User talk:Melsaran/Archive Jun 2007

Sorry, but...

[inflammatory comments/links removed] United States is as plural as Netherlands: They are both singular in construction. The United States is a country (not *are a country) made up of 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the insular areas; each state in the U.S. is obviously a U.S. state. —^Jack_Lumber ^/tɔk/ 13:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, United States in common usage is singular as the word represents one entity (in this case, a country). However, if you entirely pronounce the title, it becomes "List of United States states", which doesn't sound correct. Then what about List of American states? SalaSkan 14:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

"U.S. states" *does* sound correct. American state may mean something different. Please don't edit my posts---that link served to prove my point. (Why?) —^Jack_Lumber ^/tɔk/ 14:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, why? SalaSkan 14:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Because something in that paragraph sounds strange to a native speaker. —^Jack_Lumber ^/tɔk/ 14:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Go edit it, it's a wiki world ^^ SalaSkan 14:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh no, that's so your gig. —^Jack_Lumber ^/tɔk/ 14:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Then stop whining? Or at least tell me what it is, if you care so badly? Thanks in advance. SalaSkan 15:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Don't make such tendentious and blatantly POV moves.
—wwoods 18:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't template the regulars, and discuss your edits on the talk page please. SalaSkan 18:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I've reduced the protection back to semi-protection.

If you seriously think "genocide" is an appropriate word, try to make your case on the talk page before changing the article.

—wwoods 15:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Kay. SalaSkan 19:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read...

...WP:POINT. —^Jack_Lumber ^/tɔk/ 21:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

For what? I don't waste time in arguing with other editors about their language skills. SalaSkan 21:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! SalaSkan 13:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

CattleGirl ^{talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.}

Thanks for all your vandalism reversions and reports to AIV just now- very much appreciated! Cheers- CattleGirl ^{talk | sign!} 11:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment! SalaSkan 13:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Revert

Dude, why did you just revert my Air Traffic edits? --SteelersFan UK06 13:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, happened accidentally. I saw an edit using AVT which changed a header into ------==header==, so I thought it was a test edit. My apologies. SalaSkan 13:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Aah, my apologies also for snapping at you, I have just noticed in the "Changes" page that in one of the headings I had changed it to "→→→==..." by accident. I was trying to comment on one of my edits and include the character in my edit summary and accidentaly placed it in the article itself. Well done for having such a good eye! Keep up the good work! --SteelersFan UK06 13:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Jeremy Clarkson reversion

Thank you for your efforts towards removing vandalism - however you need to be more thorough with your changes. You reverted the last edit, but you failed to spot several others. This may have masked the errors from people currently watching the most recent edit. See the ones you missed It's a little more involved than simply reverting to the previous edit, make sure you check the page history to ensure you remove all the recent vandalism. Thanks for your help, and keep up the good work. Cpl Syx 14:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I use Anti-vandal tool which just lets me click "rollback" when I see a malicious edit in the list and then automatically fills in an edit summary and saves. I don't even get to see the edit history. Have you got any solution for this? SalaSkan 14:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Editing someone elses userpage

It was just a typo correction, but people don't normally edit someone elses userpage. Arienh4 19:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you referring to User:Sir Intellegent/essays/I-don't-know-where-to-put-it disorder? Well, I don't quite think that the user felt bothered by my typo correction, but rather helped. It's not like I changed the meaning of anything he said. (and I feel an irresistible urge to place an apostrophe in your word "elses"... But I wont [sic] now ;)) SalaSkan 19:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Your TW edit at Feces

Hi, regarding this edit, I can't see that what you reverted could be described as vandalism (whether or not you agree about the appropriateness of the image), and also I can't see any edit from Kamikaze in the history of the page which relates to the one that you undid. I don't know anything about WP:TW, but is it possible that there's some error in the software? Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 14:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I probably clicked the wrong button, shouldn't be identified as vandalism indeed. The edit was [1] by the way. SalaSkan 14:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, that was 15 April, and your TW changed more than just that. I think I'll stick to the simple undo button unless and until I get rollback! ElinorD (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Huh? This is reaaaaally strange... I just clicked the rv button, and it changes the entire page. If this happens again I'll patrol old school-style again, this is ridiculous. SalaSkan 14:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

