User talk:Kyorosuke/Archive/10

"Back off man. I'm a scientist This is an archive."

LostCasts AfD decision

Thank you! I don't know where you came from (i.e., out of the blue) but this was very unexpected. I'm mystified as to how that other, non-admin user could have "closed" the discussion. In any case, thanks. PKtm 03:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Heh. I was reading Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 August 25, looking for discussions to close when I came across it.--SB | T 03:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this! Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 18:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Sean, you're a good editor and a good admin, and I'm not here picking a fight. I just want to ask if perhaps you could tone down the rhetoric in your edit summaries just a little? Sure we can probably all take it, but is there any need to adopt language which can be read as confrontational or dismissive? You don't like something, fair play, but there's ways and means. Take it easy regardless, Steve block Talk 19:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

A week ago you blocked me for seven days, giving as the reason, "Date formatting idiocy; has been persistently warned."

This is a very stiff initial block, and I would appreciate it if you could point out to me which of my edits you found to be the most idiotic. --Jumbo 16:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

E-mail

E-mail for you, Sean. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Piggy says hi

--Keitei (talk) 12:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Block of Grace Note

Hello. In light of your troubled off and on-wiki history and personal disputes with Grace Note, please refrain from blocking him indefinitely for "trolling" — leave administrative action involving himself to uninvolved admins. Feel free to follow any dispute resolution steps, however. Thanks. El_C 04:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I won't stand in your way if you want to let what's supposed to be an encyclopedia become a playground for malcontents.--SB | T 04:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello again. I don't appreciate that insinuation, Sean. Please try to remain civil. Thanks again. El_C 04:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

El C, his remark doesn't seem uncivil, merely dissatisfied. Could you help me understand what you perceived to be uncivil? - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

He immediately assumes that I want to let "what's supposed to be an encyclopedia become a playground for malcontents." El_C 05:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Chairboy, Sean has been inexplicably uncivil about this situation. He blocked Grace Note for no apparent reason, shortly after Grace Note left a negative comment on Sean's RFA. GN asked for an unblock. I e-mailed Sean three times asking why he'd issued the block, because I don't like to unblock without the involvement of the blocking admin. He didn't respond. I left a note on his talk page to let him know I'd e-mailed him. Still no response. The only conclusion I can draw is that Sean feels he can block anyone he wants to without reference to policy and without having to explain, which is very disappointing. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Blackula nosferatu

Can you restore it to my userspace? I consider it interesting, laughable non-sense. If you consider it a bad idea then this is no worry. Just asking. It was entertaining, guess the article has value in terms of superstition information. I can tag it with a line it does not meet the criteria to be a wikipedia article. User:Yy-bo 17:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Splitting GaoRanger

It was brought up on my talk page that some more Super Sentai articles should be split up. I have done this for Dekaranger and Boukenger (one of which nearly got deleted because of idiocy on my part), however, I do not know how to name a splitting of GaoRanger down into an article for the GaoRangers (I have an idea for Ogre Tribe Org, but I will work on that later). Ryūlóng 22:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Since there's no collective name for the primary characters in GaoRanger, just use "List of GaoRanger characters" or something along those lines.--SB | T 22:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comment on my TfD vote

There was no need for that barbed comment directed at my vote on the TfD. I have my reasons for supporting the voting templates, you have your reasons for wanting their deletion. Thanks. Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 02:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

"Vote" ? --SB | T 02:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I think his point is that your comment was (allegedly) a little hostile, not that it was a vote. Karwynn (talk) 12:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Your block of SomeGuy555

PLease comment at User_talk:Someguy555 as to why you have blocked him, since you gave absolutely no explanation or warning (minus a generic and very weak troll label) for a permanent block when the user has no bad faith edits. Karwynn (talk) 12:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

The user has nothing but bad fath edits. Don't be absurd.--SB | T 17:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you, Sean Black, for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. That was one pithy support message you left for me; you didn't even leave your whole name! ;) Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. —this is messedrocker (talk) 17:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comments on Thatcher131's RfA

