User talk:Calton/Archive11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Open letter[edit]

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

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

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

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

Re: copyvio[edit]

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

You win[edit]

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

Radio Frequency Quadrupole[edit]

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

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

Lobbying in AfDs[edit]

  • Wow guys, wow. I think I get the message. Maybe. Just a little. Thank you Wikipedia Administrators. No more consensus building. Yeesh. Smeelgova 05:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC).
  • No more consensus building. That indicates to me, at least, that, no, you didn't actually get the message, but press on regardless. --Calton | Talk 08:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I have not pressed on or done anything of the sort. And yes, I did get the message. Perhaps I do not understand, can there be consensus building? Please, attempt to be kind and polite, and I will listen and obey. Smeelgova 09:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC).
Perhaps this is what I do not understand: How exactly does one "consensus-build", and not risk being summarily blocked by a Wikipedia Administrator?
You DO see the difference, right? Your "no more consensus building" makes it sound as if you believe that a couple of comments to you suddenly brought the practice to a grinding halt; it is not and never has been the case that actual consensus-building is or has been discouraged.
And as for the "all-knowing" admins -- well, there are about 1,000 admins, so if one blocks you unfairly, there are 999 others you can make appeals to. --Calton | Talk 05:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
How does one discuss issues with other editors of of like-minded opinion on their talk pages, without the risk of being blocked? How does one make other editors of like-minded opinion aware of issues that are important to them? I have started to add caveats to talk pages of other editors when I post to them, to make sure that watching Administrators know for the future that I am being VERY CAREFUL to avoid "recruiting" or anything of the sort. Thanks for the discussion and advice, but please, try to be more kind in your language to me, I am still relatively new and trying to learn and listen. Yours, Smeelgova 05:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC).
  • Please, at least acknowledge a few things. I stopped the actions in question after being warned by User:Jossi. Everything after that was just Administrators getting upset at my discussion, not further actions. I will try my best to not do this anymore, and will tread very carefully when talking to other editors on their talk pages. I would appreciate it if you try to have a kinder general attitude towards me, I am not playing the martyr, I simply want to have a better editing relationship going on here. Thank you for your time. Yours, Smeelgova 05:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC).
    • Thank you for the advice. I really wish you'd calm down a little bit though and act a little nicer. Let's all agree that this episode is over, I've learned a bit from all of your commentary, and try to edit my POV/contribution patterns in the future. Yours, Smeelgova 06:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC).

Speedy deletion criteria A7[edit]

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


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

The sideshow[edit]

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

Santa Cruz Yachts - Spam?[edit]


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

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

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

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

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



Tagging Alex Machacek[edit]

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

--NRS | T/M\B 09:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Type specimens[edit]

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

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

Get your attitude correct, kid[edit]

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

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

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

Chill out Calton. It's okay. The article looks just fine to me. Grandmasterka 05:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

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

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

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

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka[edit]

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

If you want to talk to me...[edit]

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


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

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


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

Not spam links[edit]

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

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


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

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

Thank you for your ethics[edit]

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

Well, thanks + admiration[edit]

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

You must own a time machine. My very first Wikipedia input was August 13th. How have you managed to spend 6 months on this noble crusade of yours by October 26th? Rosencomet 18:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks[edit]

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

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

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

spam link noticeboard?[edit]

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

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

Rubrey, et al[edit]

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

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

Not spam[edit]

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

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

Halloween Train proxy check requests[edit]

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

User page tagging[edit]

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

Halloween train page[edit]

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

No need to should Calton. You're right of course, I wasn't careful enough, and the deleter ID'd himself. But that's still 10 keeps to five deletes. Shouldn't be deleted. And I live in Tokyo, I've know of the party for twenty years. It's a real even, like it or not (and I don't). Vincent 01:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Bold face is better than all caps, but still no need to keep you're voice at such a raised level. It is not a closed debade. Not a debate I partticularly want to join. But admin abuse is, well, wrong. (and BTW, I apologize for the comic strip euphisms (i.e. f*&%*7g ) the article talk page. Cheers, Vincent 01:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I read the notability criteria and the reason used to justify ending the debate and deleting the page is wrong. The even is notable among members of the foreign community in Tokyo. It is documented on the net, and what I read matches what I know. This article is being deleted simply because the admin does not like it. Guess what, I don't like it either, but I won't bury my head in the sand and pretend that this annual tradition (20+ years old) doesn't exist. Vincent 01:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
My view is that the admin abused his power so I do not feel bound by his request, until other admins participate. Vincent 01:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Your comments to User:Vfp15[edit]

