User talk:Mathmo/Archive/2007
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mathmo. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks
Thanks. I think that's the first time anyone has ever commented on my diaries without being prompted. Are you a PUA btw? Got a myspace profile? Dessydes 06:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- Replied on your talk page. Mathmo Talk 07:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm doing okay. In fact ever sice I attended a PUA workshop about 2-3wks back I've been avoiding my resources for fear of poisoning what I've learnt. That, and I've been experimenting with some stuff of my own. For example, the fact that women love the word "dork". I'm probably a GPUA myself, but I don't know what the G stands for. By the way, editing a myspace is dead easy. And for that matter HTML isn't too bad once you get to know a few things. Do what most people do: head over to mytheme.com it's dead easy to use to customise your profile. Dessydes 13:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- G stands for green.Interesting concept there,"poisoning what I've learnt". Wouldn't mind doing a workshop, but don't have that kind of money at hand (going to have to try and see if I can get an overdraft at the bank just to afford my next Ironman race). Plus also there never have been (and probably never will be for quite a while into the future) workshops in NZ (whereabouts are you?). So in the end it doesn't matter if I have the money or not. Mathmo Talk 15:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- My bad, misread your message. Yeah, I think I need to work on my profile page. Dessydes 14:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah.... you seemed to have read the exact opposite. I certainly wouldn't have a problem with creating a myspace page, it is piss easy (I've been to international competitions in programing as the team captain for my University, that gives you an indication of my level of skills). Rather what I see the problem with myspace is that the average person can mess up their page and make it so sheer ugly it is quite a turn off. Meh, but then again it does have it's advantages. There are a bunch of people I'd like to keep in contact with through this. What is yours? Mathmo Talk 15:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- http://www.myspace.com/humbledlover. While you're on there you can tell what needs to be altered looks-wise. It's a shame that there are no workshops in NZ, and that you can't afford them. The best thing you can do if you want to get better is go out and experiment, perhaps even open up your own school, but from what you've told me you don't seem to be doing too badly. That's sort of the point where I am. I'm trying to experiment with what suits me and my personality best. Anyway, keep in touch, can't wait to see your profile if and when you get one. Dessydes 20:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I think I might have just added the SwingCat link, but take a look anyway. Dessydes 06:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- You did, as an anon with the IP 80.43.39.235 better watch out you can't hide from me! ;p Mathmo Talk 16:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Virus Claim is a Hoax
There is something else going on here... I wouldn't trust KK. His empty threats are just more games. However, it would seem he can hack into sites, so be careful.âPreceding unsigned comment added by 71.211.139.121 (talk ⢠contribs) 11:35, 30 December 2006
- Yup, could guess they are just empty threats that he is making most of the time. As for him "hacking into site", so what if he can? Plenty of sites are so insecure a kid can break into them, doesn't really mean much in the end. Mathmo Talk 15:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- We are the friends of Kreepy krawly. We are Kreepy krawly. Kreepy krawly, as if this even needs verification, does not hack. He is a lexicographer, a writer. He resides in England. We program, he does not. We do not hack. We identify and warn of hackers, and their more troublesome brethren, the crackers. Top computer science student ? Well, that puts our esteemed colleague in an uncomfortable position as being more-than-capable of malicious web crawling. Like the trolling recently observed at the Functionality Creep Talk page. The actions of our esteemed colleague were and shall remain hilarious. Yes, hilarious. Hysterical, even. The diversionary tactic of "warning" others of Kreepy krawly's web habits are also hilarious. He is an esteemed member of our community, and a professor at a local university. Thus his following. Thus our trust in his integrity. Others, such as our esteemed colleague Mathmo, have only themselves to blame for diverting attention to their own behaviour. Consciousness does not imply a "conscience." Interesting conversation. Indeed. Do not post fake addresses anymore with links to viruses. Do not do this again. Thank you in advance for your anticipated compliance with this simple request. We do not tolerate trollers, hackers, vandals, or crackers.
- I was of half a mind I should just ignore the damage Kreepy Krawly is causing, but then I read a message like yours and I see simply ignoring it is not going to make it all go away. Oh well. Mathmo Talk 02:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please don't give up on getting Kreepy Krawly banned from Wikipedia. This latest entry from him really indicates that there may be other factors at play here. I also wish he (not They) would stop saying that you linked to a virus - from a link to my website! There was no virus and you have been accused of something terrible. That requires action against him. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.211.139.121 (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
- He hasn't made any more disruptive edits during the last couple of days, if he has just left wikipedia and isn't coming back I'll be content with that. Mathmo Talk 03:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please don't give up on getting Kreepy Krawly banned from Wikipedia. This latest entry from him really indicates that there may be other factors at play here. I also wish he (not They) would stop saying that you linked to a virus - from a link to my website! There was no virus and you have been accused of something terrible. That requires action against him. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.211.139.121 (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
- I was of half a mind I should just ignore the damage Kreepy Krawly is causing, but then I read a message like yours and I see simply ignoring it is not going to make it all go away. Oh well. Mathmo Talk 02:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- We are the friends of Kreepy krawly. We are Kreepy krawly. Kreepy krawly, as if this even needs verification, does not hack. He is a lexicographer, a writer. He resides in England. We program, he does not. We do not hack. We identify and warn of hackers, and their more troublesome brethren, the crackers. Top computer science student ? Well, that puts our esteemed colleague in an uncomfortable position as being more-than-capable of malicious web crawling. Like the trolling recently observed at the Functionality Creep Talk page. The actions of our esteemed colleague were and shall remain hilarious. Yes, hilarious. Hysterical, even. The diversionary tactic of "warning" others of Kreepy krawly's web habits are also hilarious. He is an esteemed member of our community, and a professor at a local university. Thus his following. Thus our trust in his integrity. Others, such as our esteemed colleague Mathmo, have only themselves to blame for diverting attention to their own behaviour. Consciousness does not imply a "conscience." Interesting conversation. Indeed. Do not post fake addresses anymore with links to viruses. Do not do this again. Thank you in advance for your anticipated compliance with this simple request. We do not tolerate trollers, hackers, vandals, or crackers.