Sean, I'd encourage you to revist the RfA due to additional information regarding the incident surrounding Thatcher131's comment being posted. The comment is fairly out of context, and misses a great deal of the underlying history in the dispute. Thatcher131 was acting in accordance with an ArbCom decision. In fact, User:SPUI has been banned three times due to violation of his probation from the related RfAr. I'm not asking you to change your vote. I am asking you to reconsider your position in light of additional evidence and to do what you think is right, given that new information. All the best, --Durin 04:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of the context... but I think the comment very much demonstrates the user's attitude toward the project, an attitude which I don't believe is good in administrators. Naturally, you disagree; perhaps you are correct. However, I don't think I can be confident enough to support. Thank you for hoping to clarify, however, I do appreciate it. --SB | T 04:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• I think it's important to understand that SPUI was being highly disruptive. Thatcher131 has shown a long history of being highly patient with people and assuming good faith. In this case, SPUI had worn out the patience of a great number of people, including ArbCom. Thatcher was putting words to that, and taking the stance that defended the project. SPUI was intentionally being disruptive, and has been blocked three times under the related probation. Eventually, after all methods are tried (and they were), a warning must be made. To me, this speaks more to his ability to be an admin; the willingness to use a warning when needed for a specific, individual user, not all users in the dispute as some are interpreting from Thatcher's comment. If no other single diff can be found that shows any sort of pattern to this sort of comment from Thatcher (and I don't think any are forthcoming), this comment is little basis for opposing and completely disregards the massive contributions he has made to the project and the incredible amount of patience he has shown with editors in very contentious issues before. Respectfully, --Durin 04:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Also you may want to see the talk page of the RfA where Thatcher's various comments from that discussion are highlighted. They give a more nuanced portrayal of what he was saying. JoshuaZ 05:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

MacDade Mall

I take serious exception to your closing remarks on this AfD. What would motivate you to attack my knowledge of policy in this manner? Erechtheus 07:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

"I strongly disagree with your suggestion that it is necessary to look for and evaluate sources."[1]--SB | T 07:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

If you would prefer that I take this matter to WP:DRV or another mechanism, I will oblige. It was my hope to come to a less formal resolution, but I accept your choice to be flip.Erechtheus 07:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

You asked me why I thought you misunderstood deletion discussions, I provided you with the comment that primarily motivated that belief. What more do you want? --SB | T 07:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I asked you what motivated you to attack my knowledge of the fundamentals of deletion discussions in the text closing the AfD. I respect your right to an opinion about my discussion of deletion philosophy with Uncle G. I do not understand, in light of WP:CIVIL, why you would choose to include the sort of text you included in closing this AfD. I have seen my share of AfDs closed as both keeps and deletes, but I have never seen the closing admin behave in the manner you have. I don't think it is proper to take into consideration the deletion policy philosophy aspect of my discussion with Uncle G in making a decision, and I think it is inaccurate to suggest that "no valid reason for deletion" was provided. As I mentioned above, I would love to resolve this matter informally. If you did not intend the quote above with no explanatory text to be a flip response, I must offer an apology to you.Erechtheus 07:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

You clearly demonstrated, with that comment, that your knowledge of the deletion policy — the way these discussions work — was limited, at best. Your reasoning was invalid, therefore the article is kept. More to the point, I don't understand why you object so strongly to Wikipedia having a good article on this subject. --SB | T 08:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not object to Wikipedia having a good article on any subject. I disagree that this article, in any of its forms thus far, is a good article. I am also shocked that you are taking the position that the nominator is the sole arbiter of whether or not there is a valid argument for deletion. I plan to take no further action before I have had a chance to sleep on this matter. I'll suggest you may want revisit what has happened after you have done so as well. Erechtheus 08:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

MacDade Mall on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of MacDade Mall. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Erechtheus 18:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. Delete it if you really feel the need to, doesn't bother me.--SB | T 22:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Zombies

This has nothing to do with anything really, but I had to tell you -- the shirt you're wearing in the pic on your userpage made me laugh out loud in my office. Tahnkfully, the door is closed and no one heard my random outburst, haha. :-) -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 12:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Glad to have brightened someone's day. --SB | T 12:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

MacDade Mall AfD and DRV

Hi,

Feeling well? Please treat AfD/DRV nominators with more respect in your comment. I'd suggest avoiding admin functions if you feel you're having a "gruff" day. Best wishes, Xoloz 10:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Kamen Rider Stronger

Why the revert? Anyone reading this article knows full well what the words television and Saturday mean, so the links are just distractions, they add no value to the article. Colonies Chris 13:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

That rather assumes a lot about the reader. The article is about a television program, so that link is especially important, and Saturday, in this context, has cultural implications (eg Saturday morning, although that's not exactly applicable in this case because the series aired in the evening), which are, for some reason, not explored in the Saturday article; as soon as I find some references I will be sure to do so. In any case, the links are clearly at least somewhat helpful, but do not, as far as I can tell, actually decrease the quality of the article in any way, so there's no reason to remove them.--SB | T 13:54, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

MacDade Mall

Not sure if you were aware of it, but User:Xoloz has re-opened an AFD you closed. You may wish to contribute to the second discussion. — CharlotteWebb 01:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

IRC Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For brilliance in meta-trolling a troll on IRC. —Centrx→talk • 08:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Mad season

I noticed you semi-recently moved Mad Season (band) to Mad Season. Good call. Could you move mad season (album) over to mad season in order to match it? We'll still have the disamb headers on each, but there's no need for the album to have parenthensis since it's capitalized differently. Thanks! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