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

I was being quite literal, so try a little research before slapping templates on user talk pages.
Recap: he left a message on my page:
Have a look at the VfD page and you'll see that the consensus is to keep it. I don't know who deleted it [emphasis mine]. [2]
I pointed out that this information WAS AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE he referred to, AND pointed out -- using a quote from that page at the main AFD page -- why IP comments are discounted and consensus wasn' what he claimed. [3] Despite the latter, his response was:
But that's still 10 keeps to five deletes. [4]
So I repeated the quotes, with the most important sentences boldfaced. His response was to harp about about "not shouting" with boldface AND claiming "It is not a closed debade [sic]" despite it saying so, again, right at the top of the page.
That's THREE things in a row that are stated plainly on a single page (one of them extracted and repeated for him) and which he misses (or ignores), so yeah, he objectively has a reading comprehension problem.
Or worse, as he's the main antagonist in the WP:LAME Hall of Fame edit war over the Charles Darwin/Abraham Lincoln trivia mention (something I had no idea about until HE brought it up), so I have no expectation whatsoever of him being reasonable. --Calton | Talk 02:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)--Calton | Talk 02:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I am familiar with User:Vfp15 and was involved in the arbitration case about the Charles Darwin/Abraham Lincoln dispute. I think his behaviour was ludicrous then. However, that doesn't excuse the tone you adopted with him. I've seen no evidence since his unbanning that he has been anything other than a conscientious editor, so remember to keep civil and assume good faith. —Psychonaut 02:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Mark Steere[edit]

Do you remember him?

Something that I found on him at BoardGameGeek:

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

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

Any place in which Mark Steere is allowed to intimidate other users can hardly be called "safe" (especially if he is supported by Aaron Dalton):

Removal of citations and formatting improvements[edit]

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

The answers to your specific questions, "Accredited by whom? According to whom?" Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and that's stalker girl to you, Calvin. Try to mind your manners in the presence of a lady. :-) Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
An accredited educational institute authorized by the state to confer a Master's degree is notable, unless you can provide a different official standard for notability for institutions of higher education. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like the topic for an article about education in Washington State. Feel free to research and write. However, the precise definition is not needed to establish that a school is reputable and notable within its field and state. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
While I tend to agree that many of the links to Starwood count as undue weight I found your comment on User talk:Ekajati Grow up, Stalker Boy. a violation of WP:NPA. I'd like to remind everyone that I'm still thinking of taking things to WP:DR and these sorts of comments don't help your case. --Salix alba (talk) 08:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


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

Good ol' Brad.  :)[edit]

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

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

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

-- 00:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I do not think that Wikipedia needs your Cleaning Firm![edit]


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

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

American Greetings on RfC[edit]

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

Do not edit pages you have no business poking around in[edit]

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

To Calton[edit]

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

Okay, so I'm supposed to be civil[edit]

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

AfD Nomination: Liza Wright[edit]

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

It wasn't an apology[edit]

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

Just kind of curious about Dakltit contributions. According to [[5]] the first edit was at 20:07, 8 November 2006, yet you posted a warning on his talk page at 00:27, 8 November 2006. Is this some software bug or is there some other explanation? --Salix alba (talk) 00:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Deleted articles won't show up in a user's history. Rklawton 01:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Starwood and Mattise[edit]

You may be interested in two cases

  1. Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-03 Starwood Festival
  2. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mattisse

--Salix alba (talk) 11:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

RFC on me re Starwood & Rosencomet[edit]

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

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

Movaya Wireless[edit]

re: Movaya Wireless article This article has been worked on a lot today, and discussed with three other editors. I ([user:jog1973]) have been working on this article for 3 hours tonight, please refrain from adding to delete list, and look at the TALK for this article. Two other WIKI editors have been working WITH me to get this article in shape. They BOTH originally deleted this, and now stand by it. Please contact them. Jog1973 08:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Other Editors[edit]

BTW. I did not endorse any version of the article. I did point out references to help write an article that was within policy/guidelines; also, that it needed to meet notability criteria, which the article did not at the point that I last saw it. — ERcheck (talk) 11:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


