User talk:Wickethewok/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archived[edit]

  • Archived as of August 2, 2006. Please put any comments on the current talk page. Wickethewok 04:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pppcard[edit]

I'd appreciate an experienced view on whether the recent edits mean this article would now suffice for notability. Thanks. --Dweller 13:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, as it is I don't think it meets WP:CORP. In order to do so, to meet criteria #1, you'll have to find published works that discuss it that are not press releases. Basically, you'll need to find an article or two from a reliable secondary source, that is, someone not affiliated with the company or its products. Hope that helps! Wickethewok 13:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll point the editor here. (It's my prod on the article). --Dweller 13:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article on William Tetley, C.M., Q.C., LL. L.[edit]

Dear Wickethewok:

I take it that you are the administrator who has deleted or will delete the above-mentioned article submitted by me on August 1, 2006, concerning Prof. William Tetley.

Can you please tell me how the article could be made acceptable to Wikipedia, if that is possible? Prof. Tetley is a leading figure in the world of international maritime and admiralty law and the significance of his writings on the subject, as seen on his website, "Tetley's Maritime & Admiralty Law" (http://www.mcgill.ca/maritimelaw/), certainly appear to merit some recognition by Wikipedia. If the article as submitted is considered a "vanity page" and therefore recommended for deletion, is there a way in which I could rewrite it so that it would be acceptable?

Robert Wilkins Faculty of Law McGill University Montreal, Quebec, Canada —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcwilkins (talk • contribs)

  • Copying resumes/CVs from existing sources is not the way to write an encyclopedic article. In order to do so, articles should be written pretty much from scratch with reliable sources and verifiable information. Also, the individual in question should meet the guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia (WP:BIO). Its generally a bad idea to write about people you know directly, too. Please sign your messages using four tildas ~~~~ rather than including your outside contact information. Wickethewok 15:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wickethewok: Thank you for your message. I will try to comply with your regulation. Prof. Tetley has a most informative website, which contains much information of potential interest to Wikipedia users. 132.206.96.76 14:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So much for that....[edit]

...[1] ...This is why we promoted you? Sigh.... LOL. It's fine. - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry 'bout that, but it is a resume of someone whose notability isn't entirely asserted. Don't worry, last I checked the editor of this article was getting some help with a re-write. Wickethewok 16:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nonlifers[edit]

You have earned yourself a place on the lifelist. Nonlifer! KiKiKoKo 19:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're the one who insists on posting nonsense on Wikipedia. If you keep this up, you're headed for a blocking. Wickethewok 19:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...[edit]

...for the redirect on the Triana Orpheus/Triana orpheus thing, I was trying to do it myself once I realized my mistake but it wasn't working. -CWD 19:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • No prob. If you ever create a page under the wrong name again, use the "Move" button at the top of the page to move that particular page to a new name. Wickethewok 19:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ejaz Haider[edit]

Not a copyvio? =\ As I see, it looks like the article is lifted from here almost word-for-word, once we get to the fourth paragraph of that link. But, I'll drop it after this so as not to be an ass. Thanks for the time, either way -- SD patrol can't be easy. Luna Santin 21:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, originally there was no website listed in the speedy tag and I didn't find anything on Google at the time (I didn't that you listed it in the edit summary). In any case, it clearly is a copyvio now that you've pointed out the website. Have a good one! Wickethewok 22:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ahh. At the time I couldn't remember if db-copyvio had that parameter. Smart thing for me would have been to check, of course. :) Thanks. Luna Santin 22:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Adventure[edit]

Why was Mario Adventure deleted, when the consensus seemed overwhelmingly in favor of keeping it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apofisu (talk • contribs)

  • My reasoning is at the top of the AFD. Note that AFD is not a vote and new users' comments are traditionally given less weight. Wickethewok 17:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to add though, that the user that nominated MA for deletion's only edits WERE nominating the deletion for MA. I feel like I should contest the deletion as a bad faith nom; how well do you think that would go? --GUTTERTAHAH 19:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The place to go is WP:DRV for deletion reviews. While it may have been a bad nom, though, I think it will most likely stay deleted for the reasons I listed on the AFD. You're welcome to put it up there in any case. Wickethewok 19:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have submitted the article to Deletion review. Thank you in advance for taking the time out to give your opinion. --GUTTERTAHAH 20:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Computer and video games that have been considered the greatest ever ==

