User talk:Peasantwarrior/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

---

Gee dubs

A CSD notice was put up here by Drmies, as an obvious reminder what happens when two New Page patrollers have only one spammer to take care of :) Peasantwarrior (talk) 18:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

beat me to it

Haha nice job just beat me to putting up a CSD on that bio page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevedietrich (talk • contribs) 19:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Classical Books

Dude why did you speedy delete me, man screw you

I kindly ask you to watch your language. Wikipedia is very strict on personal attacks and I'll just say I approve of that policy. I'm sure you get the point :) Second of all, I didn't speedy delete anything - I don't have the power to do so, that power rests with the administrators. Also, the article is not yet deleted. However, I'm positive it will get deleted, if you don't improve it - honestly, I don't see how or why, since you created another article with the same name (in my mind also inappropriate, but not to the extent of speedy deleting it). I'm sure you'll agree this "–—‘““°″′≈≠≤≥±−×÷√←→·§Yanal.dahdah (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2009 (UTC)””’", which is the entire text of the article, is absolute nonsense. Therefore, I tagged it as such. If it was a test page, please, use WP:Sandbox for tests, don't create an actual article. Thanks. Peasantwarrior (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Amanda Ladd

{{hangon}}, do u want it gone? --Dian-Lou-Aopa25 (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, because of the reasons I mentioned on the talk page, I think the page should be deleted, that's why I tagged it for speedy deletion. Peasantwarrior (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Polarized Filter > speedy deletion

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Polarized Filter. ... your article has been tagged for speedy deletion.

Sorry, I didn't mean to create the page (Nor could I find the action of doing so in my "My contributions" section.

Anyway, that being said...

While obviously I should first scower the help pages before bothering anyone with questions, I am new to Wikipidea and I fear that I will soon be running into issues. You see I am trying to create a "link path" for someone looking to investigate the nature of RealD Cinema Circular polarization glasses, starting from the RealD Cinema article. However its turning out that the information in this area is not very organized. For example, the article Polarizing_filter should really be labeled Polarizing_filter(Photography) for photography is all it deals with. At present it is my opinion that the article Polarizing_filter should basically branch into the two directions of Linear_polarizers and Circular_Polarizers. A great page on Linear_Polarizers already exists but is, in my opinion, missed labeled just Polarizers.(I realize I would deal with that issue in the talk pages there.) However the search "Linear Polarizer" doesn't even take you directly there and I might not find out how to deal with that. But anyway....

I am presently working on some stuff in by personal User:subpage sandbox. Would you be a guy I could talk to if I can't find the guidance I need in the help files? Dave 2346 (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I could be that guy :) Working in the sandbox is actually a very reasonable thing to do, as well as reading help files. So, if you want some help, just come here and ask, it's not a problem :) I'll admit I don't have a clue about polarizing filters, so I'm not able to advise you on the content, however, I'd just like to point out two things I feel more comfortable advising on: I tagged your page for speedy deletion because it had no actual content... well, you probably see what was . Therefore, it was deleted and because of that you can't see it under your contributions. Deleted contributions are, well, deleted. :) Secondly, as I said, I don't know much about polarizing filters, but all the things you're proposing seem reasonable and would probably improve at least two articles. However, if I were you, before I'd do anything like moving the page to another title, I'd mention the changes I propose on the talk page of the article and see if I get any response from people who actually know something about the subject, so you can talk to them about it. Also, take a look at WP:WikiProject Physics, maybe they have a section where you can discuss all that stuff, since you seem to know much about it. But lastly, don't forget to be bold, that's one of the principles of Wikipedia - if you feel something should be done, it seems reasonable, but no one is really interested in even discussing that with you, just do it :) I hope I've helped a little. Peasantwarrior (talk) 07:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the page that was deleted, a page that was meant for the sandbox went to "air" because I forgot a forward slash when I was creating it in my User Area.

The advice about being bold is good advice indeed. In fact I practiced a little boldness yesterday, although I was made to back it up with references today :) and... I was able to. Thanks in advance for any future help. Dave 2346 (talk) 03:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

None of these pages were intened to be created. none of these pages are on "my contributions" page either Mlpearc (talk) 18:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I honestly don't know how they were created, if you didn't create them willingly. Frankly, I'd be willing to bet some sort of a mistake on your side happened. What ever happened, they were created and I'm sure you're willing to agree they were correctly tagged and rightfully deleted (if I remember correctly, the only text on those pages was "mlpearc" or something like that). About none of these pages being listed as your contributions, that's easy - deleted contributions are removed from the list of contributions. There exists a separate list of deleted contributions, but only administrators have access to it, so neither you nor me can see that list. Peasantwarrior (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Suggested Maximum size of a GIF animation.