Hey, thanks for backing me up on the article about the eskimo hunter. I tagged it for speedy deletion, and then for some bizarre reason some editors strarted treating it like a serious article. Glad to see someone else has some sense. Tractorkingsfan 01:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Weapons of Halo 2[edit]

The deletion notice is redundant in my view. I've added sources now (as I was still writig the article - sheesh!). I've replied to the deletion notice on the article's talk page. Hopefully I can be allowed to remove the deletion notice. Thanks... RSVP - Spawn Man 05:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Your comments at User talk:[edit]

My feelings aren't at issue, your statements are. Is ordinary English a problem for you? --Calton | Talk 00:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC) [6]

This is beyond the bound of civility. I'm not sure what the source of your irritation is, or why you're focusing on a total non-issue as opposed to the suggestions that you're wasting both your time and the time of everyone who participates in these MfDs. Just blank the pages and move on, really. Deletion doesn't save space or anything of the sort, and either the users will return or they won't. If they don't, it's a near-identical result. If they do, having deleted the page doesn't leave a space for a message as to why it's not appropiate use of userspace, or prevent them from re-creating the material in question. Concentrate on your goal a little bit more and the methods a little bit less, and you'll see that deletion is overkill. - 05:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Some of your last contributions are not only not nice but are verging on personal attacks. I think the proposed deletions are a waste of time, you disagree. You're welcome to do so. You are not, however, welcome to do so in the manner you've chosen. You don't get a free pass on etiquette because I do not log in. - 06:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Copied from User talk:
Hmm okay then... You're clearly not going to respond to civil discourse (since you don't recognise it when it happens) and appear diminishingly unlikely to actually engage in it (based on your previous comments) so I'm simply going to ignore you. - 23:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Sod Off[edit]

Leave my private pages the hell alone. Each and every one was given to me by an administrator and if you bothered to note, some admins were actively involved in maintaining the integrity of one of the articles. Alyeska 06:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I told you to sod off. That is my private page. Removing unwanted edits by someone else is not vandalism by any stretch of the definition. These pages were allowed to me by MULTIPLE admins. Community consensus means sod all for my private pages. Alyeska 06:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Each and every one of those pages was created by admins. Several of those pages are works in progress to try and make the pages acceptable to Wiki rules. I was oh so joyfuly informed in a recent AFD that it is quite acceptable to save pages that were deleted into user spaces to allow for them to be updated and made acceptable so as to petition for undeletion. I think I will take the words of ADMINS over your pompous attitude of going about trying to get other peoples user pages deleted. Alyeska 06:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

No, your hiding behind policy in order to attack people personally and remove pages you don't like. Don't play games with me Calton. I know what your motives are. You aren't trying to improve Wikipedia and your attempting to force your opinion of things onto others. By going about attacking personal user pages you make a mockery of the rules I was told of. Looks real nice having the very pages I was promised to allow for improving and moving towards eventual undeletion suddenly deleted. Course it actually strengthens my position that Wikipedia is a failure. Alyeska 06:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Paranoid? You are trying to get one of my pages deleted. Furthermore, you supplied a "hit list" that includes every remaining personal page of mine. I'm not being paranoid. I am being realistic considering you are attacking every single thing that I have in my personal space. Your motives are highly suspect considering how strongly you are trying to get everything of mine deleted. Alyeska 07:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Perkiomen Valley Academy Sir, please look at the discussion page before you add that ugly copyright infringement sign. This issue has been addressed and resolved. There is even a ticket number posted. Please don't put that sign up again.

-- 17:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Re : Deletion of pages[edit]

No, I meant what I said. I don't feel my comment was stupid. If you do, that is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. --Elaragirl ||||||Talk|Count 00:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind personal attack. Your opinions are yours, mine are mine, we agree to disagree. Have a nice day. --Elaragirl ||||||Talk|Count 23:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
To answer in detail
  1. - User:Calton/User_Page_Abuse - I find the levels of analysis you conduct unusual. I find your emphatic feeling that somehow these user pages are disrupting Wikipedia's goal of being an encyclopedia as eccentric at best.
  2. - User:Calton/Userfied_pages_to_watch_-_alphabetical - The same, plus I find it unusual that you seem to expend so much effort on this.
  3. - User:Calton/Userfied_pages - More of the same, with the caveat that this seems to be a project in which you (for whatever reason) need multiple angles of analysis on.
I made a statement that I find your actions slightly creepy, in the context that it was unusual, eerie, strange. I did not intend it as a personal attack, and I would have thought that your extensive dealings with idiot sockpuppets and their vacuous-minded masters would have thickened your skin. I stand by what I said. There is much, much more that could be done on Wikipedia besides going after RHaworth and userfied pages. Are they annoying? Yes. Do they disrupt Wikipedia? There we disagree. If you feel that the policy (on User Pages / Userfication) is wrongheaded, I respectfully suggest that amassing statistics will not solve the problem. You are obviously somewhat acerbic and sarcastic (which I am too) so I do not think you are stupid. If you think I am, then that is your opinion. Stating your opinion over and over again does not change it's non-factual status. Good day. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 00:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Red Guard Bob[edit]