IE7 Criticisms

Hi, saw that you reinserted IE7 beta criticism references back into the article. A beta test is to find bugs; so when bugs are found, whats so surprising about it? Plus bugs do not stay forever, so what happenned in the past is not relevant to the current version of the article. Plus the article states "various serious bugs and security leaks have been discovered". Well, how is such a generic statement a criticism? Every other browser had and have bugs, even serious bugs. Heck, every popular software have had serious bugs during their lifetime! --soum ^talk 16:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, according to my memory, IE7 was extensively criticised because of the amount of bugs, at least a lot more than most new releases. Compare these results: [2][3] SalaSkan 16:13, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

What happenned during the beta test phase, how does it reflect how solid the current release is? This applies for both IE7 and FF2 betas. And how can press coverage be an indicator of the security (or lack of it like browsers). It has to be compared on valid statistics like number of vulnerabilities since release, severity of vulnerability, whether they were remotely exploitable or not, number of patches issued, average time for issuing of patch, etc etc! (I am compiling the stats from secunia.com now) I am goona remove the entire section unless some solid criticism is presented, backed up by facts. its not a place for generic statements like "it has been criticized" that leaves more questions (who criticized? why? what happened next?) than information it provides. --soum ^talk 16:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Here are IE7 and FF2 bug reports. IE7 had 11 and FF2 had 9, which by any statistics is NOT "a lot more than most new releases". --soum ^talk 16:24, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Of course, it's not an indicator of the security, but on Wikipedia we don't determine whether a browser is secure (or anything else, for that matter), but attribute words to reliable sources. As multiple reliable sources have reported about IE having extremely many bugs, we may include that in the article provided that we cite them. SalaSkan 16:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Show one site which claims IE7 (NOT IE in general - the article is about IE7 not IE) has "extremely many bugs" after it had its final release. I have already provided evidence to the contrary. --soum ^talk 16:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I wasn't talking about "after the final release", but about the beta version. If it received criticism for a very severe amount of bugs in the beta version and we find reputable sources, this can still be included in the article. And, want some sources? [4] (about the amount of bugs), [5] (about the blatant stealing of features from other browsers). SalaSkan 16:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The IE7 article talks about the finally released version. So criticisms also should be of the same. If it needs to be mentioned, a development history section be added (or prose added to release history secn). Criticism is not the place for it. Take a look at all other browser articles. Which one lists criticisms of a beta version? There are better articles than this which will be a better place to house information related to an unsupported release, who deals with entire development history of IE7.

And I am not talking of the criticisms on feature list. I removed the ref just because it was a forum link, not an appropriate ref by any standards. However, if it needs to be talked about, there are a lot of references which praise IE7 for implementation of the same features you are saying it has been criticized for. --soum ^talk 16:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

And I have serious quesitons regarding the suitability of the second site you gave, as a ref. --soum ^talk 16:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Which are the "better articles than this" you wanted to link to? Perhaps we can include it there instead. And what's wrong with that ref? (dinner now, be back in ±30 mins) SalaSkan 16:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Its happenning a lot today. Text is getting eaten up in flight!!! Wonder if someone is snooping on my connection. Or is it yours? :D --soum ^talk 16:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh, no idea :). Anyway, that article already contains some info about the bug site etc, so it'd be a bit superfluous to add even more refs there. And what is your objection to this ref on "criticism about stealing features"? SalaSkan 18:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

(deindent)Regarding the source, my only concern is on its reputability. Layout and stuff makes it look like a self published source. --soum ^talk 07:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, but it is used as a source on seven different pages.[6]

{{Uw-copyright1}}

Hi, please discuss the changes you make on such warnings at the relevant page (WT:UTM) before implementing them. The copyright series used to be a 4 step warning, but after discussion it was decided to go for a single warning. Copyright violations are a serious problem on Wikipedia, and editors who deliberately ignore that policy should be prevented from continuing. -- lucasbfr ^talk 20:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I was just being bold. Anyway, not every newbie has read these policies, and a less severe warning would probably be more appropriate in some cases. SalaSkan 21:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

