User talk:Hinotori

Welcome to my talk page. Please be civil. Also, for the sake of convenience and organization, try to make sure that any discussion started here stays here. If you expect a response, feel free to add this talk page to your watchlist.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Hinotori, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

The Wookieepedian 16:20, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the welcome. I've been reading and using Wikipedia for a long time and felt like I was long overdue for giving something back. -- Hinotori 09:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cool beans! oh, BTW if that anon makes another biggoted edit, I will block his racsist ass, very very quickly. With pleasure, in fact! See you 'round the wiki! Hamster Sandwich 02:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to it. :) -- Hinotori 02:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Danny Green

And Thanks very much for cleaning up my article, you're a saint! -- Deucelow

My pleasure. :) -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 15:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

United States vs American Television Networks Categories

(Originally posted at User talk:AllyUnion)

The category clearly states that Category:American television networks should redirect to Category:United States television networks but the bot seems to be doing the opposite. [1]

Confused. Hope this works out. -- Hinotori 00:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The bot is functioning normally. A user attempted to rename Category:United States television networks and Category:United States radio networks without bringing the matter to WP:CFD. I swapped the tags to reverse the process. The same user also performed a copy-and-paste move of List of United States cable and satellite television networks to List of American cable and satellite television networks, the latter of which was speedily deleted. I intend to nominate the two new categories for deletion after the bot has finished emptying Category:American radio networks. —Lifeisunfair 03:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for clarifying that for me. :)

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 04:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. :) —Lifeisunfair 04:07, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha!

And you are a fan of Newgrounds too? I might come to like you. :)

→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 11:35, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say 86 reviews, 350 BBS posts, and 1526 Blams/Protects constitutes being a "fan." Probably in excess of healthy levels. :D Merry Christmas.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 11:45, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil4Linux

Just wanted to say, thanks for your help so far in dealing with B4L. I don't know what's up with this guy, but it looks like he'll be in my hair for quite some time now in the future. I just don't understand what motivates some people. Why does he do this? Daniel Davis 13:48, 25 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

No thanks necessary. It really gets under my skin to see people who try to twist the rules to their own benefit. I snapped when I saw him posting bullshit from Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Hypocrisy defined. Personally, I think his all-consuming hatred for Microsoft is pretty scary. Any rational person would realize that such obsession not only accomplishes little, but also only makes you more a victim of your (real or imagined) enemy. Will he ever actually hurt the beast that is Bill Gates and co? No. But he can let his anger burn him up along with a lot of other hard working editors here, and, perhaps, in his mind, that validates his paranoid delusions of victimization allowing him to blame a faceless entity for the fact that he's wasting so much of his life on this petty crap. Bah. Whatever. We can only hope he'll run out of steam eventually. Luckily for you, he doesn't seem to be a criminal genius, if you catch my meaning, so at least his weak, if persistent, attacks can be overturned.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 14:23, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Genocide Vandalism

What did I do wrong? I just want to correct something on the Armenian Genocide??

(The last comment was by User:81.107.68.103)

Don't be silly. You blanked a huge article, then replaced it with two sentences. If this wasn't intentional, please preview your work before hitting submit button, especially if it's a large article.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 15:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexuality/American Dream

I apologize for inserting opinion into what should be an unbiased account. Idiocy on my part.

(Last comment was by User:24.68.204.146)

No apologies to me necessary. I just work here. ;) You are welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia, as long as you follow the rules, and are encouraged to do so. Just keep in mind that NPOV is a central part of every article. Also, as an American myself, I can tell you that not all of us are obese, selfish bastards, even if many are. :P Blanket stereotypes are almost always unacceptable. Good luck in the future. Cheers.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 15:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Momentary lapse in judgement due to too much rum and mass media. I know I don't need to apologize, but I feel like an idiot. Shan't happen again. Thanks for being civil.

No problem. :) -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 15:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably mention that not all Canadians are anti-American drunks, though a few of us were. ;) Cheers!