I was thinking of prodding this article, however I wasn't really sure what policy I could prod it under. I'm fairly sure it will go to AfD so should I just drop it on there instead? Whispering(talk/c) 20:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not really sure either. What reason do you think it should be deleted? Its a video game article thats actually sourced for once, but I can see how the title/subject is kind of inherently POV. If you are nominating it for deletion, you should probably just go straight to AFD. 21:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Well I must be triping on something because it is up for AfD at the moment hmmm.... Whispering(talk/c) 22:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, I edit conflicted with you on signing my comment there... -- nae'blis 22:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article just needs a cleanup and a different name. --Rurounigoku78 01:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)==[reply]

DRV[edit]

Interesting. You do give strong reasons in line with policy. However, I think I would have accepted the google hits as indications of its fame, i.e. lots of people are talking about it, and done a no consensus. Let me know the result. You forgot to sign the AFD closure! What do you make of this one? Tyrenius 04:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS I've found a speedy delete just for you! [2] only :) Tyrenius 05:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heh, woops, yeah, forgot to sign it.... 0_o (fixed now). One of my problems with Google hits and blog mentions is that while it may assert some notability, they cannot provide any accurate information regarding the subject. Anyways, in regards to the RFA, I think a lot of the oppose stuff is overblown, especially the English-language stuff. The opposes seem kind of bandwagon-ed on. I have no problems with his support of citation templates or what have you, though this seems like something thats perfectly fixable even after an article is a FA. While it may not be the best reason hold up an article's featureshipness(?), I hardly think this is anything that demonstrative of "closemindedness" and "rigidity". The only concern I may have is that he may not assume good faith enough as demonstrated in SlimVirgin's comments. I think he might jump to conclusions of bad faith a little too soon, especially since he assumed bad faith of an admin. However, this doesn't seem to necessarily be a recurring thing. I should probably add this to current RFA page, which I think I'll do in a bit. Wickethewok 05:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's an odd situation. He didn't realise, apparently, that the RFA had closed (nothing to say it had), which would obviously make the policy changes look somewhat dubious, especially as the one to MOSDATE was wrong anyway. Seems to me mainly about misunderstandng and confusion. Still, what's done is done. I agree with you that one can't rely on accurate info from blogs etc, apart from info that a blogger has written something, that is. See Lumber Cartel and its talk... Tyrenius 20:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadly, Albert Einstein doesn't qualify under speedy deletion, as he hasn't climbed Mt. Everest. ;-) Wickethewok 05:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you caught me out there! Tyrenius 20:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Adventure II[edit]

If possible, please either undelete the article temporarily so I can move it to my userspace, or simply move it ot User:Xkeeper/MA for me (so that it can be moved without undeletion). --Xkeeper 21:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Its now on your subpage. Have a good weekend! Wickethewok 21:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page guidelines[edit]

I thought you might like to check out some work I've done on the guidelines. Tyrenius 08:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good changes, imo. I definitely think that introducing what talk pages are actually for, before getting to abuse is certainly a positive change. The addition of new bullet points like "Make proposals" is good too, as a lot of the time its certainly better to discuss edits first before accidentally starting an editing miniwar or what have you. Nice stuff! Wickethewok 05:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my article keeps being deleted[edit]

I'm trying to post an article (GAGGUL), but it keeps being deleted. I followed the format correctly. What do I need to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartoffeln (talk • contribs)

  • In order to be considered "encyclopedic", biographical subjects need to meet the criteria for notability posted at WP:BIO. Usually a group of several friends is not considered notable. Wickethewok 15:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Media Developer[edit]

I'm trying to write an article, and before I could write my defence, you deleted it!