G'day

I've just read your user page. I'm a bit pedantic about language usage too, and agree with the sentiments expressed by userboxes en-gb-5, totootwo, theretheir, youryou're, its2, apostrophe and Apostrophe Abuse. (I also find the boxes amusing, too.)
My current pet peeve is the misuse of I/myself/me, particularly the misuse of "myself". Do you know where I can find a userbox for this?
Regarding en-gb-5, I don't believe there is such a thing as "American English". In my (highly biassed and subjective) opinion, the British speak English, and the Americans speak American. (Well, almost. I don't really want to offend the Canadians, the Mexicans and the residents of South America. But what else can you call the language spoken by the residents of the United States of America? {USAian? I don't think so. And you can't call it USian - that would offend the residents of the United States of Mexico.)) (By the way, in case it isn't bleedingly obvious to other readers, the previous outrageous statement is an attempt at humour - spelt with a "u".) So, Salaskan, what is your belief about the "Australian" language?
(And yes, you're right, "This user spends WAY too much time on Wikipedia" and REALLY needs to get a life! I've just got to do one more edit first ... ) Keep up the good work. Regards, Pdfpdf 07:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! First of all, I totally agree that "English" technically means "from England", and that thus English English is the real form of English, and American shouldn't be called English in the first place. Also, the "residents of the USA" ought to find a word to describe themselves apart from "American", as America is the entire landmass of North and South-America.

The Australians are very puristic when it comes to repelling Americanisms, fortunately. And I think their accent sounds pretty funny .

And which cases of misuse of "myself" are you talking about in particular? I couldn't find a userbox for this, perhaps copy an existing userbox and change the text to a nice sentence which represents the difference between those three words. For an (insanely long) list, see Wikipedia:Userboxes/Grammar. Regards, SalaSkan 11:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding "myself": In particular, in letters/emails from salesmen that start with "Good morning" and finish with "do not hesitate to contact myself or my colleague". (Shudder.)
And yes, the length of the list is truly impressive! I guess I'll have to do it myself. Thanks for the link.
Regarding the "residents of the USA": Good idea! Yes, they ought to find a word to describe themselves (apart from "American"). Hand the problem back to them. (Note, however, that they have a reputation for being generally unaware of anything outside their borders that doesn't involve large quantities of oil.)
Regards, Pdfpdf 15:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I like your multicoloured signature. (I must get around to sprucing up mine.)
Is there a particular significance to the choice of red-and-gold?

Haha, I can understand that! Sometimes I'm just so puristic when it comes to language...

For the template, I created one, and put it on your user page (just remove it if you don't like it). Sorry for the ridiculously stupid sentence, but I couldn't come up with anything better. Any changes are welcome!

By the way, that's completely true, they probably won't ever notice it. So let's just call them "extremists" from now on, suits them well.

About my sig, not really, I was just bored with the standard signature and these colours stood out nicely. SalaSkan 15:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Some good laughs: The US World Domination Tour - Americans are not stupid! - I Am An Atheist - Bush Almighty! (I Hate Republicans) - The Idiot Son of an A**hole SalaSkan 15:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! That was a really nice gesture, and is most appreciated. It's 01:30am here; I'll post a proper response tomorrow. Tot ziens. (Or is it "Tot zeins"? I can't remember!) Pdfpdf 16:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

"Tot ziens" is perfect. SalaSkan 16:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

What do you think about "USAsians", or perhaps "USAzians"? Pdfpdf 06:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to admit that I like "extremists", but it's hardly unique or exclusive. (After all, there are some who might consider us to be extremists ... ) Pdfpdf 06:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good, but you might insult the Asians with that. USA**holes may be a bit too explicit... hmm.... This is difficult! SalaSkan 16:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it would have to be A** (not A***). And I'm afraid you're right, it probably is too explicit. (And yes, even USAzians might insult the Asians - and as there are a quite a lot of them, it's probably not a good idea to insult them.) Pdfpdf 04:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I initially rejected USAian because I thought it unpronouncable. However: "you-say-un" is a possibility ... Pdfpdf 09:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Look Salaskan, this just isn't good enough. You've been around for three whole minutes and you've made answering other people's serious comments a higher priority than chewing-the-fat (no, strike that, too USAian) a higher prioity than engaging in facetious debate with me!! I'm mortally offended and don't know if I'll ever recover. Pdfpdf 11:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I sincerely apologise for hurting you so badly. Anyway, USAian doesn't sound too bad. By the way, visited any of those links yet? SalaSkan 11:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

(I love the "Anyway"). Yes, I have visited the links:

• The US World Domination Tour is my favourite.
• I first saw Americans are not stupid! several years ago. It ages well!
• I Am An Atheist - Clever. Gets second prize.
• The "bushflash" ones don't seem to be in the same class as the first three.

I received a Bush email today that I liked: Post Turtle
Somewhere I've go a 30 second movie that still makes me laugh. What's the best way to get it to you?
BTW: Which "buurt" of which "stad" do you live in? Pdfpdf 12:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. I'll mail you with the answer, if you could enable that option in your preferences. SalaSkan 12:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I think I already have. (I hope I've done it correctly!) Pdfpdf 13:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

No e-mail address - This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users.