- Which "disruptive edits" are those, my esteemed colleague ? We have only made positive contributions to Wikipedia, aside from defending ourselves from the persistent onslaught of trolls and vandals. Not to mention hackers and computer science students. Kreepy krawly 00:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- WHAT?!?! You say that as if computer scientist are something who need to be defended against, absolutely not. Without people like us you wouldn't even be accessing the internet at the moment. And lastly, I'm telling you once again do not be messing with the format of my talk page. It is disconcerting and in extremely poor taste for you to be doing so. Mathmo Talk 07:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- It seems that you are unable or unwilling to respond the the actual question at hand. "What disruptive edits ?" Check my contributions page and name them, my esteemed colleague. I'm sure that the innovators at ARPAnet are the original innovators of the internet. I would be more than happy to entertain a discussion as to what my esteemed colleague Mathmo has done to provide for the continuance of the internet. Computer scientists, and computer science students, are necessary to the Information Age. Thank you again for "telling me" how Wikipedia should be formatted. I appreciate your ongoing constructive criticism into the matter. Kreepy krawly 21:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please stop using the phrase "my esteemed colleague", Ben. Obviously you don't hold Mathmo in high esteem, else you wouldn't have accused him of uploading a virus. This isn't some kind of game. You are disrupting a very cool thing with what appears to be total nonsense. Mathmo has asked you to stop re-formatting his page. Why wouldn't your immediate reaction be, "I'm sorry. I'll stop doing that because it displeases you, as I can tell by your repeated admonishing"? I consider you to be a vandal and a disruptive force. Your IP should be banned and all of your pseudonyms banned from this website. I may even register as a user (like you suggested so long ago, Kreepy krawly/Ben/71.210.62.238) Notice the lower-case 'k' in 'krawly'? That's how you want it, right?
- My esteemed colleagues: My name, and nobody, in our collective, is called "Ben." Sorry to dissapoint you. In fact, the original Kreepy krawly is named "Dan." I hope this causes extreme pleasure on the part of my esteemed colleagues. You can email me at: dancalliper@gmail.com . Hope to hear from you. My "reformatting" follows Wikipedia clarity standards. Space properly, indent properly. Obviously the "Functionality Creep" discussion was fruitless for my esteemed colleagues, so now the discussion has devolved into "how many spaces and colons." Interesting. While you may consider us a vandal, our contributions do not show any vandalism. Such as our edit to the "Pomona, California" page. Was this edit vandalism ? How about the "Mycotoxin" page edit ? More malicious vandalism ?
You claim the virus was a hoax, but my computer logs and registry files indicate otherwise. Claims to the opposite are attempts to offset personal responsibility regarding the flawed discussion on the Functionality Creep Talk Page. Oh, and that is how we want it. We are Kreepy krawly. Thanks for you adherence to the priciples of fairness and constructive dialogue. Our IP is directed to an IP in Montana for security purposes. That is how we like it after the virus attack. And that is how it shall remain. Kreepy krawly 00:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 1 | 2 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Auckland Meetup 2 Scheduled - Feb 10 2007
You are invited to Auckland Meetup 2 on the afternoon of Saturday February 10th 2007 at Galbraith's Ale House in Mt Eden. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland 2 for details. You can also bookmark Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland to be informed of future NZ meetups. - SimonLyall 08:57, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- If you are worried about forgetting, may I suggest you put an entry into your diary now! Or set up an alarm/meeting on your mobile phone calendar to remind yourself early enough that you can make it there. --Linnah 15:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've done that already, was more a reference to that I'm a shocker at being at places on time. Got a very loose concept of time... also never know what might come up before then with a date so far off in the future. But basically, yes I am planning to go. Just stating the obvious perhaps that you can't see into the future though. Mathmo Talk 15:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 2 | 8 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Halflife
Decay shouldn't be a problem if I keep up my sodium intake as 23Na is the only stable Isotope23. Must have potato chips...--Isotope23 19:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- errr... yeah, silly me! Is 9am and haven't slept all night, plus I haven't done any serious chemistry since I was 15. Best of luck anyway! (you lucky bugger don't need it anyway... ) Mathmo Talk 19:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense. My leet's a little rusty. âShadowHalo 22:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Re: A handy little note [...]
A handy little note for you, I see you have blanked your talk page. While this choice is yours and you kinda can do that it is hardly in good taste to do so without extremely good reason to, otherwise it can look rather suspicious.... Mathmo Talk 19:05, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oh really? Well, if anyone were really curious, they could look in my User Talk History and see what was there before, now couldn't they? =P ~ Jessica Ingmann 02:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
SFD notification
This message is to notify you that a stub template and category that you created ({{multisport-stub}} and Category:Multisport stubs) are up for deletion at WP:SFD. Please join the discussion. Thanks. ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 15:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Nothing much
Thanks for liking my username. I used it in the days when I used to slum around in chatrooms - people seemed unaccountably keen on it back then as well.
Am yet to meet a kiwi I didn't like - but in fairness, that that's based on a sample size of two. Rgrds, Notreallydavid 18:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 3 | 15 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Warning
Don't stalk me again. Khoikhoi 23:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hey hey, don't go accusing me of being a stalker. Remember WP:NPA & WP:CIVIL. Mathmo Talk 23:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not stupid Mathmo. It's clear that you found those pages from my contributions. Khoikhoi 09:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Even so, if true how to you then make the big leap in conclusion to that I'm stalking you?!?! Do properly explain yourself, otherwise what else is this than a personal attack on me? Mathmo Talk 12:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- I should've clarified by calling it "wikistalking". From Wikipedia:Harassment#Types of harassment:
The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor.
- There you go. Khoikhoi 05:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, but you then left out the following sentance which came after it.
This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, nor does it mean reading a user's contribution log; those logs are public for good reason.
- Did it occur to you that I merely went on to read some articles that I too found to be interesting? Then of course if I read them, it is likely I'll also be interested in editing them too. Do try to not be so rash in making accusations and instead assume good faith beforehand. Cheerio Mathmo Talk 05:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have no problem with you reading them, but when you follow my contributions and revert all my edits, that's when I get pissed off. I cannot assume good faith when you do things like that. Khoikhoi 05:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Why oh why are you yet again blowing this way way out proportion? Not only am I not stalking you, but also I certainly did not revert ALL your edits! You have made how many edits, somewhere in the tens of thousands? And all I merely did is on two other pages I restored earlier edits that other users had made which you had removed. One of them you had removed without any comment whatsoever, it seemed to me like a valid contribution and thus I restored it. The other you had also removed without any comment whatsoever (do please use edit summaries more often, they are very helpful for the other editors of wikipedia), then when I fixed it I did so while at the same time explaining in great detail on the talk page as to why. You can not find any fault whatsoever with my intentions behind my edits made towards the encyclopedia. Mathmo Talk 06:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- How would you like it if I went though your contributions restoring edits by users you've gotten into conflicts with? Would you like that? I'm done explaining this to you, but people that harass other users do get blocked. Khoikhoi 06:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Why oh why are you yet again blowing this way way out proportion? Not only am I not stalking you, but also I certainly did not revert ALL your edits! You have made how many edits, somewhere in the tens of thousands? And all I merely did is on two other pages I restored earlier edits that other users had made which you had removed. One of them you had removed without any comment whatsoever, it seemed to me like a valid contribution and thus I restored it. The other you had also removed without any comment whatsoever (do please use edit summaries more often, they are very helpful for the other editors of wikipedia), then when I fixed it I did so while at the same time explaining in great detail on the talk page as to why. You can not find any fault whatsoever with my intentions behind my edits made towards the encyclopedia. Mathmo Talk 06:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have no problem with you reading them, but when you follow my contributions and revert all my edits, that's when I get pissed off. I cannot assume good faith when you do things like that. Khoikhoi 05:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
I was looking for an appropriate stub template. By the way I'm not from NZ, I just a slight interest in certain forms of body modification (tattoo). Dessydes 06:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
List of Battlefield 1942 mods
Most of those mods will be deleted if they don't get an article in the short time. So, instead of adding spam, consider creating articles for the mods. -- ReyBrujo 23:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing the formatting error. It was an accident. I hit an edit conflict and cut and pasted incorrectly. eaolson 03:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, was no biggie anyway! Mathmo Talk 03:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 4 | 22 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag | WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness" |
| News and notes: Talk page template, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
| Features and admins | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Anna Popplewell
I have explained in detail on Talk:Anna Popplewell why I think the image that you have added to the article violates sections 1 and 8 of Wikipedia's fair use policy. Eluchil404 08:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Mystery Method redux
I see you are making various comments about the fact that the article is not maintaining a neutral point-of-view, however, unless you can source what appears to be counterpoints to various criticisms, they should not be added.âRyÅ«lóng (ç«éŸ) 08:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Stablepedida
Hey Mathmo.
