box :) -- Renesis (talk) 00:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for adopting me. I've having trouble figuring out how to put references in. If I am putting one in the middle of an article, how do I get it in the right order. Thanks! Hunterkb 13:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Help desk

Thanks but it was all luck. I had crafted a good reply to an earlier question and then ran into an edit conflict that basically had the same info. So it was just karma or something. ;-) Dismas|^(talk) 05:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake!

Sorry about the edit by user 24.90.209.82 [[6]] to my profile, that was me... I hadn't realized that I had logged out. - Ecksem Diem 07:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ty Ty!

Thank you 4 adoptin me (wiki wise)! I really don't know any proper codes for entering thinks like links and such to pages I'm editing. Also,(which I'm not saying this is happening) what would i do if I discovered what I thought was a personal attack or vandalism that I can prove is false or an opinion? You and aeropagtica remain my fave peoples. Edxx3 12:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia on NPR

NPR

I noticed on your userpage that you work for NPR. To your knowledge, have they ever done a piece on Wikipedia? --Daniel Olsen 05:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Daniel, I do not work for NPR. I am an obsessed fan of the NPR puzzle segment, and I prepare a weekly synopsis of that segment.[7] However, NPR has done many stories on Wikipedia. You can find 49 links here.[8] My favorite was Wai, Wait ... Don't Tell Me's "Not My Job" segment in which NPR asked Jimmy Wales three questions from random articles.[9] He panned, but ably proved that no one person can know it all. r3 14:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sarzad

Looks like he wants to be blocked for good (see this). He's also starting to attack other users again (by calling you a "fucktard"). Should we give him what he wants? // Sasuke-kun27 18:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your support with my RfA. My nomination succeeded and I've joined the admin ranks. I appreciate your support. Thanks again! =) -- Gogo Dodo 22:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for adopting me, Daniel! I'm a little rusty with things like uploading images to my user page though. Could you tell me how to do it on my discussion page. Again, thanks, --Ericdd329 16:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Never mind that message, I figured it out! Ericdd329 23:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Future of Adopt-a-user

Hi there - with Flameviper leaving Adopt-a-user for the next generation to take on, and your obvious interest in the project, I was hoping you would find to comment and help out with some suggestions for the future of the project. Please see Wikipedia talk:Adopt-a-User. Many thanks Lethaniol 15:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creating Categories

Hi. I've been focusing lately on Oregon government and politics, creating articles on state politicians, agencies, and elected offices. In many cases, it seems obvious that they belong in a category which has not yet been created (in most cases, because I have just created the first article that belongs there).

Example: the article on the incumbent Secretary of State (Bill Bradbury) and those on several of his predecessors are tagged Category:Secretaries of State of Oregon, but when I created a stub for the State Treasurer (Randall Edwards (Oregon politician)), no correlary category existed, so I created it, motivated largely by the fact that I have noticed that most articles I create very soon attract edits adding categories.

I've been unable to find a policy on category creation. Am I supposed to be submitting them for discussion somewhere before creating them, or when such creation falls within an already established scheme, does "Be Bold" apply. Sorry if this seems like a trivial issue. It certainly doesn't have the sizzle of the "fair use" policy controversy I seem to have stumbled into. ----J-M Jgilhousen 01:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]