SalaSkan 13:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Bother. The "Enable e-mail from other users" wasn't set. It is now. Could you try again please? Pdfpdf 13:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Somewhere I've go a 30 second movie that still makes me laugh. - Found it! Once I've got it on a machine connected to the internet, I'll send it to you. (~10 minutes) Pdfpdf 13:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

How can you access Wikipedia then, if your PC isn't connected to the internet? :/ SalaSkan 13:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

This PC is connected to the internet. That one isn't. Pdfpdf 13:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

You should have received them by now. (I sent another one while I was at it). Yes? No? Pdfpdf 13:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Different topic: Although User:Numbaonestunna is red, User talk:Numbaonestunna isn't. (However, there isn't anything interesting/useful/informative there; last entry 12 May; most of the entries are by bots; none of the entries by stunna.)
The contributions, however, are more interesting - last one was to Everyday People (CBS Television Network) on the 14th, and it was followed by a contribution by - wait for it - 72.93.186.128 Pdfpdf 14:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

What's so special about that? SalaSkan 14:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

(You do realise this refers to "Don't "throw away" my articles without asking first! NEW RESPONSE (6/14)" ?)
"What's so special"? Well, it seems like unusual behaviour to me. Also, you suggested "you should consider creating an account". S/he has: Numbaonestunna. S/he just doesn't seem to log in, and doesn't seem to "sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~)", which although not special, seems a bit strange to me. Pdfpdf 14:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, yes, that's quite strange indeed. He uses an (anon) IP for talk page messages, and instead of signing it with four tildes he manually puts his user name after messages. Also, I wonder where he gets the info on the CBS slogans from with virtually no other edits and only bot warnings on his talk page. SalaSkan 15:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have to get up in the morning and take my daughter to a netball game on the other side of town before 8am (and it's winter here, and a very un-Adelaide like 2 degrees is forecast). Did you get the movies? Pdfpdf 14:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
(P.S. Do you use Google Earth? Pdfpdf 14:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC))

I got 'em, quite clever. Heh, I entirely forgot that you Aussies have other seasons. Not that our weather's better... We had numerous thunderstorms and it rained all week.

About Google Earth... Well, I use it every once in a while when I want to look up something, but not too often. SalaSkan 15:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

spelling error

It's ok to correct my spelling error on my essay. I put a notice that anyone can edit that page (after I looked in the history). It is under the essay tag in a <small> tag. I can make it big, bold, italicized, and underlined if I need to... And thanks for saying *bleep* instead of the actual word. Sincerely, Sir intellegent - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 14:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Cheers! I really dislike wikilawyers who revert clearly harmless good-faith corrections just because you aren't "supposed" to edit others' user pages. SalaSkan 15:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: You're quite intellegent [sic], just so you know. ^_^

Thank you

Thanks for your comment at the RfC, to be honest I am continuously being bothered and threatened with ArbCom by this user [7]. It's becoming even clearer that his editing of my user page had an objective of intimidation. Atabek 04:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Hello Melsaran/Archive Jun 2007, I just wanted to thank you for giving your comments at my recent RFA. While it didnt pass (I withdrew after it became apparent that the RFA was "sinking like the titanic" =]), I will try to focus on and build upon your comments, and the comments of all the other Wikipedians who participated. Thanks again for voicing your opinion, and I wish you very happy editing! Anonymous Dissident Utter 06:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Who whom

About your recent change to my edit, the switching of who to whom. Yes I see you are right. It is not that I don't know my grammar, it is simply a case of this being a little sticky and unclear, well, atleast on quick inspection. "Whom does she love?" is right but "...whom I dislike" is a better example as to how my brain read the text. But given that I'd say "I hope that he is friendly" and not "hope that him is friendly", I apologise for the sheer arrogance of the edit. Speaking Dutch as a first language, you'll be surprised how many persons who speak English as a first language are totally ignorant of this phenomenon and use "who" at all times; more often than not, it is those who speak a non-English language as a first one who pick up on these things. Evlekis 23:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you referring to this edit? Heh, I now see (in the page history) that some anon reverted your edit to "who", and I changed it again. A very weird sentence indeed:) you would expect "I" to be the subject but in fact "who" is the subject as "is friendly" doesn't refer to I. Thanks! SalaSkan 14:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