Punisher

OK, it's what I written also on the Punisher talk page, but then I saw that you have your own talk page (sorry, I'm new) and decided to send it also here. I hope you won't concider it spam, if yes, sorry ;-)

OK, it was me who added the info about his later appearance in Ultimate Spider-Man, where he fought a bank robber equipped with some kind of flying suit and was stopped by Spidey. Someone else written the part about fans not liking the story. I think the piece about the action should be left. It is, as far as I know, the only Ultimate Punisher appearance since he was imprisoned. So I think one line is not too much for this, as it is important to note, that he managed to escape from the prison but was probably send there again. If he continues to apperar of course this one little fact will be not significiant, but so far it is the only thing we have exept the Ultimate Marvel Team Up story. Cheers

Oh, one more thing. I think it should be noted, that Punisher doesn;t have his own Ultimate Punisher comic book, and that he only appeared as o guest in Ultimate Marvel Team-Up next to Spider-Man (who can be called the host of this serries) and Daredevil. It would be good to mention also that Frank and Jillette weren't just "caught by the police" as it is written now, but, that Castle fought Daredevil and was knocked out by interferring Spider-Man and then delivered by him to a police station. I could do it myself but I'm afraid that my English can be not good enough to play with bigger parts of text.

(Discussion continued at Talk:Punisher/Archive 1#Removed_possibly_non-notable_information_from_Ultimate_Marvel_version_section)

Semi-protection needed on Kutaragi

Brazil4Linux has returned, again. I think the only viable option is that Kutaragi become a semiprotected article... Daniel Davis 00:54, 27 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

Agreed. Oye vey. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 01:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how he did it, but B4L managed to bypass the block Nandesuka put on him. You know, we were JUST BEGINNING to make some real progress on this article, too. Daniel Davis 06:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

I already noticed and commented on it on the Kutaragi talk page. From the big picture standpoint, however, it makes little difference. B4L can actively get by blocks by changing his ip and using sockpuppets anyways. At least if he uses his real name we can monitor his edits. Furthermore, I think an admin will probably block the main account again either way. Personally, I think more permanent action needs to be taken because he's obviously not getting the message. Did you see his reference to the rest of us as "lame/newbies"?

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 07:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The whole thing was, with the article being semi-protected, that meant that anon ips and new users couldn't edit it. Meaning Brazil couldn't just up and create a new user account or an anon IP in order to mess with the group consensus, you see? But if he can somehow still log in as B4L (who isn't a new user or an anon ip) that means he can mess with the article again... And yeah, I saw that "newbie" thing. It's one of the tamer personal assaults the guy's done; he's personally threatened Alkivar and left a comment on my user talk page about how he hopes a bomb goes off and kills me. Daniel Davis 07:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

Oh that's real lovely. I see your point about the semi-protection. I was under the impression that only anonymous ips couldn't edit it, so I figured a semi-protection wouldn't do that much good. But that's good news to me. After checking the policy, however, it seems that new users can jump on board after four days. B4L has demonstrated that he has that kind of patience (fanaticism?). Like I said, I think the admins will be pretty quick to block him again. The lift has to be some kind of mistake. I hope. Feel free to let me know if he extends his tendrils to other pages, I have Neowin and Ken Kutaragi on my watchlist at the moment. As I've said already, I can't contribute much, but I can certainly help watch for POV edits and vandalism. Also, if someone can establish that hate-filled rant against the U.S. traces back to him, I think that'd be worthy of an indefinite block.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 07:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You mean 201.29.52.180? I already traced it right back to his IP in Juiz de Fora, Brazil. It's the exact same ISP, veloxzone.com.br, that Brazil's been using since the very first time he logged in as an anon IP way back when. Daniel Davis 07:41, 28 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

Great. Maybe make a note of that here? The more evidence we can consolidate, the better.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 07:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of non-fictional heroes

Just in case you weren't aware: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of non-fictional heroes. —Kirill Lokshin 03:40, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't... *sigh* I'll change it back.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. Someone took the privilege of doing it for me. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Sorry about that; didn't mean to step on your toes :-) —Kirill Lokshin 03:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. No apology necessary. Thanks for saving me the hassle. :)

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:57, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

I just got back from my birthday celebration. Seems that while I was opening my new Shadow of the Collossus game and watching Narnia, Brazil4Linux was busy trying to smash away at your page. That means, of course, that the block worked; he won't be able to vandalize the Ken Kutaragi article at all. Many thanks we owe to the tireless folks who kept erasing his "edits", that's for sure. And thanks to you for your support through all this. Daniel Davis 07:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

