User talk:Realkyhick/Archive Apr 2007

Demir Karaca

It wasn't actually semi-protected. It just had the template placed on it, which is a notice but doesn't actually do anything. Only admins can protect. It's the second time it's been created, so maybe you could keep an eye on it. Tyrenius 04:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, there's always a lot to learn! It will be interesting to see if the link in the heading turns blue - a litmus test. Keep up the good work. Tyrenius 04:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's a speedy any more, as there is claim to notability, but it may be an AfD, if you choose. Tyrenius 06:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm very uncomfortable with the way the article is written, and even about whether it passes notability. It's not speedy under non-notable as there is an assertion of notability, but it might well be speedy under advert, requiring considerable rewrite. My feeling is that you should take it to AfD, if you feel likewise. Tyrenius 00:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Notability seems to be dating a star (in which case merge any relevant info to her article) rich (not enough by itself) businessman (doesn't seem to really qualify) court case with government (not quite sufficient) sportsman (again not up to the notable benchmark). Tyrenius 03:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Tyrenius 05:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Vigor Microlight Deletion

For the record, I have no affiliation with the company that makes Vigor Microlight. I just bought one and wanted to provide some information for others who might buy it. I see there are pages for other products, like software and whatever, so I'm surprised you deleted my article on this. It certainly didn't sound like spam to me when I wrote it. JettaMann 19:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! ..not

If you're warning a newbie about something innocent but incorrect (like [1]) please also welcome them. Remember, don't bite the newbies! Thanks :) --kingboyk 21:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, newbie ---like me...thanks for deleting my site for no good reason...you ruined my day and wasted my time... :( --Time2rise 01:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Hi! Thanks for adding the logo to the Jitney Jungle article. Happy editing! --Tkynerd 21:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks?

For nothing; you deleted my page even though I wasn't promoting myself...I thought this site was supposed to be for everyone--not just for people like you who control information like a dictator. This site is a joke...you totally wasted my time and ruined my experience on this page... --Time2rise 01:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks for helping--Doktor Who 21:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the compliment

... on the Cape Coral High School deletion page. Did you notice that WP:SCHOOLS has had a big fat "Rejected" notice slapped on it? Again, much appreciated. Noroton 20:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Vanity

Please see the note on "Vanity" I have left in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Véronique Becker, so we can be *nice* to people. Tyrenius 03:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

CSD is a treasure trove! However... :) Tyrenius 05:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Aging in Place

You are a life saver, I had all but given up and was going to call it a day. I was motivated by Sally Herriot who has filed a federal suit to be allowed to "Age in Place" within her retirement community. She is being forced to move to the skilled nursing unit and the Ole gal said, "No" she isn't moving. She is challenging the idea of others moving her when she is perfectly happy in her assisted living unit/apartment. Senior civil rights, the next frontier. ThanksTalkAbout 07:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC) Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Realkyhick, Many thanks for saving the article on Aging in Place. The article will help many faced with life changing decisions and it couldn't have happened without your help!PEACE TalkAbout 02:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

New Zealand Association for Research in Education

Sorry- I didn't realize that I couldn't transfer the info. provided I credited the website. Delete it if you must. I rewrote it as per your instructions -- could you review and if OK remove speedydelete tag. Thanks!!O'Donoghue 10:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, could you please look into Justin Johnston, a non-notable, vanity piece which should have been speedily deleted speedily long ago. Thanks!

O'Donoghue 10:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ben Fernandez

That sounds good. The subject certainly seems notable, and I was hesitant to delete it. Let me know if you need any assistance. -- Merope 17:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Damn, you're fast! The article looks good.  :) -- Merope 18:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Help! - Turkic alphabets

Realkyhick, will you please help with the "Turkic alphabets" article. User Dbachmann effectively immediately killed it as a stand-alone article, pretending to merge it with Orkhon alphabet, without resorting to use to Talk page, or allowing the other users to comment. The action is visibly done in a bad faith. User Dbachmann belittled the author, removerd references contained in the original article, wiped out most of the contents, and then added in the merged left-overs. Please reverse this covert and unannounced speedy deletion. I even can't give a link to the wiped out article, because he re-linked Turkic alphabets title to Orkhon alphabet, like it never existed. Can you suggest what else can I do to restore the article? Barefact 21:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Angela Carder

Thanks for reminding me that the Angela Carder article needed to be categorized! I've added a few, but others may be appropriate. Cactus Wren 07:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries?