NP Watcher

I've added you, with pleasure. Be careful at first, as with any new tool. Out of curiosity, what brought you to my door? --Dweller 14:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Cheers! I needed an admin to do this for me as Martin seems to be on a Wikibreak, and to see which admins are online at the time, I went to the history of WP:AIV and clicked the link to the first admin I saw in the list of blockings. ^_^ SalaSkan 14:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Serge Corbin

WP:CSD#G4 (repost) is only for situations where an AfD resulted in an article being deleted and it is reposted in the same form. Since this was speedy deleted the first time, G4 does not apply. Please use PROD or AfD if you believe this article should be deleted. Thanks,--Isotope23 20:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

So if someone speedily deletes a nonsense article, and the exact same article gets reposted, I have to prod it? Sounds like recognising the trolls. SalaSkan 20:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you also use an editor warning each time, the person will either get the idea or fairly soon be blocked. That's even more effective for trolls.

But I came here to tell you that although Otis Watson is most likely nn, the article does assert notability, and cant be done as a speedy. I totally agree with your feelings of impatience at these sort of articles, but being able to keep the speedy procedure at all relies of using it very narrowly so people have full confidence in it--because there are those who distrust it enough, and distrust admins like me enough, that they want to end this essential way of handling many things. DGG 20:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me, I'll be more careful in future. SalaSkan 10:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

ECOMB

Hi. I am trying to build a wikipedia page for my non profit environmental organization in Miami Beach: ECOMB. Not less than an hour after I started, you deleted my page because it was about an organization - there are many organizations, people, bands that have wikipedia pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_stones http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_congdon. Listing ECOMB on wikipedia is important because of its impact on Miami Beach and more specifically South Beach, the Trend Capital of the United States. In order for Social Behavior to change among our youth's outlook on the environment, their icons need to buy into the theory that doing good for the environment is a cool thing to do. I am trying to build up a case to pitch these celebrities and I need the online credibility of Wikipedia, Myspace, ect.. in order to "get to the next step". Please give me another hour or so in making my page and you will see that this page merits worth in your library. - Ben McFerren ECOMB Board Director —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecombmiami (talk • contribs) 22:55, 13 June 2007

Dear Ben, first of all, thank you for your article. I will explain why Wikipedia might not be the place for you to list your organisation.

Wikipedia has grown immensely and is one of the 10 most visited sites in the world.[8] As anyone can edit, many people and organisations take Wikipedia as a medium to promote themselves. That's why we are very cautious of possible advertising on Wikipedia. The two articles you linked to are verifiable through reliable sources. This is a means for us to know that the bands/organisations are notable.

I understand that your charity serves a noble cause, but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and no place to promote anything.

If you want to have an entry for your organisation in Wikipedia, please look for some reliable sources which published about it. Also, try to write with a neutral point of view, and if you are personally involved with the organisation, it is very important that you try to avoid a conflict of interest. Sincerely, SalaSkan 10:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thank you visiting and commenting at my RfA, I have tried to expand on my philosophy and answers, and hope that these address your concerns. Even if they don't, thanks for stopping by. DrKiernan 14:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

That clarified a lot for me. Sorry for assuming bad faith at first. I voted in support for you now. SalaSkan 20:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank You

It looks like my Request for Admin has closed successfully at (58/8/2) I consider it my duty to try to live up to the trust that you and others have shown in me. SirFozzie 17:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on becoming an admin! SalaSkan 20:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Revert on The Rocky Horror Picture Show cult following article

On June 8th you reverted an edit by me back to that of the last edit made by 69.62.180.166. But you gave not explanation and I was a little confused. I am 69.62.180.166. I was just curious if you remember what the reason for the revert was. Some times I forget to sign in. Oh and congrats on becoming admin. --Amadscientist 04:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Huh? Me? I'm not an admin (yet). I just congratulated someone else who passed an RfA recently ^_^

For the revert, I can't remember, so I'll look it up.