An Alert

Bet you'll never guess who this is. :) I'll get to the reason why I'm hiding behind it in a moment. I've been watching the edits, writing style and posting history of User:Dungeon_Siege (including his use of a so-called "anonymous IP", calling everyone vandals, etc, and I'm now thoroughly convinced that he's another sockpuppet of Brazil4Linux. Alkivar's got his page protected (because B4L vandalized it a while back repeatedly), so I'll have to notify him about it via my regular account. Can we get someone who can do user traces to track this latest one back to B4L? I think this might be the cataylst for a Permablock. I'm sure he's tracking the Doom127 contributions, that's why I've created this Sock. I'll put this message on everyone's page so you guys are made aware of it, and you can put your responses here. Doom127sSecretSockPuppet 11:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. Unfortunately, the reason I've been rather silent lately is that my old laptop died a horrible death, and I was without a computer until yesterday. I probably won't be able to really regularly check up on B4L (or his gazillion sockpuppets), but I will check my talk page daily. If you find him and need someone else to come in and lend support, let me know.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 13:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment

I've left a comment on BorgHunter's talk page, if you want to take a look. I've requested that the page get Semi-Protection (rather than full), to prevent the use of anyone using sockpuppets and anons. I think it's just what Neowin needs. Daniel Davis 23:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

Semi-protection would indeed be great, though at the time he had given full protection to B4L's version. Not that he should be blamed for that as it's always "the wrong version" that gets protected. :) Noneloud's vote should really help though. Even if B4L rolls in a dozen sockpuppets, it'll be pretty plainly obvious which are his. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 22:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pico

Excellent work on there dude. Very nice. Daemon8666 21:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) I noticed on your user page that you plan on cleaning up the Pico page. I think the fan-made section needs a lot of work. Many of them are notable in regards to Pico, but the reader needs to know why. Maybe you could help with that? :) -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 22:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Delta

I'm glad you happened along, and I appreciate you speaking up on the issue. I really felt like I was banging my head against a brick wall, and at least now I have some company. ;)

Thanks again. Kafziel 23:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. I know what it's like to argue against irrationality in a vacuum. Very frustrating. Let me know if I can help with anything else. On a side note, sorry I missed all that vandalism on that article; I only scanned through it the first time I read it.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 01:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I missed it all, too. Somehow I fixed some of it and didn't spot the rest. Oh, well. It looks halfway decent for now. Still needs a lot of work, but I think I need a break from that article for a little while. Kafziel 03:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kafziel and Hinotori. I am sorry to have take up your time and to have been on your nerves. I also felt like shouting to the wind with you :-) (Also, for the arbitration, I did not realise that you people knew each other. I should have known better...)

Anyway, I would like your comments about this: What about revamping the article on Camp Delta to gather all comments/links/refs about the concerns on torture and the rebuttal from various sources in the two sections "3 International concern about the conditions in the camp" and "4 U.S. Government Denial of Allegations of Mistreatment"? Thus, this will free the article from some repetitions and will give one place to put together all the refs. from the U.S. government (and others) and the refs. from NGOs.

Yann

Yann, in all honesty, I have never met Kafziel before reading this article. If you don't believe me, feel free to check our contributions: mine and his. I arrived at the page because I was filing a request for Mediation at the WP:Mediation Cabal and noticed his request there just above mine. I wish I could help out further on the article, but I'm going out of town for four days. If there's still dissension when I return, I'll do what I can to help. Cheers. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 18:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, Yann, seriously - let it go and please stop following me around. Hinotori, I'm sorry to have brought this to your door, and I'm sorry for his bizarre accusations that we're somehow conspiring against him. I don't know what else to say. Thanks again for your help, and I'll try to take this elsewhere. Kafziel 05:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it; I think I can see how the language barrier may make my statement about helping with anything else seem like evidence of past collaboration instead of just a genuine offer of neighborly assistance. I want to remind you to try and keep things civil. I empathize with you, and I understand that it's frustrating, but you'll do your arguments a lot more justice by keeping a level head. Cheers. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 18:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm here to help you out

Thanks for your vote on my candidacy for ArbCom. I think I may be able to help you out of a problem. Unfortunately we can't write with a tone of voice, so I think that my stance has come across as a more blanket statement than intended. I am, by nature, someone who believes in loopholes and exceptions, and that loopholes and exceptions can't always be predicted in advance of them being discovered. Having a rigid rule would mean following it even if it was manifest that its spirit should not apply, to the detriment of the project of building an encyclopaedia. That's the reason why I endorsed 'Ignore all rules' although I think it hideously badly named.

