User talk:MacGyverMagic/Archive 20

Massachusetts compromise[edit]

Thought you would like to know that the article has been rewritten based on a link provided by User:Billbrock. Please revisit the article and reconsider your vote. Thanks. howcheng [ t  c  w  e ] 22:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ball washer[edit]

You asked me why I tagged this for Wiktionary: the answer is the dull but straightforward one that I am of the opinion that this can be dealt with perfectly adequately by a dictionary definition and really doesn't require an encyclopaedia article. However, the operative word here is "opinion", and I will lose no sleep if you remove the tag and beef the piece up a bit. I note your comments on one of my subsidiary pages, which I don't doubt you intended to be helpful. Best, Staffelde 23:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know - good luck with it. Staffelde 10:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Leeroy Jenkins[edit]

Hey MGM the AdventureQuest citation is already linked and is mentioned directly here on the main page. GuildWiki the Guild Wars MediaWiki has an article on Kilroy here and furher refernce to Kilroy can be found here and here.

I cannot reference a date because Warcraft Movies does not provide one but I can excerpt this:

Title Leeroy!! 
Size (MB) 15 
Runtime (min) 3 
Category PvE 
Summary The world famous Leeroy goes crazy on an UBRS run. 
Faction Unknown 
Race Unknown 
Class Unknown 
Server Laughing Skull (USA) 
Country USA 
Language English 
Author PALS FOR LIFE- More movies by PALS FOR LIFE
 
Guild PALS FOR LIFE 
Avg. Rating 8.4 
Downloads 1225557 (5,591 per day) 
Published 2005-05-11 11:31:57 by Proshon

which is viewable here. — Falerin^{<talk>,<contrib>} 14:12, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure I follow what you are seeking. The report just takes the form of a table on the website I referenced above that lists the number of downloads they have had for that video it is not an external commentary on that number. I did add a qualifier to the mockup that says "As of December 2005" — Falerin^{<talk>,<contrib>} 14:45, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RD homework[edit]

Hey Mgm, thanks for calling that to my attention, Sunday afternoons seem to be the most blatant. I'm at a tug o' war as to what would be most helpful to these "kids", an answer, a pointer or a lecture. Geesh! Your thoughts? --hydnjo talk 21:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you, that seems a sensible approach. I'll ~~try to~~ (grrr...) keep that in mind. --hydnjo talk 22:00, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If by my keystrokes I'm not helping well, that's worse than doing nothing at all. hydnjo talk 23:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did we forget?[edit]

This is a friendly reminder that apparently, the winners of Wikipedia:Article rescue contest have not been determined! I am posting this to all the judges listed there. Maybe it would be a good idea to get this done soon? --HappyCamper 03:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion Criteria[edit]

Thanks for the reminder. I must stop working in the early hours of the morning :-) --Ian Pitchford 11:35, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Railroad Earth[edit]

With the cleanup you've provided it's now obvious that it's not a vanity page. My mistake. --DCrazy talk/contrib 16:35, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is wrong with you?[edit]

Hey MGM, I just saw that you deleted the Webcest article, again. Apparently the only criterion for speedy deleion was that it was reposted information: well look at the original reason for deletion, that was nelogism. The word is now in reasonably common usage by many people (with th increasing number of shock sites, I find it's useful more and more) and is even more well known. It easily passes the google test. What you have to realise is that certain rules stop applying as time goes on - the neologism rule stops applying when the term is no longer pure invention. I challenge your justification in deleting this article on the grounds that the rules of deletion no longer apply. I would post this at the talk page of the article in question but you didn't seem to read that the first time round so why should I assume you'd read it now.
Gorman 19:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Airplane doors[edit]

Thank you MGM for your answer, which has thankfully ended the debate among my co-workers. It was threatening to set a new record in my office for the length of time spent debating a single subject other than work. The record is currently held by "What would happen if you fell through the centre of the earth?".