What's up with you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Databoybiz (talk • contribs)

  • Could you please tell me which article you're referring to? Wickethewok 15:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, ok I found it. The reason it was deleted was because it had very little information and consisted mostly of links to other sites. Next time, please include more information and ensure that your subject meets WP:WEB. Wickethewok 15:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha Rho Omega[edit]

Looking back at the page's logs, I saw that you were the first and fourth person to delete Alpha Rho Omega in less than a day. It's been recreated again, and I've already tagged it as a {{db-copyvio}} just a few minutes ago. As I'm not an admin myself, it might be a good idea to go ahead protect the page from being recreated for a while. Just letting you know, as it seems you've been the main person dealing with this page. — Rebelguys2 talk 22:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alritey, if I see this re-created, I'll probably semi-protect it for a little while. Thanks for the heads up. Wickethewok 00:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Why did you delete this?[edit]

I am new to Wiki, and i am trying to create a page. I don't understand the Alpha Rho Omega wiki was deleted. It seems like there are several other similar pages out there. Examples include Sigma Phi Epsilon, Alpha Delta Gamma, etc... Please help me understand why it was deleted.

Jlauer 02:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)jlauer[reply]

  • You did not provide any proof of notability (eg. what makes this group of people important and not just some guys at a single university. Other times, you copy/pasted content from another website, which is unacceptable as well. In general, its a bad idea to write about yourself/groups you are involved in fyi. All articles should conform to WP:BIO and WP:V. Wickethewok 12:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No More Room in Hell[edit]

I noticed that you deleted the article shortly after its creation; I was still double-checking and fixing up the article when you took it down just minutes after. I'm just wondering why you would see fit to do so, as I was going to link the article to the List of Half-Life 2 mods, and was planning on placing screenshots and an "in development" template on the article.--Chef Brian 17:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • This article was deleted awhile ago on WP:AFD per Wikipedia consesus as it did not meet Wikipedia requirements for verifiability or notability. Wickethewok 17:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • In response to your "notability" claim, please note that there are similar articles (meaning there are articles for other HL2 mods) such as Hidden: Source and Iron Grip, and I did not see how this mod was any different. I planned on increasing the content in the page as I went along the next few minutes. As for verifiability, I posted several links to the website and forums where my claims could be double checked. --Chef Brian 17:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those are not reliable sources. Forums and websites of the product in question are not reliable sources. I agree with you that the other mods are of similar notability/verifiability. Wickethewok 17:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I understand that their POV is not neutral, being that they are the developers, the fact remains that the information they give out is FACT, and so long as a template is placed noting that the mod is in development and that information may change at any time, all information itself is entirely verifiable. --Chef Brian 18:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Typically you need reliable secondary sources for proof of notability as anyone can write whatever they want about their own products, and could certainly have reason to. Wickethewok 18:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your argument pertains to products; not to mods. Mods, being free, have no reason or need to make false claims or fabrications by their developers; these people are doing this for their own interest and the interest of others, not for profit. Aside from this, visual evidence has been presented in the various media updates on the website, and the mod has a ModDBprofile for further verifiability. --Chef Brian 18:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alrite, I restored the article. I am putting it up on AFD to see if other people agree that it should still be deleted. Wickethewok 18:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your consideration. I'll try to keep updating the page and make it as wiki-worthy as possible. =) --Chef Brian 18:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Innuendo in Rocko's Modern Life[edit]

He recreated/reposted an article you just deleted. Can we get protection on it? Thank you! Sparsefarce 17:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm going to see if he in fact has any sources. If he fails to present any, I plan on it. Cheers and such. Wickethewok 17:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin recall[edit]

I'd be interested in your take on my suggestion.[3]. Tyrenius 19:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Tyrenius 02:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message[edit]

Well, thanks for the message, but don't worry, I didn't take the experience harshly. I MAY be relatively new to wikipedia, but I've been working with hrwiki and uncyclopedia for a long time, so I've pretty much got the gist as far as editing tools and formatting, etc. are concerned ;) Anyway, I found out that there were previous attempts at creating NMRiH articles and even a NMRiH wiki, none of which succeeded. Probably would've blown over a lot quicker if anyone had cited that for me earlier X) Cheers --Chef Brian 01:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Awesome! I love hrwiki. Keep up the nice work over there and here! Wickethewok 05:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do you determine what's notable?[edit]

I've included an article about my band Sarkasm but it was deemed not imortant enough by you. Can you please let me know what are your criterias? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdubuc (talk • contribs)

  • Criteria for bands are listed at WP:BAND. It is always a bad idea to write about yourself or people you know directly (see WP:AUTO). Wickethewok 19:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SofTech, Inc.[edit]