I'm a reasonably new Wikipedian, I've only been around for a couple of months. I came across the Red Guard Bob page that User:Dalt was building yesterday when monitoring new images. I went ahead and prod'ed it. I would have speedied it if I knew that was an option. You came by later and added the speedy tag.

I don't disagree with the deletion. I learned about {{db-web}} and WP:VSCA because of it.

The minor problem that I do have is that I explained my understanding of the deletion process to Dalt on both Talk:Red Guard Bob and User talk:Dalt, and now his page is gone with no further explanation for a new editor.

I guess it boils down to wondering why you didn't put anything on Dalt's talk page to explain what was going on. ~ BigrTex 16:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for such high levels of contempt. I'm sorry for having taken the warning of an administrator seriously. How very wrong of me to assume that the policy as stated by an administrator and not corrected by others to be correct. How wrong of me to follow what I thought were the rules and how correct you were to condem me for having attempted to follow the rules. Alyeska 00:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Arpad Elo[edit]

What, exactly, is the idea of moving Arpad Elo to a name nobody, ever, anywhere uses, outside an old Wikipedia listing and its clones. A move totally contrary to everything in Wikipedia:Naming conventions. A name totally contrary to common sense.

No, this is not another unilateral move. It is a longstanding article name, discussed without objection on the talk page. This is an American university professor and chess player, not known under any spelling other than "Arpad Elo" in any chess publications, not known under any spelling other than "Arpad Elo" in connection with his professorship at Marquette University.

He is best known for developing a chess ranking system. A system that is always, universally, everywhere in the world, known as the "Elo" system, though it is sometimes capitalized as the "ELO" system, often because people don't realize it is a person's name and mistakenly think it is an acronym.

Now, please move that back, or I will have to find the appropriate place for a complaint against your actions.

Can you cite any verifiable, reliable source showing that Arpad Elo ever used any other spelling, that he was ever known under any other spelling in any chess tournament, that he was ever known under any other spelling as a professor? I bet not. Gene Nygaard 05:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Alfonso Faustino[edit]

I noticed that you were nominating Alfonso Faustino for speedy deletion and I've changed it to an AFC nomination in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alfonso Faustino. --Sbluen 06:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

James Ida[edit]


I've substansially cleaned up the article James Ida and provided serveral sources and external links. Please let me know if there's anything else I can do. MadMax 09:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


I have put User:MER-C/Spam into its own template, with the link to your userfied pages list preserved, at Template:Spamsearch. Feel free to update the list as necessary. 07:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


Hi Calton. Sorry, you're wrong.

From WP:CSD:

Recreation of deleted material. A substantially identical copy, by any title, of a page that was deleted as a result of a discussion in Articles for deletion or another XfD process, unless it was undeleted per the undeletion policy or was recreated in the user space. (my emphasis).

WP:USER is a guideline, whereas WP:CSD is a policy. If you want it gone, put it through MFD. Proto::type 10:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Incidentally, WP:USER and WP:CSD were giving conflicting advice on this, so I can see how you could have gotten confused. I've amended WP:USER, as policy trumps guideline. Proto::type 10:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
If deleting lame bios on user pages was a valid criteria for speedy deletion, every Editor's user page would be deleted. So being a lamo bio is irrelevant.
And it doesn't look like spam. As far as I can see, it looks like the user's bio, and so it being userfied is perfectly acceptable.
Don't tag it for speedy again, please. Proto::type 10:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
In the time you've spent bitching and assuming bad faith, you could have put the user's page through MFD.
Hint 1 - well, if all a user does is edit his own user page, so be it. Rather that than vandalise or put up spam.
Hint 2 - Date of an edit is irrelevant.
Hint 3 - Exactly how does having a biography of a person on their own user page fall foul of WP:NOT?
Look, I'm as deletionist an admin as they come, but I'm not going to misapply speedy deletion just because you don't agree with (or don't understand) WP:CSD. I've had enough shit for creative deletions in the past. Again, take it to MFD rather than throw a hissy fit on my talk page because you have to be right. Proto::type 10:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm not arguing why the page should be kept, or the ins and outs of WP:NOT. This isn't an AFD discussion. This was me telling you that the page didn't come under the CSD and to take it to MFD. Again: Take it to MFD. I'll even vote for deletion, as it fails WP:NOT. But it is not a speedy. Proto::type 08:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Fuck you![edit]