Hi! I admire your diligence in cleanging things, up, but could you please use edit summaries while you do? Otherwise it makes it hard for your fellow tidiers to figure out what's going on from the article history. Thanks, William Pietri 07:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Rickshaw Inn

Holy sh*t! It's 2AM; and I just started the damn Rickshaw Inn page. It wil take a few days as I research more of this inn's illustrious history. Our family has been involved with Cherry Hill for a half-century; and there is much to say as I go back to the Cherry Hill Library's township history room in the basement... Which my parents have contributed many artifacts to. Discpad 07:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Dan Schwartz

Yeah, speedying something out from under an editor with a history is probably better avoided. It can take a little time for a good article to develop. But Discpad, don't forget to stay WP:COOL. William Pietri 07:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

London bus articles

Are we going to have a separate article for every single London bus route? I doubt very seriously that individual articles would meet notability standards. I'm not even sure that one article encompassing all London bus routes is notable. Realkyhick 04:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Take your complaint up with WikiProject London Transport, who have saved various from deletion.--sonicKAI 21:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: The Battle at the Pass of Thermopylae

Hi, I saw your comment on this page. While I salute your effort in praising good work, are you aware that this article was cloned from the main article, Battle of Thermopylae? I suspect that this is the work of a tendentious editor, & have made it a redirect; if I'm wrong, please let me know. -- llywrch 21:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Deep sea drilling

Yes, after I wrote the article and published it I noticed that I had submitted it under "Deep sea drilling" instead of "Offshore drilling". What I meant to do was to have a disambiguation page for two possible meanings of "deep sea drilling," so if it's alright with you, I'll revert it to my disambiguation page. Cmcfarland 07:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

No worries. I've heard several professors talk about "deep sea drilling" as a substitute for "offshore drilling," I suppose because it generally takes place off the coast deep in the sea. However, there was also a government project by a similar name, so I added the disambiguation page instead of a redirect so that people trying to do research on the government project wouldn't be mislead.Cmcfarland 07:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thend's Apology

I apologize as I misunderstood what the issue with the article was.

I'm sorry, I'll work on the outside sources. Thend 17:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)thend

USRD Newsletter - Issue 3

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 3	10 March 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: Project news Inactivity? Deletion debates Article Improvement Drive Featured subproject Good and Featured Articles Featured member From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Active user verification

Hello, Realkyhick. Due to the high number of inactive users at WP:USRD, we are asking that you verify that you are still an active contributor of the project. To do so, please add an asterisk (*) after your name on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/List. Users without one by the next issue in 2 weeks will be removed off the list and off the respective road projects as well. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks. TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 20:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Faith, Works, Grace and Latter Day Saints

You added a 'noncompliant' tag to this article eight minutes after I first created it. After looking at your talk page, you seem to be in an awful hurry, so I've made my own backup of the article so I can recreate it if you get trigger happy. I'm not sure what the process is, I've responded to your concerns on the article talk page. 74s181 07:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been working with Mark on the article, he is most definitely not LDS and seems to be an experienced Wikipedian who works on many religious articles, he may even be an official 'editor', I'm not sure. He is the person who originally criticized the article shortly after you tagged it. Anyway, we've had some discussion, he's made a number of suggestions, I've been working on it. 74s181 23:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Per Mark's suggestion I removed all mention of opposing view, he said either do that or I needed to include a full coverage of opposing view but he said that effort would be 'doomed'. He says as long as the article speaks neutrally about what LDS believe on the topic and doesn't suggest what others believe it is ok. Everything is in the form "LDS believe...", the quotes make some assertions, but that is ok, right? Anyway, he says it is better, still kind of long but that for some reason this is typical of LDS doctrinal articles. 74s181 23:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Mark suggested I try to get your attention and ask you to take a look and see if you feel like you can remove the tags. BTW, I've renamed it Perfection (Latter Day Saints), also per Mark's suggestion. 74s181 23:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Fachinformationszentrum Karlsruhe

That was fast. I have added stuff there, done for now. Please see Talk:Fachinformationszentrum Karlsruhe. Jmath666 05:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC) And check my edit summary and history if in doubt. Jmath666 06:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Royal Commissions Act 1902

Hi, I've revised the into to the page and feel the context article tag is no longer required, and have removed it. Thanks for pointing it out, I hope it's better now. RP Bravo 04:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

how are my edits nonsense?

--Momomoses 07:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

CONFUSED # : 0

I AM REALLY SORRY REALYHICK. BUT THE COMMENT THAT YOU LEFT ME ON MY TALK PAGE CONFUSES ME. PLEASE CONTACT ME ASAP BECAUSE I DON'T WANT BE BE LOST ON THIS. AND TELL IF IT'S A BAD THING,TOO. THANK YOU FOR YOU TIME. anisha 13:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)STARFIRE&ROBIN MARCH 20,2007

I've never undone an autoblock before, so I may be going about this wrong, but the IP you posted has no recorded blocks. John Reaves (talk) 07:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

realkyhick's proposed deletion of KTron

The game KTron indeed exists and is bundled with some editions of Ubuntu. I will create a new version of the page which you flagged as a candidate for sppedy deletion. The page was indeed too short and more information and a web site have been added.P2me 16:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Also thank you for the edits.