I have noticed you are interested in Stablepedia from more than one comment you put on talk pages. I am the creator of Stablepedia, and i was wondering if you could give me some comments to improve Stablepedia. I would like to get in touch with you. You can find contact info on my user page. Thanks. Sinan Taifour 15:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikistalking
Shortly after a disagreement on one article, I suddenly found you cropping up on another article that I'd recently edited, inserting a link to a pornographic Website that was both unnecessary and objectionable (in that there was no indication as to what the link led to). Looking at your Talk page, I see that this isn't the first time you've done this sort of thing. I strongly suggest that you rethink your behaviour. It's one thing to see an example of poor editing (poor English, poor coding, PoV insertions, etc.) and follow up on the editor's contributions in order to clean up further examples; it's another to follow the editor as a response to a disagreement elsewhere — and when your consequent edits are themselves questionable, the accusation of wikistalking is virtually proved. You really don't want to go down that road. --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 12:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't believe that it was, rather it was a very useful and relevant illustrative example. Neither should anybody be in anyway whatsoever surprised as to where the link went, after all it did say pornographic website. You have got to be kidding me here, how much clearer could it be than that?! To claim stalking is also equally silly to me, this is but one instance where we both happened to edit a page (other than the obvious example). Stalking must be vastly more extensive and deliberate than that. Besides, user contributions is a better way to browse about than "random article" and I look at more often I expect which people who I've had no disagreement with at all as those who I have had. Just obviously it is only those who have previously disagreed with me who then immediately leap up and shout claims of "stalking". Mathmo Talk 12:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- First, the link said nothing of the sort; the context suggested that the link might have been to a documentation of such usages (as most other such links do). (The other link that you added to the references section wasn't connected to anything in the article, so isn't a reference.)
- Secondly, I gave a warning; I didn't immediately convict you, otherwise I'd have taken steps to have you blocked (though I have alerted other admins in case this is your standard way of responding to conflict). Perhaps in future you should follow up the contributions list only of people with whom you haven't just diagreed, in order to avoid the impression of wikistalking. Either that, or don't trawl through the history of such articles in order to see how the editor in question has been editing; interest in the article doesn't entail doing that. --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 12:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- How unsurprising it is to see my esteemed colleague Mathmo up to his old tricks again. It seems that Mathmo considers Wikipedia a sort of playground where he can stalk, harrass, and excoriate users for his own agrandizement and amusement. We, Kreepy krawly, have been monitoring our esteemed colleague Mathmo's contributions since the unfortunate incident discussed under the title on his talk page: Virus Claim is a Hoax. We have saved the deleted talk page from Functionality Creep if anyone would like to view Mathmo's style of discussion. It is unfortunate and amusing, but neither professional nor serious. Mathmo seems to always come back with absurd denials which amount to "Me ? C'mon, dude ! You're thinking of that other guy !" That of course was not a quote, but a subjective summary of our opinion of his discussion style. In our opinion, Mathmo does not take Wikipedia seriously. Kreepy krawly 23:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Pimps
A pimp lives off the avails of prostitution; it is a lifestyle which typically entails a substantial amount of violence and/or degradation. As such, I block those whose usernames proclaim "pimp", for the same reason I block those whose usernames proclaim "Nazi". DS 04:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- There are a few problems with what you said, one of which you are projecting onto this your own personal opinion of prostitution by calling it degrading. While prostitution certainly isn't on my own personal list of top 3 job careers (though oddly enough a couple of days ago my girlfriend started discussing with me if I'd ever considered becoming a prostitute), I do leave that behind when discussing on RfC. Another flaw in your logic is that you are assuming there is only one meaning of Pimp, for many people it has a meaning similar to "player". I'll leave you with this little thought, would you block everybody who has the word Maddam in their username? Mathmo Talk 04:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 18:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
"They train people to turn lead into gold" isn't true just because they train people, irrespective of the result; for the sentence to be true, the training must be successful. Similarly for "they train men to become more attractive to women". --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 21:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Testing
Yeah, just testing some userscripts on myself :) --Ryan Delaney talk 07:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
You wrote: "errr.. don't you mean your version is constantly reverted?"