You deleted this page earlier today, and another admin deleted it a couple of days ago, and now it's back. I'm tagging it for speedy...delete and protect? Akradecki 20:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion[edit]

Hi there, I am a new admin and just asking for some general advice when working in CAT:CSD since I have seen your work there. What do you normally do with articles that are not "gibberish" per se, but just horribly written one or two-liners about various topics? Other editors seem to tag them with A7, but I'm not sure if things like that really qualify for speedy. Is it better to just remove the tag and tell them to use {{prod}}, or just tell them speedy doesn't apply and leave it at that, or just to delete them? --Aguerriero (talk) 14:42, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hiyas! What I normally do, is if it is a legitimate topic with reasonable language, I'll fix it up into a proper stub. Otherwise, if its so poorly written that its almost useless entirely, I have no qualms with deletion. Often I find that these are usually good faith article creations on topics that already exist and just need a redirect. Are there any specific examples you're wondering about? Wickethewok 14:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks! I can't find any examples right now, but maybe I'll ping you in the future if you don't mind. What you have said is very helpful though, and I will certainly take that approach. --Aguerriero (talk) 15:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem. Different admins have different philosophies on speedy deletion, so my views should certainly not be taken as dogma. Wickethewok 15:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wohlberg not a political candidate[edit]

You're simply not hearing the argument Wickethewok. I've been trying to explain why I posted this information in the first place, but no one seemed to be listening. I respect your opinion, but would like to submit my reasoning behind posting "Wohlberg" or "Charlie Wohlberg". Charlie is not a political candidate. More importantly, he is an individual who undertook a truly historic mission to Germany, as being part of a group of the first Jewish High School students to visit Germany post-holocaust era. This is very significant. The event was covered by national German broadcasting companies, and marked a new effort by the German government to make amends with the Jewish Community. The German Government orchestrated this mission to create connections between Jewish and German students, and in doing so, also gave diplomatic status to the visiters as representatives of American Jewry. Charlie and his colleagues were granted behind-the-scenes access to Goverment officials, and property and were in constant contact with high government officials. So, I would like to submit to you that you allow me to post up this article once again. I apologize for not contacting you sooner, I wasn't sure how. I look forward to hearing from you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EastSidR (talk • contribs)

  • This was already decided at articles for deletion here. If you feel you have a valid reason for recreation, present your argument at WP:DRV. Simply re-posting articles can get you blocked. Wickethewok 19:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what are you talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyler565 (talk • contribs)

Ohad Shem-Tov[edit]

Hi Wickethewok. Can you secure this page as a redirect? (that is not the Ale Yarok page you may be reverted to). An anon keeps on reverting the community descision. Best regards, gidonb 14:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sasha Picture[edit]

Hey Wickethewok! Thank you for the extra info added to the Licensing of Sasha's picture. I was allowed access to that, and other Sasha pictures, at a special (hidden) Media/Press section at www.djsasha.com. Access was granted due to the fact Sasha contributed an 84 minute original set for a documentary film I produced and directed (see Biography on Film, at Juan Carlos Plata). Red Light Magagement issued me authorization to distribute this, and other promotional pictures, in the Juan Carlos Plata Press Kit given to local and international press here in Guatemala in February, 2006.

I see you are an avid contributor to Sasha's Wiki article and for that I salute you! Let's hope this improvement to the article as well as your future efforts help make this article a Featured Article. Greetings from Guatemala my friend. // Virgilrm 17:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ah, very cool. Thanks for adding the Press Kit pics to Wikipedia! Wickethewok 17:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KLF FA nominations[edit]

Hi there. Since you've taken the time and trouble to support my FA nomination for The KLF's ***K the Millennium, I'd like to ask your advice about which - if any - of the following articles I should nominate for FA next. If on the other hand you think none of them are up to par, please say so!