ditto. Mowster 05:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
double ditto Mowster 05:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Its war now asshole!!--Swedenborg 01:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Yerse...yerse... just so. Did you notice this ANI thread? Bishonen | talk 03:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC).
Calton seems to generate a lot of this sentiment? Mowster 05:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for Mediation[edit]

Info-icon.svg A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Alameda Measure A.
For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
This message delivered: 05:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC).

"Vandal Attack", by Beatgr[edit]

Because I'm sick to death the constant rewriting of the text of User:Beatgr's messages -- not that it makes them less garbled, the original versions:

Version 1[edit]

at 05:15, November 24, 2006, unsigned by Beatgr:

Vandal attack from Japan?

As an alumni of this university, very unfortunate - since permission had been given. Care to reinstate this article?

Versions 2 & 3[edit]

at 05:23, November 24, 2006, unsigned by Beatgr:

Vandal attack from Japan? Your words, "This whole project is infectious: hitting the random page button, I encounter whole swatches of text and knowledge areas requiring work, and I suddenly feel compelled to try to do something about it, even if I didn't have any particular interest in the subject to begin with." THAT IS OBVIOUS. Better talk to Jimbo, next time you are in US Beatgr 24 November 2006 5:24 UTC

As an alumni of this university, very unfortunate - since permission had been given. I WILL NOT RETYPE - YOU ARE A COWARD - care reinstate this article to where it was so I may offer what ever doucmentation you believe is necessary?

Versions 4 & 5[edit]

at 05:54, November 24, 2006 -- sig time below entered manually:

User Carlton made an assumption that the WIUW was lifted from a web apge, when in fact -- the opposite occurred. Major portions of that web page came from my original Wikipedia entry in March 2006 -- after I informed them of the new entry.

s an alumni of this university, very unfortunate - since permission had been given. I WILL NOT RETYPE - YOU ARE A COWARD - care reinstate this article to where it was so I may offer what ever doucmentation you believe is necessary?

Your words, "This whole project is infectious: hitting the random page button, I encounter whole swatches of text and knowledge areas requiring work, and I suddenly feel compelled to try to do something about it, even if I didn't have any particular interest in the subject to begin with." THAT IS OBVIOUS. Better talk to Jimbo, next time you are in US Beatgr 24 November 2006 5:44 UTC

Version 6[edit]

at 06:03, November 24, 2006 -- sig time below entered manually'':

User Carlton made an assumption that the WIUW was lifted from a web page, when in fact -- the opposite occurred. Newest portions of that web page came from my original Wikipedia entry in March 2006 !! -- after I informed them of the new entry.

As an alumni of this university, very unfortunate - since permission had been given. I WILL NOT RETYPE - YOU ARE A COWARD - care reinstate this article to where it was so I may offer what ever doucmentation you believe is necessary?

Your words, "This whole project is infectious: hitting the random page button, I encounter whole swatches of text and knowledge areas requiring work, and I suddenly feel compelled to try to do something about it, even if I didn't have any particular interest in the subject to begin with." THAT IS OBVIOUS. Better talk to Jimbo, next time you are in US. Already filed this incident. Beatgr 24 November 2006 5:44 UTC

Version 7[edit]

at 07:02, November 24, 2006 -- sig time below entered manually'':

User: Calton made an assumption that the WIUW was lifted from a web page, when in fact -- the opposite occurred. Newest portions of that web page came from my original Wikipedia entry in March 2006 !! -- after I informed them of the new entry.

As an alumni of this university, very unfortunate deletion - since permission had been given. I WILL NOT RETYPE - YOU ARE A COWARD - care reinstate this article to where it was so I may offer what ever documentation you believe is necessary? Requested copy of deleted article from arbitration.