Errr.. no, my version didn't exist until very recently, and Amoruso (who has been edit warring with other editors) was the first ever to revert it, today. So, errr, please read the history carefully. The manner in which you intervened with your 'errr' remark and your reversion to a version that is argued extensively to be against WP policy was a bit disconcerting. Thank you. Ramallite (talk) 15:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for contributing to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Fischer. I expanded the Pamela Fischer article, and you might want to take a second look at it. --Eastmain 03:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for keeping me updated, is nice to see how the article has now been improved. I've made a couple of comments on the AfD and changed my vote as appropriate. Mathmo Talk 03:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the improvement
Thank you for your improvement on Pamela Fischer, I have reconsidered the deletion process, but I do not think according to the rule I can withdraw it unilaterally. But I believe more people will post Keep to keep the improved article. Thanks again! Wooyi 03:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I went ahead and just performed a history merge, since it's easier and preserves the history - you should be able to salvage anything useful from the page history. --Coredesat 05:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey thanks, that seems like an even better idea. Cheers. Mathmo Talk 06:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
The comment was deleted because, first, it was added after the AfD was closed, and shouldn't have been, and secondly, the article remains deleted until an undelete discussion has been completed. Please don't attempt to add it again; editing closed discussions isn't allowed (not even by the closing admin in this case, and certiainly not by anyone else). --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 11:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- One of your comments has already beenfound to be wrong, in that if the closing admin changes his mind he doesn't have to go to deletion review. Which is why the deletion review quickly closed, you were merely making a point. As for the other point you raised, I suspect that is wrong. But I won't bother getting into silly edit war with you over anything I'm even slightly uncertain about. Mathmo Talk 11:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Please make new comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Real Social Dynamics (2nd nomination), not an old archive. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 00:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
You prodded this article, stating "What notability, what sources? What does "Community School of 2006 prize" mean? Is it significant?" as your prod reason. The prod was contested by Daemonic Kangaroo (talk · contribs); if you feel it still doesn't meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, I invite you to AfD it. However, please do not replace the prod template; once a prod is contested, an article needs to be sent to AfD to be decided, not by another prod. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 11:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, I know that is a way to contest it and that the correct procedure afterwards is to send to AfD. Thanks for the note anyway. When I get back I'll see how I feel about if it should go to AfD (possible not, a person has contested it. Might ask them for the reasons first). Mathmo Talk 11:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Tankini Page
It's clear that you're the only person who wants that transparent headless shot. Why is it so important to you that that particular picture be included? Nik42 01:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry
G'day there Mathmo. :) I'm very sorry that I haven't been putting enough work into my nominations, and I'm sorry for the annoyance I've caused. I really want to do the right thing and try to avoid embarrassment and trouble for everyone and I'm very glad that you're willing to help me. I promise that from now on I'll do a bit more research before nominating an AfD, rather than just taking the article at face value. Cheers, --Candy-Panda 11:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, it is sweet. Hopefully underneath you can see I was just trying to be nice to a newbie! I can understand where you were coming from before, a few of those did look like to me as well as AfD candidates. But the difference is would have checked and in the end not listed them (and probably have improved the article in the process). Anyway, in future about anything else at all feel free to ask me or another of the many other users I'm sure would be willing to assist you. Hope you enjoy wikipedia! (and don't let the bad parts of it get you down too much) Mathmo Talk
Please review. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- What the... !!! For goodness sake be more specific than making a baseless broad sweeping and unsubstantiated claim. Mathmo Talk 14:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- How exactly did you come across Jamil Hussein controversy, and why was your first and only act there to engage in a reversion of my edit? Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- oh my, you have got to be kidding! Seriously, are you trying to tell me that page is the reason for this accusation of yours? Why in the world could it be because of that page, have you already forgotten your very badly failed attempt to get the page completely deleted? Mathmo Talk 14:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, it is the most recent in an emergent pattern of your disruptive behavior that I am attempting to head off at the pass. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- This whole big fuss you are causing has got to be the silliest thing I've seen this year. I've only got that page on my watchlist because you asked me to edit that page!! Good grief, and what do I get from this? Nothing but abuse, accusations, and grief. Probably the memory of how the AfD went for you is sore you must have forgotten? I don't know what it is with you that you should attack me like this. Anyway, to help you remember I'll provide a link to the AfD and a direct quote from that page of what you said to me:
- No, it is the most recent in an emergent pattern of your disruptive behavior that I am attempting to head off at the pass. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- oh my, you have got to be kidding! Seriously, are you trying to tell me that page is the reason for this accusation of yours? Why in the world could it be because of that page, have you already forgotten your very badly failed attempt to get the page completely deleted? Mathmo Talk 14:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- How exactly did you come across Jamil Hussein controversy, and why was your first and only act there to engage in a reversion of my edit? Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- I look forward to your help in making sure that the article reflects what was written in reliable sources
- Now I really don't want to massively start editing that article, already have more than enough to keep me busy in life! But your request of me did at least persuade me to add the article to my watchlist so I can help out as and when I can. Gee, silly me. Mathmo Talk 19:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Your sole contribution to the article is edit warring to include blogs as reliable sources. Worthless. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ok fine, change tack by calling my contributions worthless now that I've shown your accusation of "stalking" to be false. I changed that edit because I disagreed with it (for reasons I've already explained) and naturally it was that edit that I changed because it was the most recent one so it was what I saw displayed on my watch list. As for the blogs, you are failing to appreciate the usuage and context of them in that article. Whatever, I'm doing something else for the moment. Your whole behavior surrounding this I feel has been appalling. Next time you ask for help don't pounce on and attack and editor with such intensity based on merely one edit that you disagree with. Really, was it any suprise to you my edit? You want this article deleted while I voted keep on your AfD, clearly we are not seeing quite eye to eye on this. Mathmo Talk 19:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Your sole contribution to the article is edit warring to include blogs as reliable sources. Worthless. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Now I really don't want to massively start editing that article, already have more than enough to keep me busy in life! But your request of me did at least persuade me to add the article to my watchlist so I can help out as and when I can. Gee, silly me. Mathmo Talk 19:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[after edit conflict]
I think that you mean "change tack" — but he hasn't. he's pointed out that, having followed him to the article (something which this Talk page indicates is a favourite tactic of yours when faced with disagreement) you did nothing useful there, but made disruptive edits (another familiar pattern). --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 19:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Am getting sick of this behavior of attacking me, my sense of humour for it is running out. I've explained already in much detail why I was there (in summary, because Hipocrite asked me to edit on that article!). If you don't understand what I said, then I politely suggest reading it again. Oh, and thanks for pointing out my typo. Rather ironic really considering the lack of tact Hipocrite has shown. Mathmo Talk 19:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, your blatent disregard for our policy on Reliable Sources is completly expected by me. You are not here to improve the project. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[after edit conflict]Oh that is just swell, more accusations. "You are not here to improve the project"". As for this "blatant disregard" you seem to believe that I have, well... read it yourself: "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field or a well-known professional journalist. These may be acceptable so long as their work has been previously published by reliable third-party publications." Mathmo Talk 19:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I'd only remind you that, after I'd suggested that you were behaving in a way that was verging on wikistalking, you sarcastically implied that I was doing the saem thing on an AfD — an AfD on an article that head been part of the subject of our initial disagreement. Now, given that peculiar accusation, I think that the horse you're trying to get on just isn't high enough. --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 22:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Not exactly, these were two different articles we had edited. And then a 3rd yet another one for the AfD. And my comment was to me clearly meant in jest, to make light of the situation at hand back then. If you mis-read it and had taken offense my apology. If it had troubled you so very greatly which you had pointed it out to me earlier and I could have cleared it up with you. Mathmo Talk 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it's all in the History, so I'll not bother to argue the issue. As for taking offence, there seemed little point. --Mel Etitis (Îελ ÎÏηÏηÏ) 23:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see new combined deletion debate. ~ trialsanderrors 20:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that you voted early on this, and wanted to let you know that the article has substantially grown (and will likely grow further) into a useful list of evidence for the Moon landings that has nothing to do with hoax sites. I'd like to invite you to take another look, and to consider changing your vote. Gravitor 19:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Your Proposition
Well, thank you. As I told Nat, I need more mainspace, as well as XfD. Another problem I know someone will bring up in my RfA (even if I wait until June) is that I have 1200 edits to userspace. Those aren't recent (most of them are when I was new), but it's still not going to go well. Thanks for your consideration, and for bothering to leave me a nice message about it. :-) · AndonicO Talk · Sign Here 10:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your vote to keep on the article on their children, but they have put this one (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents of the Prime Ministers of Canada) on AfD as well. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Joseph Matthews and the Pickup Wiki
Title sounds like a 70s band doesn't it? lol. OKay, let me start with the pickup wiki. I never really bothered with the Dallas PUA Wiki, I just kept it there as a reference. The pickup wiki I discovered is pretty user-friendly. If you know Wikipedia, you'll easily know how to edit this particular Wiki.