I'm creating a GIF animation and I couldn't find a suggested maximum size in the help pages. I don't want to create one that is too large, do you have any suggestions.
The one I've got is 77 kb in size after optimization but it is a little choppy. I'm predicting after doubling the number of frames that it will go up to 100 kb.

Or otherwise...
Myself I've got highspeed 3mbs. Would you know what the average person has and then maybe I could judge things from there.
Also do you know if the file is going to download in the background for everyone. Because then the file size wouldn't be as much as a problem.

Any feedback would be helpful.

Thanks for your time.

Dave 2346 (talk) 04:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks anyway, I've committed to a size. Dave 2346 (talk) 04:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

DFCU Financial

Yup, sorry about that, I was too hasty and only read the revision comment. Thanks for fixing! Moocha (talk) 12:00, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Yah, I know. Quite an easy mistake to make, given the summary of his edit. I've posted a warning on his talk page and I hope he won't try writing something like that again. Seems to have quite a temper. Peasantwarrior (talk) 12:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't leave warninngs on my TP

Certainly not when you have no reason to do it. If you find my tone unhelpful or offensive go ahead and take it to the ArbCom. --Gilisa (talk) 11:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I currently do not have issues to the extend of taking this to ArbCom, as it is a final instance. However, I do find your tone unhelpful, some of the wording offensive and I feel you are generally not assuming good faith. Therefore, I have warned you, which I have a right to do as much as any other editor. The most obvious examples of why I think you should improve your communication are as follow: [1], [2], [3]. There are, of course, plenty more.

Of course, I am not an admin and can not sanction you in any way - see this as a sort of collegial advice. Of course, should I find your behaviour inappropriate, I will notice the appropriate, but I hope it won't come to that. I just wanted to encourage you to be civilized, assume good faith and not use Wikipedia for skirmishes with your political opponents. Thanks.

P.S. Of course, you're not the only one engaging, in my opinion, in uncivilized conduct on the page in question - I see user Faaaaaaamn and probably dozens of others too, from "both sides", also engage in uncivilized name-calling ([4]). That whole discussion is on the verge of breaking down, in my mind. Peasantwarrior (talk) 11:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

You don't realy have the right to warn editors without reasonable justification, and sorry, you didn't have one. This is too much drama for me. Regards --Gilisa (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Please read Identifying incivility. Your comment(s) constitute Direct rudeness as written on those pages - "(d) belittling a fellow editor, including the use of judgmental edit summaries or talk-page posts (e.g. "snipped rambling crap", "that is the stupidest thing I have ever seen");" and possibly "(a) Rudeness, insults, name-calling, gross profanity or indecent suggestions;". After that, please note Dealing with incivility - I did exactly Step 1 in the process: discussing it on your talk page, where, as the page advises, I politely explained my objection, so I was well within my rights as an uninvolved editor. So, please, don't do such name-calling again. Have fun editing :) Peasantwarrior (talk) 12:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for refering me there, but again, my comments were barely incivil, at max, and were addressed to one IP editor who cited fringe sites on a sensitive talk page anyway. If you do intend to stop the discussion there from breaking down, please avoid drama. I have no interest in discussing this further. Thanks. --Gilisa (talk) 12:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree your comments were not what would be called "rabidly uncivil" (if such a phrase exists :D), but they were uncivil and I've just tried to encourage you to pay attention as the atmosphere there is very unstable and I frankly don't think you were helping. As for the content posted, you shouldn't call any content "crap". Besides, I really wouldn't call Max Blumenthal's web site "fringe" - the man is a notable Jewish liberal journalist. His views and yours may differ, but - and here we come back to my point - you shouldn't etiquette his work as fringe just for not agreeing with it. That's a big problem. As for dramatizing, I didn't even edit on the talk page there nor I intend to, so I fail to see how a discussion with you here would break down the discussion on another page. I'm merely trying to encourage you to keep editing, by all means, but to stop and try to see your edit with someone else's eyes before saving it. That's all. Peasantwarrior (talk) 12:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Richard Littlejohn

Dude, Richard Littlejohn dies of bad AIDs this morning. Do you have proof that he didn't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.220.214.130 (talk) 11:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Obvious vandalism aside, the burden of proof would, of course, be on you as you are the one introducing such claims. Of course, him dying of AIDS would be highly unlikely since he wrote a column in the Daily Mail three days ago. Once again, please do not vandalize pages, as you did to Richard Littlejohn, Germaine Greer, Talk:Feminism and Talk:Irwin Goodman. If you have any referenced information about those or other subjects, feel free to add them. Peasantwarrior (talk) 12:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

---