Kind regards, Gallaghp

Musilanguage[edit]

Is it just me or is this OR? I asked for refs, but the only cite is from the book itself. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 23:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.dat[edit]

I'm not partial to a merge exactly for the reasons I outlined. There is nothing useful that could be said about .dat other than it is associated with a countless number of applications. I also have misgivings about List of common file extensions which I've expressed on that article's talk page. Zunaid 09:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

I would like to wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year. Guettarda 17:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

The Move: Sam Fife (AfD discussion)

I hope that this helps. Uncle G 22:07, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive Logic is now up to par![edit]

Hi Mgm! Check out my article now, and read my message under "delete." Hope I did enough to get you to change your vote!
Wjkellpro 22:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:XGustaX / User:24.60.161.63[edit]

Here are some diffs that will show the pattern of this user's edits, alternating between an account and an IP:

As User:24.60.161.63 (contribs)[edit]

User talk:Kirill Lokshin (generalized complaining)
Culture of Costa Rica (POV additions/deletions to emphasize whiteness and Europeaness)
User_talk:24.60.161.63 (blanking talk page)
Latin America (deletion of information)
Philippines (changing "big error")
Germanic peoples (deleted paragraph referring to influence on Spain)
British Empire (replaced map with one he created and (apparently) tried to cover by linking every year in the article)
User talk:Marianocecowski (calling reversion of his changes vandalism)
User talk:Yug (reverting my edit informing Yug about XGustaX)

As User:XGustaX (contribs)[edit]

United States (removing reference to African and Amerindian descent of many Hispanics)
Costa Rica {minimizing influence of non-white peoples in Costa Rica)
Spanish Empire (swapping the same maps again, along with a deletion of information)
Spanish Empire (again)
Latin America (removing info and links, modifying from "some European heritage" to "of European descent")
Latin America (swaping map, Europeanizing, etc.)

Templates Maintainance[edit]

Hey Mgm. Thanks for the heads-up. I had a feeling that was case when I saw some of the Ph ones which were linked in the Help: namespace. I left stuff like that strictly alone. My rule of thumb was: If in doubt, leave it. I think I only got real legitimate old stuff though. If you know of a case where I tagged one that shouldn't have been, please let me know so I don't repeat the mistake. :) Thanks again, Mgm! Take care. -- Shinmawa 17:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chocolate Pudding[edit]

I rewrote the chocolate pudding article, please take a look and see if it still deserves deletion. It could be a lot better, I was just working with the reference books I had around the house, but I think it at least has some worthwhile content now. Crypticfirefly 19:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dancing[edit]

With regards to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of music genres that are not subject to high danceability standards, I have one word for ya: mosh. :) The Literate Engineer 23:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The ongoing and wide-ranging discussion regarding stub redirects[edit]

Greetings:

I notice that you have recently expressed an interest in the discussion regarding stub redirects and where they might be properly addressed. I have started a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Redirects for deletion, and hope that you might wander by to provide your insight.

All the best.
Ξxtreme Unction|_{yakkity yak} 15:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AWB bug[edit]

Hi MGM, thanks for letting me know, but as you can see I just editted that article and it worked fine for me, I have also not known this to happen before, could you let me know what version of windows, IE and .NET framwork you have, and if you did anything else, like copy the text into a different program or something. thanks Martin 22:47, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I put the arabic text in my sandbox, maybe you could try and see if it corrupts it again. thanks Martin 22:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks, before you click save and you can see the diff or preview, I assume you can see that it has mangled the text there? Martin 23:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

95% sure it's a Windows 98/ME problem. :( Martin 23:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(p.s.) I know unicode works in other stuff for you but I can't think what else it could be, and 98 is know to have problems. Martin 23:42, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know really, probably uses some resource that isnt compatible or something, the only variable is the operating system, I'll look into it further tomorrow. best Martin 23:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

File Upload[edit]

I have some pictures I'd like to upload to WikiMedia, and then use many of them on pages I intend to edit. I cannot find your email address. Would you please tell me what to do? Thanks. Maxwahrhaftig 20:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

HAPPY NEW YEAR[edit]

Happy New Year MGM!!!! -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 10:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gabe Cohen[edit]

Copied from User_talk:Werdna648 On the AFd of Gabe Cohen you misplaced the {{at}} tag. It needs to go above the header with the article title. Just so you know in the future. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you can probably tell, I'm not an Admin and have never placed it before, so thanks for the info (as I hope to someday be an admin... got a bit more RC Patrolling left, though). P.S. you might want to consider archiving some of this talk stuff.. It's 77kb, and takes forever to load. Werdna648^T/_C\^@ 12:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Kart[edit]

Sorry. I was under the impression that the Snaking article was deleted with the same content; I did originally nominate it for AFD, but upon finding that it had already been AFD'd, I assumed that it was for the same content. That is, unfortunately, one of the shortcomings of not being able to see deleted pages. As for mass nomination - how would I do that? - 21:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Pedophilia advocacy[edit]

Pedophilia advocacy is not a term, and can't be a neologism. It's a description. I see it as a breakout from Pedophilia, not a discussion of a term in itself. Googling the term doesn't make much sense. You need to google to determine whether there is any advocacy of paedophilia, if anything.