As for Joseph "ThunderCat" Matthews, he does indeed spam, but he is important for a number of reasons:
- It is by stumbling upon him that most guys find out about "the community".
- He is connected with most of the PUAs out there, whereas quite a few of them have issues with one another. This is a trend that is starting to change as it goes (as most sciences and arts do) from being something which few can do and do well, to an industry with standards, and codes of conduct.
- Every year he hosts the "pickup artist of the year award". Most people don't agree with it, and I'm one of them, but in response, guys like Attraction Chronicles have started hosting their own "Dating coach of the year award", which asks for the opinions of other people.
- He helped bring "Style" to fame as the number one PUA. Whether you agree or not is up to you, but he has stuck up for AFCs and the community more than any other PUA out there.
Back when hotmail.com was 250MBs I cancelled my account with ThunderCat, but I've now reopened it under a separate walla.com account which I keep just for PUA related spam; and there is lots of it. More than any free porn websites. Walla give out more space then Google: 5Gigs, plus I have organised that account and it's folders nicely.
Nice hearing from you again, and thanks for the feedback. Dessydes 15:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Mathmo: I noted that you weighed-in on the first round of the above proposed deletion. I am the contributor with the clear COI (in retrospect) who created the article. I have not and will not participate in editing it since the COI was raised. That said, I do feel the articleâs subject can be written from an NPOV, is verifiable and notable. Unfortunately, the initial references used in the article are burdened by COI and I cannot get other contributors to take note of an extensive list of 3rd Party, independent references to the subject.
The following links which are included in my summary of references at [1]. This link is on the talk page of the article. I think the references below support verifiability and notability along with all the other linked references I listed. I would appreciate your take on that belief, and if you concur, your support in retaining the article. If they not support notability, then why? I need to learn more about WP:notability if I am to contribute fruitfully to Wikipedia in the future.
Thanks----Mike Cline 21:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- [11] and [12] seem to be the same article? Or at least allbusiness.com is a copy from something in bakingmanagement. Mathmo Talk 23:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Mathmo-Thanks for your support. There is indeed a bit of redundancy in some of the references, but my intent was to show wider coverage than just one instance. I think is happens on a lot of articles where one finds a redundant source first, makes note of it, then later finds the original source and then doesn't remove the redundant source. I will be mindful of that in further contributions to WP.--Mike Cline 12:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, in future in areas where you have commerical conflict of interest you might want to try and get some support (and help, along with explainations/understanding) before it is put on AfD. Would make life a lot easier for you I'd expect. Mathmo Talk 12:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- I would agree wholeheartedly. I thought I was trying to do that once the COI was raised, but found the going tough. I am still a bit concerned that COI is a bit of a trump on NPOV and Notability discussions and will follow evolution of those guidelines closely. For a new Wikipedian, this was a tough, but useful learning experience.--Mike Cline 13:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, in future in areas where you have commerical conflict of interest you might want to try and get some support (and help, along with explainations/understanding) before it is put on AfD. Would make life a lot easier for you I'd expect. Mathmo Talk 12:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Mathmo-Thanks for your support. There is indeed a bit of redundancy in some of the references, but my intent was to show wider coverage than just one instance. I think is happens on a lot of articles where one finds a redundant source first, makes note of it, then later finds the original source and then doesn't remove the redundant source. I will be mindful of that in further contributions to WP.--Mike Cline 12:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Operation Christian Vote
Just to let you know, my comments are not personal in the above Afd. The sources still seam to show that the group isn't notable (in my opinion), however, this is just my opinion and maybe other editors will disagree with me. Good luck with finding the sources, and I really hope that you do prove its notability so it can be kept. I'm going to bed in a minute so I'm sorry if I don't reply swiftly to comments. Regards and all the best RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 00:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey don't worry, I'm not taking anything personal! I see it now as merely misunderstanding of policy. Nothing personal at all to me, I'd never even heard of this group before seeing it on AfD! Good to see you also aren't taking what I said personally about checking, I was just asking. Gee, it seems we are all being so overly polite over this! Oh... and while I'm about it.... sorry to be a spelling nazi but this is the second time I've seen you spell seem as seam. If you know the difference then ingore this comment, if not it would help for you to look it up. Mathmo Talk 00:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm a Pharmacology student not an English student so maybe my spelling isn't quite upto scratch. God, if there was an appologetic (hope the spellings right!) barnstar, I think we'd both deserve one! Anyway, back to business......... WP:N states that they should be the subject of non trivial works, I just feel that the references you've added don't make operation christian vote the major subject and they just briefly mention them, I don't think its misunderstanding of policy, merely interpretation RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 00:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- lol, I think I need to go check if there is an appologetic barnstar! There probably is. I've had friends doing Pharmacology, interesting subject. Though I'm a Physics/Math/CompSci student myself (no english there! Wouldn't want to study it myself, well... is at least very low down on my list of favourite subjects to study). I'd have completely ignored your spelling error normally (it did stand out bodly to me the first time I saw it a few minutes ago), but when I see it a second time soon afterwards... for such a simple word too (is only four letters long, sure if it had been twenty four letters long... that is completely different)! Heh, my perfectionist side and eager to help side comes out. Anyway, am getting extremely sidetracked here. But doesn't matter, because I've already answered your main point on the AfD... Mathmo Talk 00:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm a Pharmacology student not an English student so maybe my spelling isn't quite upto scratch. God, if there was an appologetic (hope the spellings right!) barnstar, I think we'd both deserve one! Anyway, back to business......... WP:N states that they should be the subject of non trivial works, I just feel that the references you've added don't make operation christian vote the major subject and they just briefly mention them, I don't think its misunderstanding of policy, merely interpretation RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 00:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Evanescence
|
Hi. Looks like you like Evanescence and you may be interesed in joining its WikiProject. Please consider joining the Evanescence WikiProject, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Evanescence.