What I don't think is that IAR should be used in a blanket way for users to take it upon themselves to say "I think this is in the interests of the project, and so I'm going to do it and damn the rest of you if you don't agree". The recent userbox debate is a case in point as the deletions were reversed almost immediately and stirred up considerable anger, making it more difficult for any coherent policy to be established - so it was also counterproductive. While I don't like userboxes which are used for advocacy, there is no way that I would ever go around mass-deleting them, not just because policy is unclear at present, but also because it's a discourteous thing to do. I hope you accept this as a slightly fuller explanation, but if you want to inquire further, then please feel free to do so. David | Talk 23:18, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to state here that I do very much wish to interact with you further on this; it's just that I'm a little busy and I have a meaty explanation of my concerns that I would like to give (that you can read or ignore at your leisure). I'm out of town for the next four days, but I'll try to get back to you here after, if you're still interested. I hope I didn't give an impression that I was ignoring you. Cheers.

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 18:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, and I think you're being perfectly fair. Just wanted to give you a little reminder - no pressure, but the election has only about 30 hours to run right now. David | Talk 16:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/KM

You commented on Kelly Martin's second RfC. it is up for archival. you may vote at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Kelly_Martin#Archiving_this_RfC. CastAStone|^(talk) 03:45, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heartwarming...

Ha ha ha Yeah, I'm an old softy. :) Kafziel 05:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hello?

I appreciate you starting the mediation process, but other than that, I haven't heard anything from you at all. Have you been paying attention to the case? -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 04:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hinotori: Firstly, my sincerest apologies for having neglected this mediation issue. I have indeed been paying attention to this case but, alas, I have been extraordinarily busy in "Real Life" (that mythical entity of the universe) and have alas not had a chance to work out the next stage etc. Please be assured that I have not forgotten about this case, however, and I will eventually get around to it (very shortly; within the next few hours if possible). Thank you very much for your patience. Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 23:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Discussion originated at User talk:NicholasTurnbull. User left Wikipedia, so now a non-issue. Related message left by me on his talk page.)

Well, it was nice while it lasted

Banned user Brazil4Linux is vandalizing pages. Again. So far he's been spotted at Neowin, enforcing his old old edit. I may need your assistance once again. You know, babysitting this poofle is not what I wanted when I signed up for Wikipedia. Grr. Daniel Davis 02:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)[reply]

Sorry for the delayed response. >_< Ugh... I'm out of town at the moment, but I'll try to help if I can find time. He just doesn't give up does he? -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 08:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:PhoenixIcon.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:PhoenixIcon.PNG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 00:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded that image in the hopes of finding copyright information for it, but never did. Feel free to delete it if necessary. Sorry for the trouble. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 10:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Smart

Can I hold you to your comment here? By virtue of this? - Chris 02:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can. I'll start the proceedings in a bit, when I have some time. Thanks for pointing it out. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bleh. I still don't have much time irl to write this, though I did start formatting the RfAr. I'll try and work on it sometime this or next week. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 06:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi to you too

Yeah, I'm the same Seizure_Dog on Newgrounds. That talk page of mine was just somewhere I was keeping notes for clues for www.thisisnotporn.com I didn't really expect anyone to check my userpage so that's why that junk is there. Nice to know I still have fans though :P --SeizureDog 01:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed one month ban

You write: I strongly doubt that anyone, Tony included, actually sees a month ban as a just, or even useful remedy, thus my nagging concern that some other motive is at play here.

I am completely sincere in this.

Looking at an interpretation of the evidence presented by Aaron Brenneman, Nandesuka and others, my activities have been extremely disruptive and without justification over an extended period. Looking at my lack of penitence and unwillingness,after considerable period of reflection, to allow that I was wrong, then if that interpretation is correct it follows that this is an extreme case and similar behavior could well recur. Thus a ban of one month would be reasonable. And desysopping should certainly be considered.