Your words, "This whole project is infectious: hitting the random page button, I encounter whole swatches of text and knowledge areas requiring work, and I suddenly feel compelled to try to do something about it, even if I didn't have any particular interest in the subject to begin with." THAT IS OBVIOUS. Better talk to Jimbo, next time you are in US. Already filed this incident. Beatgr 24 November 2006 5:44 UTC

New text below[edit]

Man, I'm already seeing the train wreck coming. Hint: I'm not the one on the tracks.

What train wreck? I have the WIUW entry in the radio station standard format and checking catgeories that I remember (I don't have a local copy - remember). As I said earlier -- the copy is so I can minimize possible disambiguation -- and avoid more work for volunteers. Beatgr 24 November 2006 7:15 UTC

Do you even know what "disambiguation" means?

Disambiguation in Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Foundation projects is the process of resolving ambiguity. The conflict occurs when a single term can be associated with more than one topic. Beatgr 24 November 2006 7:25 UTC


Hi Calton,

With so many similar aticles being put up for speedy deletion, I think a group AfD is more appropriate to discuss these - the question really is: is a building notable just for being over 300m tall? If so, then starting a few stubs on them is fine. I'm not saying they necessairily are notable - but I think this sort of thing should be bought up to the community. --Robdurbar 15:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Well I must admit I deleted one, but when I saw that there were about 20-odd I felt that for such a large number of articles a wider discussion was needed. Ill list them on Afd. --Robdurbar 15:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
ok, sorry, just seen your second post but phone has just rang so will review it in a mo! --Robdurbar 15:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

:::Well having read about the source I'm more inclined to agree with you. I still think that this is a very borderline decision though and would be happier with an AfD; it hurts no-one. Robdurbar 16:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC) Actually screw it, you've convinced me, away they go... --Robdurbar 16:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC) Well since you've relisted them, I'll let someone else decide. --Robdurbar 16:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I just removed a CSD tag from 868 Towers Offices and Hotel. I don't feel it's best for me to judge whether a short stub on a possibly non-notable topic is deletable; better to send it to AfD instead. -- SCZenz 01:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I've removed all the tags (I hope). It's impossible for me to tell these aren't expandable articles, and there is enough information to get started on that expansion. Speedy deletion is not a tool for borderline cases. Mass AfD them instead, if you wish, so there can be a centralized discussion with intelligent input. -- SCZenz 01:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
They seem like perfectly sensible stubs to me. Buildings of these dimensions certainly are notable, even if they are not finished yet. Fut.Perf. 01:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


I have brought this situation to the deleting admins' attention, because I frankly think they (there were two of them, at least), didn't spend enough time thinking those issues through. Also, as you can see above, Robdurbar had doubts about these deletions. The bottom line is, if those are good articles, those would be good stubs to start from. There was basic information—enough to start on expansion—and a source; there's no way they could be called empty. The fact that these articles may not be notable in the end should not bias us towards deletion on unrelated grounds. -- SCZenz 05:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain to me how 868 Towers Offices and Hotel matches any of the following: "It is a very short article providing little or no context (CSD A1), contains no content whatsoever (CSD A3), consists only of links elsewhere (CSD A3) or a rephrasing of the title (CSD A3)." It doesn't seem to me that I'm the one who's trying to redefine the criteria for speedy deletion. -- SCZenz 05:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Note in particular the difference between little content and little context explained in WP:CSD#A1. -- SCZenz 05:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I've brought it to DRV ([7]) Fut.Perf. 09:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Gia Farrell[edit]

Hi. Why did you remove the YouTube link on this entry? -- StAkAr Karnak 11:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Could you please provide a link to the policy you cite regarding YouTube? -- StAkAr Karnak 01:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The links you provided stated: Most YouTube material is unsuitable for Wikipedia because:

The source and legitimacy of the videos on YouTube are almost or totally impossible to determine, hence they are not reliable sources and are not verifiable (A key requirement).
The YouTube link would seem to be Gia Farrell's own account, since there is a professionally-produced music video there that seems to be exclusive.
Many videos on YouTube are of questionable copyright legitimacy, which should not be linked from Wikipedia.
If it is her account, it presumably has her blessing, as well as Atlantic's.
Since many videos are personally made, they represent original research, which Wikipedia is not in the buissiness of publishing. They may also be biased in their presentation of material.
Not applicable. The link was valuable to someone looking for information on this singer because access to a 'free' performance with the subject's permission aids the user in forming a complete picture of the subject - which is why they were likely looking her up to begin with. -- StAkAr Karnak 02:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
In other words, it falls under a different set of criteria, namely spam, ALSO verboten, since the "service" isn't valuable to the reader, it's valuable for promotion of the subject -- which leads to the next obvious question, namely whether you have a conflict of interest here. Do you? --Calton | Talk 00:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Flattering as your implication may be, no, I have no connection whatsoever to Gia Farrell. I went to see Happy Feet, liked the song, looked her up, and came across the three original links (Atlantic, MySpace, YouTube). They all appeared to me to be official, legit, and each contributed something unique to informing me. I felt they could similarly inform others as they painted a thorough picture of the subject. Indeed, I had a very different view of her after seeing the "You'll Be Sorry (When You're Leaving)" ballad then I did viewing the initial pop song. -- StAkAr Karnak 00:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Skifdank[edit]

Thanks for listing those (I've deleted them as they're fairly uncontroversial). If any of them come back and object, I can reinstate the less vanity ones. I've been trying to discourage people from userfying vanity of users who obviously have no interest in contributing. I think we should get either a speedy deletion criterion or some tagging method for clearly abusive userpage that are used for advertising or vanity without contributing to the project. If we can tag such pages I can run WP:AWB to get rid of them on a regular basis. How did you find them? - Mgm|(talk) 11:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Could you please give some input on Wikipedia:Userspace abuse. I'm probably going to rename it before asking for community input. - Mgm|(talk) 09:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Rudy Maxa[edit]

Your recent edit to Rudy Maxa (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 13:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Ben Pridmore / Memory Sports[edit]

Memory Sports has got a HUGE article (marked as excellent) in the German wikipedia. The sport is more famous in Germany and Austria than in England or the USA, but it is not a small sport. The World Championship has been filmed by about 5 film crews and the American participant Joshua Foer just signed a 1.2 million dollar contract for a book about it. Memorizer 16:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Tachu Naito[edit]

Hey Calton, when I blocked Swedenborg a few days ago, I gathered from your userpage that you can speak and read Japanese. Well, I just translated this article Tachu Naito and was wondering if you would like to double-check my translation and copy edit, ( -hints- this also applies to anyone else reading too of course). I need the most help with the references, I wasn't sure if I should leave them or translate, and wasn't sure if 正平調 from the Kobe Shimbun one was the author or the title and couldn't find a translation I liked either way. Also, I couldn't get 勲二等旭日重光章 - 旭日重 seemed like maybe a typo of 旭日章, I know it is an award but wasn't sure of the specifics. Anyway, maybe you would like to help with this? Regards, DVD+ R/W 04:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

My guess is that saying your ability is sub-pathetic is quite an understatement. But thanks for looking, I will also post it at the Japan wikiproject, in case you are being honest. I'll take your advice and try to expand the intro, but expanding will be a little difficult since the sources I have found are in Japanese. DVD+ R/W 05:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Ask anyone you'd like to review the article. I might post it at DYK after the wikiproject. I mentioned the Tokyo Tower in the lead, but didn't expand much and I added a picture. Maybe you can help pick (or take) a better picture, there is a few at the Commons Commons:Category:Tokyo Tower which look pretty good, I just don't know how it is best portrayed. Since it is red, I chose one that shows that though some of the duller ones show the truss structure better, or should it be one that shows it in the city context? I don't know. It also looks cool at night. Also I used second degree award so it didn't sound like the award was a second class award. You are very lucky to be in Japan, I came very close to taking an internship in Osaka, but didn't because of my own percieved language ineptitude, I'm sure your not so bad. I just found out about Naito on the 21st so couldn't have told you about the exhibit. Have you heard of this company before? 雪華社? I haven't but they published one of the references, at first I used the translation Snow Bloom Corporation then changed it to Yuki Hana Corporation. Here's another article I want to translate ja:亀甲墓, a little morbid I know, but it still looks interesting to me. DVD+ R/W 06:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR (and...)[edit]

Pending: Wikipedia:Personal_attack_intervention_noticeboard#User: :-)

Incidentally, he's actually 5RR, because he has an edit by another anonymous IP.WolfKeeper 07:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You're at 3R limit (as am I), I'll fix up the page in a few hours when it runs out.WolfKeeper 07:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: FinanceToGo[edit]