Since my cohort Vinoir is on an indefinite wikibreak, I'm just looking for a little guidance as of course to me all 3 are great! ;) Please reply on my talk page or at WP:KLF. Thanks! --kingboyk 09:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC) P.S. Sorry your FAC for Sasha didn't work out. FTM opened a week before yours and is still running, such is the FA director's discretion I suppose :)[reply]

prod'ing warez groups[edit]

It appears you are putting prod (delete) tags on nearly every group in Category: Warez groups. This seems like destructive behavior to me. I recommend you open a discussion on List of warez groups and get some experienced group consensus before you go after a whole category of articles. --Vossanova o< 20:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm only PROD'ing ones with no reliable sources attached. If you contest the PRODs, I am OK with nomming them for AFD instead. Thanks for the heads up. Wickethewok 20:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

funkitron[edit]

Please do not delete funkitron.

It is one of the oldest and major publishers of casual games on the net. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave635 (talk • contribs)

  • I am certainly not just deleting this on my own - if it is deleted, it will be due to a consesus of Wikipedia editors. The AFD, which you have apparently seen already, is the appropriate place to express your opinion. After 5 days or so, the closing administrator will judge the approximate consesus based on those comments, so its best to have the discussion all in one place. Wickethewok 23:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ultra Records[edit]

Per your request, and my love of Ultra Records, I expanded it extremely. Look at the page now and tell me what you think of it. Ultra Records DJREJECTED 01:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ah, very nice work. Thanks for the improvements! I fixed up some minor things on it as well (format, spelling, etc). Cheers and such! Wickethewok 03:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oncotype DX Page[edit]

Hello Wickethewok-

I'm hoping that you can help me. I noticed that you recommended the page I created about the Oncotype DX assay be deleted and I am trying to figure out what else I can do to make this better. So far, I removed "subjective" content and the rest of what's up there is just facts about what the assay is and how it works. Any direction you could give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your help.

Cheers, Lpfister


Hi Wickethewok- Can you get back to me on the above? Thanks.

  • Heyas. I've restored this article. In the future, if you disagree with a PROD, you can remove it and state your reasoning on the talk page. I would suggest you add references to where you obtained this information. Unless you add secondary reliable sources, you run the risk of the article being deleted again (eg. newspapers, medical journals, etc...). If you are, in fact, associated with the product/company in question, I suggest you avoid editing it, as this can lead to point-of-view issues.Wickethewok 20:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion / Revert[edit]

Can you please detail the reasons for deletion of our contributions? Incorpentertainment

Eeeeeeeeeeeeee![edit]

Thank you! You've made my week! I don't normally resort to squealing with delight, but my very first barnstar seemed to inspire it. Thanks! -- Merope Talk to me/Review me21:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Glad I could make your week, Merope! Have a good one! :) Wickethewok 00:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World of Warcraft instances[edit]

Hey, I'm writing articles for all the instances in World of Warcraft and you went and deleted one while i was still making it. Can i ask why you deleted it and if I'm in any violation of creating these articles tell me where I can write them and on what site. thx. Pariand29 03:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I actually didn't delete it, I turned it back into a redirect. A little while ago there was a debate on whether or not we should have an article for each WC instance, and it was the general consesus that we should not. Wickethewok 13:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok then well can you tell me where i can write these articles cause i have an interest in letting everyone know about these as most people on World of Warcraft dont know much about it. Thx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pariand29 (talk • contribs)
  • If its content that would only be of use for WoW players, I would suggest WoWWiki http://www.wowwiki.com/Main_Page. It would probably be more appropriate for this type of original content, as Wikipedia is for previously published information. Wickethewok 02:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK man thx for the help. as you may be able to tell im new to this so i dont know all the rules yet. thx. Pariand29 03:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem, mate. A general rule of thumb to go by as to whether or not information should be included in Wikipedia is whether or not its been published in a reliable, secondary source (eg. PCWorld, IGN, Yahoo News, etc...). If it hasn't been, its generally safe to assume that this information is not suitable to a general encyclopedia. Best of fun and luck editing, and welcome to Wikipedia! Wickethewok 04:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden[edit]

I live in Sweden, and I have written a lot about artists and groups who are famous in Sweden and the Nordic countries. J 1982 20:15, 14 September 2006 (CEST)