I disagree with that interpretation, but I think that the arbitrators should consider it. They can evaluate my good faith in suggesting it (after all, they chose me as a clerk) for themselves. I would not make a proposal that I did not believe was, contingent on certain findings of fact, necessary in the best interests of Wikipedia. --Tony Sidaway 20:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carbonated drinks catgeory

I have no real problems with a Carbonated drinks catgeory. I don't see that it is needed, but if you want to have one that's fine. But I am not sure why you feel the need to include beer in such a category, and what it would serve. The way my mind is working right now I can see people creating categories for Dark Drinks, Light Drinks, Sweet Drinks, Dry Drinks, etc. Fine if they want to do such a thing, but if people tried to apply such categories to Beer I would see that as un-needed clutter and remove them. At the moment I see applying the Carbonated drinks category to Beer as un-needed clutter and somewhat misleading. Though I see no harm in having Draught Beer listed under Carbonation or Carbonated Drinks as that article is specifically about beer that has been carbonated. It may be worth bearing in mind that cask beer is not carbonated. And while bottle conditioned beers contain co2, they are not considered to be carbonated beers. And many lambics are served totally flat. In short - beer is not a carbonated drink, though SOME beers are carbonated. Cheers! SilkTork 08:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Tony Sidaway's RfArb

*If he wouldn't, as you seem to be suggesting, it would show a lack of community confidence in his adminship, in which case he probably shouldn't be an admin to begin with. I'm not quite sure as to why you're directing your sarcasm at me. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 19:25, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, I did come off terribly snarky there. :-( I apologize, most especially to you, since I was feeling rather sarcastic toward the process as a whole, but not toward you personally in any way.

The thing is, I think a lot of admins - especially the ones who have been around the longest or been the most proactive in exercising their own discretion toward their admin tools - would almost certainly not pass a re-RfA. This comes from a number of factors, mostly that the longer you are around and the more you do, the more enemies you tend to accumulate. Also, the more active you are, the more mistakes you have a chance to make... and every mistake will be waved around in the RfA, you can be sure...

Plus, in Tony's case, obviously any re-RfA would be an enormous political battle, with most every process-is-important partisan voting against and most every encyclopedia-first IARer voting for. In the middle of all that heat and so little light, I doubt a fair determination of community support could be made. —Bunchofgrapes (talk)

Mike Del Grande

Looks like another sock-pocket... check out Special:Contributions/Night_Avenger. *sigh* --Spook ^{(my talk | my contribs)} 05:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Doom127

Looks like your lovely friend just leaved Wikipedia (sigh) --201.58.86.100 15:18, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hinotori. I've been talking to Daniel via IM and I know why he left. A couple days ago, he had a slight disagreement with another user named Pagrashtak about the use of the ESRB being used- something about them being "decorative". Apparently after his first post, someone began using multiple AIM and Yahoo accounts to plaster [this message] at him repeatedly, crashing his IM client (and his PC in the process) and causing him to lose several hours worth of programming assignment work. He assumed it was Pagrashtak and an argument ensued, but Pagrashtak let him know (after a heated argument that went on for a while) that it actually wasn't him who had attacked him. So now you know what's been going on, and why he left. The Eye 02:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Eyes- The Goggles do nothing!

User_talk:Pagrashtak#My_Eyes_Are_Open

Daniel Davis 03:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Truth

Sad end... Category:Wikipedia:Suspected_sockpuppets_of_Doom127 ... Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Doom127.2C_The_Eye.2C_.26__Jean-Luc_Picard--Pinoi 01:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not dead yet, Brazil4Linux. Much as I'm sure you'd like that. Daniel Davis 03:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hooj Choons

You've marked this article as NPOV. Could you please point out examples of how it is POV? Just slapping on a NPOV tag isn't very helpful. If you don't explain why, the tag will be removed. Thanks! Wickethewok 07:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I know. I just don't have time to really work on it tonight. Mainly, it makes a lot of statements that I feel aren't particularly justifiable, e.g. "dominance of the dance floor." Is the article implying dominance over competitors? Over the whole scene? In whose eyes? Words like "classics" and "masterpiece" seem highly subjective, without any citations that would seem necessary for such claims. I can't make any pretense of knowing much about the label, or even dance music in general, but a casual read-through seemed pretty overly laudatory, especially for an encyclopedia entry. If you like, we can discuss it on the talk page tomorrow. I'm currently kind of on Wiki-break, which is why I put the tag up to hopefully let someone else take care of it. But if you want me to address it personally, I can. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 08:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, okay, I'll tweak the language, or at least provide citations stating that certain notable individuals regard it in a certain manner. Cheers n all that. Wickethewok 08:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great. Thanks. :) -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 08:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NextGen NPOV edit