I am not sure why you deleted this article. It was not spam. I am an experienced user here (over 6000 edits). If you think this is spam, then is AppZapper and many other Mac application articles? Many thanks — Wackymacs 07:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not even the developer - why isn't this notable, and why does it sound like an advert? I haven't heard any reasons from you. I can see why people don't like you much. — Wackymacs 07:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
You're suggesting something saying that I have added it so soon after its release - however I fail to see anything wrong with that. You're still not giving me reasons for its deletion. — Wackymacs 08:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
No need to shout. You're the one who tagged it as speedy delete, as far as I know. — Wackymacs 08:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Please keep in mind you should keep civil - you don't participate with others in a respectful way to say you're meant to be an experienced Wikipedia user. — Wackymacs 16:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I find it insulting that you think I'm bothering you when I am simply trying to discuss something with you. I'll ask again: Did you tag the article as speedy delete, and if so, what were your reasons? As for not contacting the admins yet, I have not had the time and I was attending college all day. — Wackymacs 18:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

MediaLooks Deletion[edit]

Hi! Please explain where lies the difference between promotion and encyclopedic information. Or perhaps provide link to a guideline? For instance, there’s an article on Acronis. Thanks. User: Stardancer


Look mate if mine is not notable believe me there a thousands already on wikipedia with less detail than mine. if no one cares about finnish films who cares about danish films, tamil language films and so on which people have added to wikipedia with far less detail than mine. I know lets just have American films on here. Are you biased against foreign films or that genre or what? try googling it and you will see the entires. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

OK I have picked a totally random article from swedish films They Call Us Misfits. OH yes what a brilliant article this is. THis of course is notable but mine with the cover and cast and plot details is not? Please just leave it will you. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

In answer to your question the point of it exactly is to provide information and knowledge to a reader anywhere on the planet about something they wouldn't know about if they hadn't visited wikipedia. Doesn't the sum of all human knowledge one of our key principles mean anything to you or are you happy to continue to attempt to remove peoples hard work? Wikipedia is not a directory yes I agree with you, the idea is to turn it from a directory into an encyclopedia entry which conveys information to the reader. Please don't bother me again. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Sandy Carmichael.Sorry wikipedia is not a who's who directory of rugby players. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 20:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

So why is Aanai notable then? And that article was written by me not copied of a video box. I do have a brain . Ernst Stavro Blofeld 20:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Hall Institute of Public Policy - New Jersey[edit]

If you looked at the edit history, I actually removed a speedy tag for it being a non-notable company {{db-a7}}, not that it was a copyvio. I don't usually check that it's a copyvio (via a Google search) unless it looks rather suspicious, but thanks for picking that up. enochlau (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


Yes, it's a real town, though it's commonly mistaken as part of McKinleyville. My cousins live there and I was there last week on vacation. As mentioned in the article, it is a VERY small town, with no more than 500 people living there, and that's quite spread out (middle of the forest). Look at the Humboldt County article, and look under cities. The "notable Fieldbrookians" heading was meant as a joke when I was going to send them the page. Totally tricked my folks here at home. However, the rest of the article is factual...I really should label it as a stub about California though...

Good to see someone's cleaning up Wikipedia though.




Like I mentioned, it's generally just McKinleyville; shares the same postal code, office, highschool, etc...just a small little town in the middle of the woods (dirt/graded roads, houses are in clearings). Also, it was previously a red-highlighted article under the Humbodlt County entry, so I took the liberty of creating a small article as I have a connection to the place.


Greetings! I noticed you replaced an "unsourced" tag after I cited IMDb on Agentti 000 ja kuoleman kurvit and removed the tag. Though you may personally have a higher standard, IMDb is generally accepted as a source for WP film articles. Please suggest an alternative if possible; otherwise, please go with the flow and allow IMDb to be used. Thanks - Her Pegship 19:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Off topic with Matt and Dave[edit]

Off Topic is a podcast i mentioned their MySpace as a website in the userbox, and that can be changed to the Gcast site, but they are not soley a blog, I insistantly request you reverse this immediatley. i'm sorry for the confusion i may have caused, and will fix it, if you would please just rv the deletion. Thank you. PS: please READ articles before you delete them next time.Ganfon 02:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


Then you have alot of deleting to do...see the category for audio podcasts, or just podcasts, or video podcasts. Any will do. Perhaps that particular code needs to be reversed, because I'm going to rough estimate that there are about 50-60 podcasts that have wikis Ganfon 02:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)