No. Disambiguated article titles need more differences than simply capitilisation.--SB | T 08:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Or diacritics, perhaps you'd care to comment at Talk:Motorhead (video game) and/or User talk:Freakofnurture#Motorhead. —freak(talk) 06:00, Sep. 30, 2006 (UTC)

User:TheSkunk

This user recently came to me and left a message on my Talk page, that was rather smug, about Freddy. I returned his message, asking why he came to me in the first place because I never really discussed this with him. After somewhat of a personal attack, rather mild, he just removed my comments (no reason) and rudely told me that he would continue to do so if I commented back. I'm curious if there is anything that can be done? Normally I wouldn't really care, but his attitude toward me, for no reason at all, has prompted me to ask someone about it, and I noticed that you had left a comment on his page earlier. Thanks for any feedback. Bignole 11:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, he's largely just a dick, I'd suggest ignoring him if possible. I don't have Freddy Krueger on my watchlist anymore... if there's something in particular going down over there, I'll take a look.--SB | T 20:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I hope he didn't run you off with his snive comments. I know we've disagreed in the past, but I know your a good editor and know enough about Wiki and Freddy to do good stuff with all those pages (even though it, as well as the rest of those fictional character pages need serious reworking in policy matters). I haven't bothered with him. I read what he said on the page, and I think he's lucky becuase he could have easily have been blocked for 24 hours his continued abuse of other editors. Oh well, someday he's going to piss off the wrong Admin and he'll have to deal with it. Thanks anyway. Bignole 21:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

User:NuclearUmpf

Thanks for deleting the AfD tag, the uncivil wikipedian is simply sore about me voting to keep an article he put up for deletion.Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Muhamad_Naji_Subhi_Al_Juhani Since this handle was suddenly created, this user has put two articles up for deletion, and had several arguments on AfD. He is simply a trouble maker. Travb (talk) 17:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for closing the AfD. I really appreciate it. Thanks for the contributions to the article too. Have you seen the movie yet? I haven't.Travb (talk) 17:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I would like an explanation as to why the AfD was closed please. The movie obviously fails WP:FILM on every level of it. Thank you. --NuclearUmpf 19:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to point at that Travb only appeared on my AfD after I posted on this Talk:Allegations_of_state_terrorism_by_United_States_of_America in which would be seen as a position opposing theres. But the real issue is that the movie fails WP:FILM. --NuclearUmpf 19:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Sean you should have been notified (which I don't see where you have) that your removal of the AfD was presented to Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 September 29 for review by NuclearUmpf. I thought I'd let you know, since it states that you should be notified. Bignole 19:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

My apologies I never put one up before. --NuclearUmpf 19:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

User names on AIV

Good call that should have occured to me - apologies. I wanted to convey the full situation around the blocks themselves before scores of poor vandal users jumped on the bandwagon. Should have thought about it some more. Thanks again Glen 21:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

You as an admin.

In my opinion, and I think I'm entitled to it, since you guys have control over us regular editors and since you've made lousy decisions I disagree with, I think you're just an awful administrator. I don't see how you were voted an administrator the first time, and I checked and you almost didn't make it the second time. The bureaucrat kind of fudged you into your position. You're just terrible at your job. Of course, I'm focusing on your job, not you personally. You could be a great guy in real life, and I wouldn't know, so AFAIK, I haven't violated any policies. Billy Blythe 07:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 2 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Penalty, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Courteousy note

Out of courteousy I wanted to tell you that I mentioned your name here: User_talk:Thatcher131#Your_new_name. Have a nice day. Travb (talk) 17:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing

I was having a bad day and stripped my account of everything fun or unique...but I'm over that now. Her Pegship 22:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC) (aka #355698)

Abbie is...

Abbie is looking at you. Teke ^(talk) 04:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Mailer Diablo's RfB

Heya. Just a note to say that I've replied to your oppose !vote at Mailer Diablo's RfB. Since nobody else has replied, and you don't appear to be very active at that page, I thought I should draw this to your attention so you have a chance to respond.

Cheerio. :) Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 09:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:In the news

Please explain how the Google/YouTube story fails to meet the ITN inclusion criteria. With items dating back as far as the 5th, I fail to see how adding a mention of this enormous purchase (which was the only WWW-related entry) was a bad idea. —David Levy 19:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Because it's idiotic, as I explained in the edit summary. By your logic, it should also include films that are large successes, which quite often make in excess of 1 billion dollars — but, of course, that would be "popular culture" and thus non-notable. Just because you don't want to admit that we have ridiculous biases doesn't mean they don't exist.--SB | T 19:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree that covering one of the largest business transactions of the year (an occurrence to which a film gradually grossing a billion dollars is not comparable) is "idiotic." The fact that it happens to pertain to a website has absolutely no bearing on its notability.