My intention, if the article survives, is to rewrite it to be a much more balanced discussion of advocacy for pedophilia, its supporters and detractors. I'm not really fussed what the title is, but the phenomenon certainly exists and is noteworthy enough, although clearly a minority concern. I'm a little concerned that people seem to think it's "POV" to even talk about advocacy of paedophilia. But, like many things we might personally find distasteful, if it exists as an objective thing in our world, we should cover it. The argument that it is too minor a "movement" to be covered has more force but is that really the case? What's our bar for that? Is the bar lower for the distasteful? We cover antipaedophiles who seem to have very little following, after all. James James 23:34, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for me the main thing is that there is advocacy, and as you say trying to rid Wikipedia of an article about it seems to be heavy-handed censorship (partly powered by the recent outcry over paedophilia articles). So I'm glad that we agree on that. I think "Pedophilia advocacy" is a neutral title for the "movement" rather than a term that we're describing, but I'm not stuck on it. I just picked it in an attempt to diffuse arguments over "childlove movement", which is not very NPOV to say the least. What would be your preferred title? James James 22:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Masonic organizations redirect Vs Delete[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Masonic organizations I did redirect, it was removed. (I posted othis n the site too...;~) Please consider redirecting yourself (I'm fast approaching 3RR on a regular basis on that article) or voting for Deletion. Grye 17:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand your desire to keep the "attribution" it is also no relevant. It doesn't matter who first wrote the list as it was freely licensed and they don't need to be attributed.Gateman1997 21:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MGM, When I add the Redirect tag (again), can I cite (by copying over) your statement from my page to the discussion page of the list? Grye 05:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I reconsidered my vote on this subject and changed it to Merge instead. -- (aeropagitica) 06:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Land Before Time VI: The Secret of Saurus Rock[edit]

MacGyverMagic wrote: Please take more care when tagging items for speedy deletion. This was not vanity fiction, but an article about a film in the series called The Land Before Time produced by Steven Spielberg's Amblin Entertainment, which is quite obvious from the Google links. Please make sure you check before tagging something. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I did google, but not carefully enough. Your advice is noted. Did you offer the corresponding advice to the new user, i.e. advising the user to apply appropriate context to edits? I see that you haven't. To atone for my sins, I changed my test notice on the user talk page to a Welcome, almost immediately, before your note on my talk page. Hu 11:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Just zis Guy, you know?/AfD[edit]

Craving your indulgence, is that better now? - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 13:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trimble[edit]

How do you know the nautical term trimble from AFC yesterday was a hoax? -- Mgm|^(talk) 11:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should have explained. Basically it's so packed with details that don't verify: Terembel, Trimblism as a mystic tradition, "bloviation" misused, the post of "First Vicar of H.H.R.N", the claimed book Kaluma! Upanishad of War, a Thomas Waddington involved with retaking the island of Anatahan (an active volcano that no-one would want), Captain Johannes Jornmeinnes, the frigate "Locust Eater", the other claimed book The Graeme Willcox Anthology of Martime Lore: Vol 3 - The Blight... Tearlach 11:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby George[edit]

Hi, I just replaced the speedy tag with an AFD tag and voted keep. Then I saw you had tagged it prior to a slight expansion. Can you take a look at it and decide whether you agree that we can close the AFD debate immediately? Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks For Your Suggestion[edit]

You make a very good point about NFPA standards being filled with large amounts of unneeded jargon - it looks like summarizing the second of interest will work out very well. Thanks! -- Natalya 19:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Coziness"[edit]

See Talk:K Street Project, and please confine all future discussion on the subject to that appropriate area. AnonMoos 17:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer[edit]

To answer your question to me from weeks ago, I got your name because you are the only one listed as a person to whom pictures for upload can be emailed on Wikipedia Commons. Maxwahrhaftig 21:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS[edit]

Hi just a quick OTRS question. I'd like to take on [1]. I've answered a couple from this guy, and think it might be an idea to try give him one person to talk to. I've locked it to me, but will reverse that if you'd rather keep it youself. Would you mind if I took it? Many thanks -- sannse (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to pass back to root ("zoom", and then "owner" - root is on the list). But don't worry in this case, I've got it in my queue. Thanks! -- sannse (talk) 16:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changing names[edit]

How long have bureaucrats had this ability? WAvegetarian ^(talk) (email) ^(contribs) 21:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]