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 that you can help with. Thank you!!! |
Armando.O (talk|contribs) 01:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, but then again I did already know about this..... the evidence. Mathmo Talk 13:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 7 | 12 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Amazing Race Contestant Deletions
You asked a question on the David Conley, Jr. deletion about WP:POINT. The answer may be here. --evrik (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- errr... yeah, had seen there was that link. Only followed it through just now though. Anyway I don't really want to get involved with that. But that is why I was more cautious with my voting. It just looked dodgy what was happening, wouldn't have minded at all though if somebody else had done the nominating of the articles for deletion. Mathmo Talk 17:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yup. I understand. --evrik (talk) 17:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: RfA
Hi, thanks for you confidence in me it is very much appreciated. I do intend to run for adminship in the near future but I want to make sure I am fully prepared first. I hope you will still feel you can support me when the time comes. Thanks again, Mallanox 00:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
New seduction community template
In light of the recent nomination of Template:Notable Members of The Seduction Community, I've began work on a new, broader template in my namespace (here). The intention is that it is placed at the bottom of the page. â Sasuke Sarutobi 16:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for letting me know. And happy Valentines day! lol Mathmo Talk 17:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy SEALs
Re your message: Another admin deleted it again. -- Gogo Dodo 19:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
DRV
The article Hillcrest Christian School, on which you commented is up for DRV here. You may wish to take part in the debate. Bridgeplayer 17:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Sand Squid/Messy Stench
Too late & too bad. Another deletion happy admin deleted it. I think these guys get hard-ons from deleting stuff. Like I've said before, it's easier to delet than create or repair.--Sand Squid 06:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey - can you set a real email address in your preferences? I'd love to drop you a line. WoodenBuddha
- Strange, I thought I'd set it up a while ago. Wonky memory.... lets go check. Mathmo Talk 08:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello, An article that I created as a part of Wikiproject Cycling called Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais and linked to the Mount Tamalpais article, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais. Thank you, Bob in Las Vegas - uriel8 (talk) 09:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration
I have initiated a Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Nearly Headless Nick disregarding consensus and consensus-related policies, a matter in which I believe you to have been involved in the case history of. Your commentary may be appreciated. Balancer 13:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've C&Ped the statements from the RfA to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington (2nd RfC) on the basis that there seems to be agreement that the issue should be taken up in RfC. You may wish to ratify, modify, withdraw, etc your statement if you have made one, or add a statement if you have not. Balancer 23:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey
I've just added some new stuff, but not to the sarging diary, but to the PUA wiki instead. I'm considering deleting that diary and just adding a link to the wiki under my other other diary. Just keeping you updated. Dessydes 11:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Cheers, though it is one of the zillions of things I've got on my watchlist anyway. So I tend to notice the changes you make to it most of the time... Mathmo Talk 11:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- 'Kay I won't delete the page, but I do want to delete the link to the annihilation vid. It'll still be on the other wiki. Gotta keep this stuff as inner circle as possible. As always, you'll be the first to know when I make changes. Dessydes 07:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 8 | 19 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Proposed merge of Independent evidence for Apollo Moon landings into Apollo Moon Landing Hoax Accusations
This is just to let you know that there is a merge proposal being considered at Independent evidence for Apollo Moon landings. Given that you participated in the AfD debate about this article, you might be interested in leaving your opinion concerning this merge on the talk page. Lunokhod 16:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
RfA proposal
Wow, thank you so much for suggesting it! I don't think I'm ready yet; I'd like to get more involved with policy and XfD's, as well as procedure. So far my contribs have been fairly even among writing and fixing articles and vandal patrol, and I hope to keep it that way. Another article or two to GA or better yet FA, a few more months under my belt, and I'll certainly consider your suggestion! Many thanks, â Editor at Large(speak) 06:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- That is a good idea of yours, it will make it a stronger possibility you will pass on your first try (I hadn't yet done a super careful check of contributions, you had simply seemed like a good possibility from what I could at first see (there has been recent discussion about a need for more admins). But increased editing in those areas would for sure be helpfull in your greater understanding of wikipedia). I'll do my best to keep you in mind in a few months time, and check you out some more when the time comes (feel free to remind me). Mathmo Talk 13:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Right now, I don't think it should be deleted as the claim it was non-notable in the prod wasn't substantiated. I nominated it for AFD because that's what I usually do with articles that are prodded for the wrong reason, but might still warrant deletion for something else. I'm hoping to get community input. - Mgm|(talk) 13:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see now. So I gather that you are then expressing no opinion about the keeping or not of the article? If so it probably would be a good idea to state that in the nomination. Thanks anyway for clearing it up a little with me. Mathmo Talk 13:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 9 | 26 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
New WikiProject
Hey, I'm starting a new WikiProject (sorry that I haven't responded in a while) called Mathematics Construction. The temporary WikiProject is here. Hope you can help! Sr13 (T|C) 07:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 10 | 5 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Hamish Carter
It's true enough. I added a link on his page to the news story on the BBC site. Regards. --Maarten1963 20:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
David DeAngelo
Hey, could you do me a favor and work in the sources I listed? I would do it myself but I'm stuck with massive amounts of hw. Thanks man. --Amit 02:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm... how about half and half (or something), I've got a useless internet connection here which is severly limiting my ability to do stuff at the moment. But I'll make a start anyway. Mathmo Talk 02:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Louise Nicholas
Hi Mathmo,
Regarding the inclusion of the word "falsely" on the Louise Nicholas wikipedia page - I agree with the previous edit and feel that this word should be removed. Just because "A proves B" does not necessarily mean that "B proves A".
Just noticed that your "User Page" claims you have some knowledge of Maths. Surely the above logic will therefore make sense! :-) âPreceding unsigned comment added by 130.123.128.114 (talk ⢠contribs) 06:54, 8 March 2007
- lol, thanks! I did before kind of see what was being said. Though I feel like the opening section ought to include the fact that they were not found to be true. Also originally a person had made a change to it which said she is a liar [13]. But like you I believed that to be a little bit too strong, so when I put in "falsely" [14] I was actually toning it down from liar. At the time I was merely putting in something better than "liar", and "falsely" was the best that came to mind in that mind. However... if a few more seconds of thought... I believe now it would be better to put "unproven" instead of either of the two earlier versions. Mathmo Talk 07:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Mathmo,
Much better!
Do you think the opening might read (slightly) better as follows ?