Oh, I see, the thing I reverted was some links and a section about a forum. I was on vandalism patrol that day, and encountered many linkspammers, so I was a little suspicious. Now I see that it was a genuine addition, so I will be more careful in future. Cheers. SalaSkan 06:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Human feces

Do not include that image again without achieving consensus. Thank you.--Kamikaze 10:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I didn't look at the archive. Be prepared from some very heated discussion though ;-) WP:CENSOR is one of WP's core principles in my opinion. SalaSkan 10:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

And WP:PROFANITY in mine.--Kamikaze 16:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

my RFA

Thank you for supporting my RFA. I hope I will live up to your expectation. Let me know if you need any help, or I make any mistake. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 23:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Policy quoting

Hi Salaskan. Where did you pull this from? "While this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may freely use proxies until those are blocked." I can't find it. Thanks. ॐ Metta Bubble ^puff 03:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Is okay, I found it. Thanks for quoting. Obviously a very current issue. ॐ Metta Bubble ^puff 03:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Recreation of delete category

You have recreated delete categories. See WP:CFD 2006 August 20 for {{lowercase}} and 2007 May 29 for the rest of the Wrong title templates. —Dispenser 18:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, there's no way I could have seen those CfDs. Delete my cats if you want. SalaSkan 22:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't "throw away" my articles without asking first! NEW RESPONSE (6/14)

Hi, I went in to add on to one of my CBS articles and noticed that I couldn't edit it because you decided to put it in a "rubbish bin". Don't ever do that to anyone without asking first! I just started on that piece today and didn't have enough time at that moment to really get into it. Maybe you should take the advice of the disclaimer you have on your profile and get off the computer once in a while, and not spend your time undermining people's work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.93.186.128 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 14 June 2007

Wikipedia articles need a certain notability for inclusion. Your articles were about a CBS-slogan, and could hardly be expanded beyond a few sentences. Articles which have no chance to expand and grow into a real encyclopaedia article whatsoever are eligible for speedy deletion.

Those slogans can be included in the main article about CBS, or perhaps start a List of CBS slogans. Wikipedia gets thousands of new articles a day, and we need to make sure that they are all worthy of inclusion in an encyclopaedia. Also read what Wikipedia is not and our introduction. Finally, you can sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~)

P.S. sorry for my usage of the word "rubbish bin" if it offended you, it wasn't meant as such. SalaSkan 10:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Salaskan, i'm sorry to say this, but you are way off track about many things. First off all, if you read my first comment to you, I said that I was just getting started with the article, which is why I only had a few sentences up. If you scroll down to the categories at the bottom of that page, you will see that, in the past month, i've created other CBS campaign pages, chock full of information (other than just the slogan for given year). Also, if you click the "history" section on any of those articles, you will see the username of the person who created them - numbaonestunna. That's me.

There is already a list of CBS slogans tied in with the main CBS article, but i'm not the only one who has created pages about the campaigns associated with them. That list has already been linking to older articles about the campaigns. I am just merely launching articles about the ones not included yet. It's noble, I guess, that you are educating users on the do's and dont's of Wiki, but i'm not exactly a newcomer anymore and am familiar with all the rules you are pointing out to me. Next time, however, just check for certain details before banishing someone's work. -numbaonestunna

I'm sorry if you were "just getting started with the article", I couldn't have known that when I patrolled. I just saw one/two sentences, which qualifies for speedy deletion. If you're "not exactly a newcomer any more", you should consider creating an account. By the way, I wasn't the one who deleted the article, I merely tagged it for deletion so an administrator could review it and check whether it could be speedily deleted. SalaSkan 18:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Salaskan - Its precisely for this reason that NP patrollers are encouraged not to nominate articles for speedy without giving the author time to expand them. Its also extremely bitey for a new user to see their first srticle with a speedy tag on it 5 seconds after they uploaded it. How about you load up something like 50 or 100 new papers in the tool and start from he bottom? That's what I do and it prevents this problem. Cheers Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. SalaSkan 10:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

TWINKLE abuse

Following http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JackLumber&action=history I have blanked your monobook and prevent you from reverting back for a period of 24 hours. In the time you don't have access to these tools, please read up on all of our policies concerning the use of automated tools, the 3 revert rule and when you should and shouldn't revert edits with a vandalism related edit summary. Reverting an administrator is clearly not simply reverting vandalism and you're very lucky not to be blocked for edit warring on that page. Nick 22:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

• The removal of text on Jack's page without discussing it with him was inappropriate, it was not a personal attack, what about you read up on WP:U sometime?
• What does it matter whether I revert with twinkle or with the "undo" button, the result is the same. I accidentally clicked "rollback (vandalism)" instead of just "rollback", but it should make no difference
• Administrator access does NOT give you any more rights in a discussion, it is merely a bit in the database for helping with maintenance and clearing obvious vandalism.
• Could you please readd my other monobook tools (i.e. LAVT, alt main page and IPA mouseover)? SalaSkan 10:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)