Google's buyout of YouTube certainly is of greater global interest and importance than Lesotho's adoption of a new flag, among other recent stories. I didn't say that no biases exist, but it's patently illogical to omit an internationally noteworthy news item purely because it happens to fall into a particular category that arguably receives too much coverage. That's nothing more than bias in the opposite direction.

As you've failed to cite a single ITN inclusion criterion that the entry fails to meet, I've restored it. —David Levy 20:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Gah, you and your ruleslawyering. Make the main page look ridiculous if you so desire, I've got better things to do.--SB | T 20:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

What ruleslawyering? You removed an ITN entry that met all of the inclusion criteria purely because you've unilaterally deemed its subject unimportant. I'm sorry, but a $1.65 billion buyout of the world's tenth most visited website by the world's third most visited website is internationally significant and interesting. This is major financial news, and you're acting as though the entry pertains to a funny video that was posted on YouTube. —David Levy 21:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Choad

Don't swallow it, good work on the rework, thanks/wangi 01:52, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English prefixes

FYI: I added wiktionary:Transwiki:List of English prefixes to wiktionary:Wiktionary:Transwiki log. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On October 20, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phil Fondacaro, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

I wondered if you were interested in updating this? We have a shortfall of active DYK workers at the moment and growing backlog. You know how this works after a few visits as a writer...Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 03:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice article. Enjoyed the read -- Samir धर्म 04:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:CFDS

An entry, Category:Kamen Rider Characters you have recently commented on at WP:CFDS is contested and has been removed from WP:CFDS. The discussion was too ambiguous to automatically transfer to WP:CFD feel free to place a nomination there if desired. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 02:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Ridiculous.--SB | T 02:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Tim Blake Nelson

This is ancient history, but I just noticed that you removed material I added (diff), and your edit summary says "unsourced." I provided a link to an interview that seems a reliable source to me. Am I missing something, or are there other grounds for excluding this material? Wareh 21:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

The material I removed had to do with Mr. Nelson's spouse and children; the information you added was merely moved further down, out of the intro.--SB | T 21:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Duh! Thanks for the response. Wareh 22:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Wissahickon Creek

...was actually User:Bonaparte. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Wikipedia wishes you a Happy Birthday!!

From all of us at Esperanza, we wish you a Happy Birthday and a great day! Bearly541 talk 00:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Here's wishing you a very happy birthday :)--Dakota 04:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

OMG BIRTHDAY. GO NOVEMBER BIRTHDAYS!--§hanel 04:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy birthday, dude! --Merovingian ※ Talk 04:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy birthday, I noticed that your birthday is same as Pilotguy's birthday. Daniel5127 (Talk) 05:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Just a happy Birthday message to you, Kyorosuke/Archive/10, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

On behalf of everyone at the Birthday Committee and Esperanza I hope you have a great day, and I hope you continue to contribute for many more years to come! Once again, have a great day! Jam01 07:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Just a happy Birthday message to you, Kyorosuke/Archive/10, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

I, and E@, wishes you a happy b-day! YAY! Randfan 22:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

And a very, very happy birthday from me too. AnnH ♫ 23:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy belated b-day, Sean! Snoutwood (talk) 17:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Block on User:Suicidal Tendancies

Hi, I read on ANI from another user that you 'blocked this guy for being a troll'. If you review his contribs you will see he was a fair and dilligent member of the wikipedia community who worked hard to fight vandalism and enforce the official policies, consistently. After being told to change his name he infringed NPA, but ONCE. Branding him a 'troll' and kicking him out permanently is IMO a completely ridiculous, unconsidered decision. I would appeal it properly but I guess this user will have left WP for good over this incident anyway, so theres no point, (other than making my point to you, which I guess I've now done). Thanks --Amists 10:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

NPA

Re: "use some common sense" Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; 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. Now, why are you removing the wiktionarypar template from !! as well as deviating from the intro paragraph format (which you have at least provided a reason for, while still reverting the wiktionarypar template three times in 24 hours)? -- JHunterJ 18:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

User: Mewtwo4

Wasn't this user blocked some time ago for being a sockpuppet? Recently he/she has been edtting her own talk page to remove evidence of such. Drake Clawfang 23:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

ミカドロイド

ミカドロイド, Tangotango 08:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yay! Thanks a billion. :) --SB | T 21:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Template:Gentoowiki on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:Gentoowiki. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. – gpvos (talk) 02:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment by Pine marten

You deleted my article when I was in the middle of editing it. I went to the deletion log, but there weren't any good reasons why you deleted it.Why did you delete It? I'd feel beter if gave me a good reason why you deleted it.--Pine Marten, December 29, 2006