I created the article Next Generation Magazine back when I was still new to writing wikipedia articles. Looking back, it definitely was a strong POV. I was a big fan of the magazine. The rewrite you did was excellent; it kept all the important information while removing some of the pro-Next Gen wording. Good job. --Mitaphane 00:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote me:

Don't encourage him. Anon, we have other wikis specifically for edits like this. If you want to check one out, have a look at Uncyclopedia; it's chock full of fun stuff. Wikipedia, however, is for factual information. ANY vandalism here, even amusing or creative vandalism, is a waste of other users' time and energy and hurts the project. Since you seem like a decent writer, why not try your hand at writing some constructive, neutral, informative articles? I'm sure you'll find it rewarding. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I took long to reply. For the life of me, I don't even remember what the nonsense was that the whathisname wrote that I was commenting on (i.e. sarcasim). Thank you for the infor about that other site -- it should be amusing. Also, thank-you for the vote of confidence -- it's apreciated. -- Jason Palpatine 05:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC) (speak your mind | contributions)[reply]

Hello. -- Jason Palpatine 21:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC) (speak your mind | contributions)[reply]

It's been a ridiculously long time, but it just irks me when I neglect something, so I might as well tidy up this loose end (yeah, I'm the anal type). I'm so sorry to respond to this so late, but anyways, just to clarify, that post I wrote was actually in large part directed at the anonymous ip that you were commenting on. I wasn't assuming you were new or anything, I simply was saying that it was likely not a good idea to encourage him in vandalism, regardless of how witty or funny it was. So the only part of the statement that was actually directed at you was the first sentence. I'm also sorry if I came across as snippy to you; I recall that at the time I didn't think you'd ever read it (since it was on the anon's talk page not yours), and I simply wanted to come across as serious to a potential vandal. Here's a link to the vandalism in question (I admit, even I thought it was pretty funny).

Anyways, cheers and happy editing. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 20:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now I'm the one to apologize for taking so long. Thank-you for the info -- it's what I was looking for. I have uploaded the item (and a pair of others) to the Uncyclopedia. I just thought such a witty piece of work should have been put in its proper place. -- Jason Palpatine 18:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there!

This is CableModem, from IRC. I am a good Wikipedian/RC Patroler now! :) Come visit me on IRC! --CableModem 09:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you're still around! :D --CableModem^_^ 06:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Davis (Doom127)

Is he gone forever or can we try to bring him back GoldDragon 04:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am SO out of the loop... I have no idea. If you hear from him though, and you have a spare moment... let me know? I don't even know if you'll read this... I'm debating putting this on your talk page. :X -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 08:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hero discusion page articles

I noticed your sections in the discusion page for the Hero article. I agree that more research should be done on Heroines, and for film heroes. I would like to assist you with that.

I myself am interested in researching the differences between masked heroes and non masked heroes, the difference between a hero and a superhero, and what are the main types.

I am awaiting responses. Corrupt one 02:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pico's School's CSD notification

This is just to inform you that Pico's School has been tagged for speedy deletion because the redirect no longer links to anything.--Kylohk 15:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I know this has nothing to do with you personally, but you know, it would have been nice if someone had let me know that the article it was linked to was up for deletion. Not that it'd matter considering it'd be deleted anyways. Who knows what possessed me to spend several hours on that article? Whee. Back to wikibreak for me. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 15:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AvP2 box.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AvP2 box.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:SeriousBusiness.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:SeriousBusiness.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Motormaster

I have nominated Motormaster, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motormaster. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. TTN (talk) 20:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. While I technically did create the article, it was initially only a redirect. I have relayed your message to Krisr7 who gave the article its own page. Cheers. Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 05:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join WikiProject Stanford University!

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Stanford University, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Stanford University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

--ralphamale (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Motormaster for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Motormaster is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motormaster (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TTN (talk) 16:50, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Sock puppets" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Sock puppets. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 11#Sock puppets until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of World Combat for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article World Combat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Combat until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

—Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:47, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kent Nichols

Hello Hinotori,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Kent Nichols for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

John B123 (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]