Louise Nicholas is a New Zealand woman who made allegations, later found to be unproven, that she was raped by three New Zealand policemen in her Rotorua flat in 1984. âPreceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.146.126 (talk ⢠contribs) 07:12, 8 March 2007
- Yup, completely agree! It reads better like that (though probably could be improved even more I presume at a later date). I'll go change it myself again. Just so you know for future reference, most discussion like this is typically made on the article talk page. So others can see it more easily. In this case it doesn't really matter too much, and is even good idea actually when there is a difference of opinions about one article between two editors. If it saves edit warring etc... anyway.... I'll probably make sure I link to here from the article talk page just so others can see for future reference. Mathmo Talk 07:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Sounds good. A good discussion and resolution. âPreceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.146.126 (talk ⢠contribs) 07:28, 8 March 2007
- Have you considered getting a user account? Makes your experience a lot better on wikipedia (watchlists, preferences being set, easier communication, etc...) if you are going to be editing here again. Mathmo Talk 07:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Please sign my autograph page
Please sign my autograph page. Aâ¢Nâ¢Nâ¢Afoxlover PLEASE SIGN, ANYONE!!! 21:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
cont. Magnetic_Monopole_NPOV
Hello, I was on vacations, sorry. Now replying your message at User talk:Lixo2 and mediation (see link on title).
- How ironic, just after I close... Lixo2 shows up! LOL, welcome back Lixo2! Mathmo Talk 00:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 11 | 12 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Magnetic Monopole NPOV
Please mediators, see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-26 Magnetic Monopole NPOV... Wikipedia need your help, the dominant POV at Magnetic monopole is systematically DELETING (rv) colaborations. 201.83.166.62 14:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- So very sorry, I've been rather busy recently, and stuff here has been slipping my mind. Haven't been doing much more than random sporadic edits at times. I'll get onto this soon. Now... I must sleep, got two important interviews tomorrow and only a few hours sleep until then. Yet I still have a heck of a lot of work to do beforehand.... what fun! Mathmo Talk 14:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Deletion review for Template:User no GFDL
Just thought you'd like to know:
A template you participated in a Tfd for (Template:User no GFDL) has subsequently been speedily deleted, and is now under deletion review. Miss Mondegreen | Talk 16:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
MedCab cases
Hi, please review and close any of MedCab cases you are done with. --Medcabemail 22:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Mathematics CotW
Hey Mathmo, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 23:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 20 | 14 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi
I saw you'd signed up to handle the dispute at WP:MEDCAB which seems to have flared up again. I'm happy to have a go at sorting out what's going on, but you were the first to wrestle with this so wanted to give you a chance to run with it first. Thanks for your work so far.
Chrislintott 12:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 22 | 28 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 23 | 4 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Worse Than Failure
Ok. I have userfied the page at User:Mathmo/Worse Than Failure. I have nowikied the last part (categories, stub, & an interwiki link) so that they do not activate on a page in User space.
The key issue here is that the article makes no effort to establish the notability of the web site as is required at WP:WEB. If you want the article restored you need to find independant references that satisfy the WP:WEB criteria. Without those, the article is likely to be deleted again if it is recreated. Recreate the same article enough times, and you will find the space blocked from recreation again. So that is not a good way to go about this. Basically, the proper way to handle this is to either convince me that you can satisfy the WP:WEB criteria, or failing that you can take the page to WP:DRV to look for a reversal of my descision by a larger group of general editors. - TexasAndroid 12:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, I'm aware of the notability requirements already. Just wanted to check how far along the article had already gone with that. Not at all it seems, I'd have deleted that article too if I hadn't been aware of tdwtf. Guess I'll have to start from scratch in meeting the requirements. Thanks again. Mathmo Talk 23:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Notability of Vulcan (programing language)
A tag has been placed on Vulcan (programing language), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. andy 22:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
The problem with this article is that it is far more about Wayne Ratliff - who already has an article anyway - than it is about Vulcan. It tells us almost nothing about Vulcan. That's why I added {{db-bio}}. IMHO you need to do a rewrite, focussing on the interesting and relevant features of the language. andy 08:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 25 | 18 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 26 | 25 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Inappropriatre level of abstraction and assumed expertise for an encyclopedia article
Hi Mathmo, I think, your opinion expressed in "Inappropriatre level of abstraction and assumed expertise for an encyclopedia article" is right.
--Overix 21:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment in support, it can be little things like this which help keep good contributors around. Here is another way I could state what I said: "There are layers of knowledge, and it is not always possible to remove all layers such as to put all knowledge on the same level of required base understanding for understanding." 21:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 27 | 2 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 28 | 9 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Christian Vincenz
A tag has been placed on Christian Vincenz, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. SeveroTC 21:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Christian Vincenz
I deleted the page because it is a rather serious WP:BLP violation. The source you mentioned is a fan page of one of the alleged victims. You will need something non-trivial if you wish to keep that comment. Without it, I doubt Vincenz is otherwise notable. Do you have something non-trivial? If so, I do not mind undeleting it for you to work on. Thanks. JodyB talk 03:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Please see my reply to your follow up on my talk page. JodyB talk 14:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
1942
Just a heads up on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Battlefield 1942 mods (5th nomination. Bfelite 23:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 29 | 16 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Silvia Saint
That's odd. If they revert you again, you should file an RfC or take it to WP:ANI. It was likely a mistake, since that page seems to endure rather heavy vandalism, and spam (as I'm sure you can imagine). Cheers, Silly rabbit 12:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed I do realise how that page can get a lot of vandalism, I have it and similar pages on my watchlist and I get to see the degree of vandalism they get compared to others. I tend to find people can put "rvv" too readily, using it as a replacement for a real reason. Or even (as is possibly true in this case) in an attempt to hide an edit of their own which is removing valid content. Mathmo Talk 13:03, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Meetup
Hey, I noticed you attended one of the previous auckland meetups, and I am notifying previous attendees we are planning another one on 11th August. See the meetup page for more information, or to say if you are coming. Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 01:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Going to check it out. Mathmo Talk 03:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 30 | 23 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted your edits to Jessica Drake as IMDB and TV.com both are not what are considered reliable sources. See here for more details regarding IMDB as a source. Tabercil 03:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
High Society
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from High Society (magazine). Please be more careful when editing pages and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Valrith 03:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- If you had read the edit summary you would have seen I had specified why. You haven't responded to what I said, instead you labeled my edit as vandalism in your edit summary. Mathmo Talk 04:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to High Society (magazine). Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Valrith 19:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Meadowlands shopping plaza
Hi, could you please tell me what the problem is with this article that they seem to be having for no real apparent reason?Jameeserano 04:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Auckland Meetup 3 - Coming?
In Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland 3, you have listed yourself as a likely attendee (and offered to bring a laptop) as well as in the apologies section. Will you be there or not? confused... Linnah 09:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, was in a rush and thought that was a comments section! Mathmo Talk 22:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
This message is being left for both User:Mathmo and User:Valrith:
I have seen the two of you steadily reverting each other's edits over the link to Silvia Saint's MySpace page in her article. I strongly urge both of you to take your dispute to Talk:Silvia Saint. Further additions and/or deletions prior to discussion occuring will result in the offending party being blocked and/or the article in question being fully protected. Tabercil 22:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:13, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Three kings
The problem was the article was a significant breach of CSD G12, being a direct copyright violation from another website, the A7 was just a sundary deletion reason. By having this article CSD'd instead of completing the full AfD process, it means that the article can be recreated without falling foul of CSD G4 (Recreation of deleted material). You see, there is method to the madness. I would suggest that you work on the article in your own personal sandbox, and once you think it's ready come and obtain some feedback from others on WP:SHOP before moving it into mainspace. To start off the article strucutre, grab a copy of my shopping centre article baseline template, copy it into your sandbox and work from there. If you have any questions or need some help, please don't hesitate to ask. Cheers, Thewinchester (talk) 04:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for explaining, makes much more sense the method you followed. Just seemed odd at first. Mathmo Talk 21:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Indented comments on numbered lists
On numbered lists (using #), indenting using :: causes the numbering to restart from 1. Instead, use #:, which keeps the numbering intact. Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 22:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! I didn't even notice it. Mathmo Talk 22:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Talk Pages (re:Keri Sable)
I think you should take your own advice and read WP:TALK, where it clearly states " The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page ". Neither the vandalistic comment I removed from this talk page, nor your addition of a link to the edit history fit this definition. Valrith 20:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
'Twas a mistake. I've restored the history. Thanks for letting me know. --Coredesat 22:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like only one edit by you stating that the creator of the language is notable. It's probably not worth bringing back, although you can recreate it as a redirect to the dBase talk page if you want. --Coredesat 00:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
helpful WP space pages
for t hose following AfDs: [15] , and a new one, [16] DGG (talk) 02:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Cheers, although... I was already linking to the first one from my userpage! (gives you an idea of how handy I feel it is..... ) Mathmo Talk 03:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Deleted material
Restoring explicitly deleted material, as you did here is not a good idea. Pages are deleted for a reason, and doing things like that will make userfication of other deleted content less likely. --Eyrian 18:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- That has nothing to do with userfication, it hasn't been. Neither could I find any such deleted page, I was restoring it from the history of the main article. Material existing as a separate article or within an article are two completely different things. Mathmo Talk 20:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- No, they're not. That material was deemed unsuitable for Wikipedia. It was spun off, then deleted. --Eyrian
IPC
"I feel that it is important to keep popular culture articles because they inherently demonstrate the notability of the parent article while at the same time keeping the parent article more streamlined. Mathmo Talk 22:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)"
- What you are talking about is taking a list of materials, cited to primary sources, that are being arranged in a particular way to make a point. Tha is to say, you are taking a bunch of primary sources and using them to show something new (i.e. importance). That is categorically original research, and unacceptable. --Eyrian 22:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Meh, I just wrote that a few minutes ago as a start to a more in depth discussion. I've barely made a start with what I have on my userpage there, is mainly just a remind to myself it something I'd like to write a little more about. I'll discuss it more with you once I've done that.
Re: List of Scientologist
Double check it, it's right. Kwsn(Ni!) 01:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- It's nothing new to do that, I've done it before and have seen others do it. There was what, a 1-2 hour difference? If it were a greater gap, I wouldn't have done it, but I'm leaving it on. Kwsn(Ni!) 01:12, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- I know it has been done a lot, but strictly speaking it not right. Because it has been let slide before doesn't mean it can always been done. Plus in the AfD there has already been many votes/comments on it. Even worse for you case, is the number of them referring to merging into List of Scientologists. Which now would be patent nonsense, as they are both listed. Mathmo Talk 01:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Trainspotting
I missed your additions to the talkpage at the time and have replied there. Valenciano 07:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Cheers! Even though I'd completely forgotten about that edit until I saw it again... is all good. Mathmo Talk 06:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm rich!
Sadly, I didn't get any takers on my bet. There's probably some rule against it, that's called WP:BET, but if all else fails, someone need only say WP:FIVE. Mandsford 21:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 33 | 13 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Clown shoes
a video of Mystery wearing clown shoes? hahaha. I gotta see that. Dissolva 18:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 35 | 27 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 36 | 3 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 04:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 37 | 10 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Gangs in New Zealand
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Gangs in New Zealand, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. gadfium 00:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- You were planning to get back to this article in March. Could you add a full introductory paragraph, at least, with a list of the main gangs and some sort of context. Are we talking about gangs of a particular ethnic/racial makeup, motorcycle gangs? Grey power? (just kidding!) Areas of New Zealand where problems or influence is greatest? I don't want to AfD this, but it really isn't acceptable in its current form.-gadfium 07:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
The Noob
You once voted to Keep the noob, if you are still around, the noob article has been up for three months, and is back in a AFD again. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_noob. Could use your help if you feel like adding another "keep". Timmccloud (talk) 19:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Got Your Message
Hey Mathmo what's up you sent me a message a few days ago saying my article might be deleted and It was. I was wondering you could help give me some tips so I could rewrite it up to standard. It was the Article I had written on the PUA Guru Vin Dicarlo, I took his workshop, loved it and noticed that he didn't have a wikipedia thing, so I figured I'd add him. My question is how many references do I need because I can only find a few about him. Thanks Man
EdgeFree âPreceding unsigned comment added by Edgefree (talk ⢠contribs) 21:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
COI DeAngelo Criticisms
Hey Mathmo, if you take a closer look at the DeAngelo history, you'll see there's been a lot of trouble with various sock puppets sanitizing and vandalizing at whim or based on financial interest. I myself am not affiliated with any of the companies who profit on the community and industry. So you're too quick on the trigger. Please investigate the links and see if there's merit to them. But stop playing with the criticisms section, as without it, the entire page becomes a one-dimensional marketing / advertising piece for the DeAngelo empire. Take a look and let me know on my talk! DutchSeduction (talk) 14:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I have been following that page now for a long time. A person does not have to get monetary profit to have potential COI of interest, for instance I run various things completely for free yet I do not promote them at all on wikipedia because of the potential COI that could possibly be brought up. Likewise it would be best if you exercised similar caution. Also yes I have looked at the links, they do not look at like what I'd add to the article because I feel that they wouldn't be adding to it. Perhaps if somebody else has been adding in your links then would be some merit in your argument, but for now ease up on it. Thanks. Mathmo Talk 02:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Mathmo, you are assuming that the site is mine. It's not. You're playing a 3RR game, and continually removing all criticism from the DeAngelo page. Thereby whitewashing a page that is full of corporate product promotion and weasel words. None of the links are commercial, and only a couple of them were added by me, and all of them provide examples of alternatives, made non-commercially available. 3RR Please lay off the vandalism. Feel free to contribute and add to the criticism section. DutchSeduction (talk) 12:51, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)