USRD Newsletter - Issue 4

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 4	24 March 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: Project news March 16 IRC Meeting Deletion debates Kentucky and Utah projects demoted Featured subproject A quick look at the structural integrity of state highway WikiProjects Featured member From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 22:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

How is yesod not important?

Stress majorization

I was looking through the new math articles today when I ran across this article.

I see that you tagged it for speedy deletion within six minutes of the time the author started to write it. I think that's ridiculous.

Please don't add the "speedy delete" tag to an article unless it's been in existence for at least 24 hours. Give the poor author a chance. Please! DavidCBryant 23:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

(Thanks for writing back. Why should they have to write in the sandbox? Do you just make this stuff up?)

OK, Realkyhick, you apparently don't understand what I'm asking of you. Please be nice to other editors.

I don't have time to read through your archived talk pages, so I just looked through the stuff that hasn't been archived yet. Here's what I found.

• You put a speedy deletion tag on KTron, and it was actually deleted, then recreated.
• You labeled Geoemyda yuwonoi as a hoax within ten minutes after tha author started to write it. If you had run a simple Google search you would have located this academic paper with about 10 seconds of effort. You might have even incorporated some of the information from that paper into the article, instead of labeling it first as a hoax, and then as unreferenced.
• You tagged Steve Allott for speedy deletion within one minute after the author started to write it. It took the author 90 minutes to finish writing the article. 90 minutes isn't quick enough for you?
• You tagged Rickshaw Inn for speedy deletion within one minute after the author started writing it. You got a rise out of the author on that one.
• The author of Perfection (Latter Day Saints) wrote to you saying "You added a 'noncompliant' tag to this article eight minutes after I first created it."
• You put a speedy delete tag on Fachinformationszentrum Karlsruhe within one minute after the author started to write it. It took that author 37 minutes to write a fairly good, well-referenced article. 37 minutes isn't quick enough for you? At least you didn't call this one a hoax.
• You put a speedy delete tag on Stress majorization within six minutes after the author started to write it.

So that's seven articles in a month where you interrupted a contributor who was writing something new for Wikipedia and made that author deal with the tags you had placed (instead of working on the new content). And every instance might easily have been avoided if you had simply checked the history page to see that the article was under construction.

I'll say it again. Please be nice to your fellow editors. (Oh – as to your request for "less technical" math articles, I'll see what I can do. But math is technical, so some of the more advanced articles are going to be hard for most people to understand. Knowledge is like that.) DavidCBryant 11:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, Realkyhick!

Thanks for writing back on my talk page. I do appreciate what you're doing to maintain Wikipedia's quality. I saw the "New Pages Patroller" tag on your user page, so I read those guidelines. I really think you might want to read them again, particularly this part. Thanks for all your good efforts! DavidCBryant 15:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

crystal balling

please make sure you read an article before you accuse it of being crystal balling, also, make sure you understand what it is. An article is only crystal balling if contains "unverifiable" speculation about a future event or product. if the speculation is verifiable and comes from a source out side of wikipedia than it is not crystal balling. i would suggest you read the article for the eighth gen. video games and come up with a new reason for deleting it since it is blatantly obvious that it isn't crystal balling. thanks. J.L.Main 18:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Reconsider

Hello,

Just FYI... I have improved the West 49 article such that you might change your opinion at the AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West 49. Sancho (talk) 15:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

local history fiend

how can this be stopped? Maybe today's seige will have an influence (smile) DGG 05:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

David, I assume you're referring to The Never-Ending Chronicles of Billy Hathorn. I have no idea. He seems to be polite enough when contacted about his actions, but he keeps on doing it anyway. I almost hate to say anything because he's actually a pretty good writer, but his subjects usually aren't notable. It just goes on and on ... Realkyhick 05:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as User talk:Rake) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense comments. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Rake 05:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

In all seriousness, maybe you should read what the term means. :)

LOL

"I've come to the conclusion that if you've ever spent more than ten minutes with this author, he'll write an article about you."

OK, when people are on-line we tend to use the phrase "LOL" quite a bit more often than it actually literally applies. In this case, though, I actually did literally laugh out loud. 8-) Mwelch 06:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players

Hi, seeing you have been involved in previous Afd debates I invite you to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 17:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)