  • Riiight, but you still need to add in some reliable sources of information and claims of notability into your articles regarding Swedish music. Wickethewok 18:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Most of the artists have participated in the Eurovision Song Contest and/or the Norwegian and Swedish preselections for the Eurovision Song Contest. I don't have many sources in English. I thought we have Wikipedia so people can look up things they don't know so much of. J 1982 20:30, 14 September 2006 (CEST)
  • If you can add these claims/sources (even if they are in Swedish) to the articles, that'd be great. Thanks! Wickethewok 18:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From where do you wan't the sources? Wikipedia? If you want information in English, read the Wikipedia articles about them. I have some of the albums. It isn't easy to talk about this, since I don't know what you know about these artists/groups? /J 1982 21:02, 14 September 2006 (CEST)
  • Are you aware that information in Wikipedia articles has to be sourced? For example, provide a link to a newspaper article featuring the content you have included in your article. Wickethewok 01:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GumbyProf Lab2 Page[edit]

Hi there. Thanks for checking out, fixing, and then reverting on my students' page for their class assignment. I think you exactly found the problem they have, which is that by making that page correctly show the prod link, they put the page on the prod list as well. I wonder if you would write on that talk page and tell them what they might do instead. I could do it, but 1) I think it would be good for them to hear it from someone other than me, and 2) I'm not sure what they should do. Is there a way to put the picture of the box but not the actual box? Otherwise, maybe they just need to take it off. Anyway, thanks for any help you can give. GumbyProf: "I'm about ideas, but I'm not always about good ideas." 02:52, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton. I learned something new, too. GumbyProf: "I'm about ideas, but I'm not always about good ideas." 14:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cheers, GumbyProf. Best of luck with the class! Wickethewok 14:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...[edit]

... for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Though, truth be told, I crack up every time it gets vandalized. Cheers. -- Merope Talk 00:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • No one ever vandalizes my page... :( (surprisingly) No prob though! Wickethewok 02:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:USERNAME violation[edit]

This user created an attack page (for which I gave him a {{bv}} warning), but I think his username warrants a block, yes? -- Merope Talk 16:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yup. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers and what have you.  :) Wickethewok 16:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
After re-reading WP:USERNAME, I see I should have reported it on WP:AIV. But thank you! -- Merope Talk 16:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either is fine. The point of WP:AIV is to bring things to the attention of an admin anyway. Wickethewok 16:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

edit summary[edit]

When I first saw that you reverted the addition of Lostpedia to the list of wikis, I was a little confused. Your edit summary simply listed it as a revert, and I couldn't at first see why. Only after spending several minutes looking over the AFD discussions did I then realize that the list mentions that only articles with entries on Wikipedia are allowed on the list. It would have been helpful if you had mentioned this as your reason for reversion in your edit summary. Just wanted to let you know. Dansiman 20:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, I usually do write a proper edit summary when reverting the List of wikis article. I was feeling lazy today though so I didn't bother writing a summary... serves me right... ;-) 'ave a good 'un! Wickethewok 20:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Left-aligned text

Game Mods[edit]

Thanks for having my back. Whispering(talk/c) 21:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • No probs, keep up the good work.  :) Wickethewok 01:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • So is this what it's like to be a admin? You should see all the nasty coments on my talk page. *sigh* And I've only gone through about a 1/4 of the computer game mods catagory. Whispering(talk/c) 14:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Could you meander over to PoE AfD and adress some issues I would but I don't think I could say what needs to be said with out being polite. Whispering(talk/c) 19:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've found that a lot of the time its best to just relax after a few days in and let other legitimate editors get involved. A lot of the time the new socks will just yell a lot and make many unverifiable claims, so its best to just kind of relax a few days into an AFD. Wickethewok 13:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are both lamers who should have your own pages deleted. You contribute nothing but conflict to the wiki. You have no honor or integrity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.43.65 (talk • contribs)

  • I have warned you for not being civil. If you continue, you can and will be blocked from editing. Wickethewok 05:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • In my opinion it is you guys who are not being civil by attacking legit articles for no reason. If you want to make Wiki better then propose how to do that. But to go along and insult legit articles and scream for deletion is petty and flat out wrong. For a free speech area, there seems to be a lot of censorship when the tables are turned against you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by RobRoy78 (talk • contribs)
    • While I disagree with the way he says it, the previous poster has got a point. You do seem to have been a tad over-zealous in marking articles for deletion. In a few cases, a simple tagging of the article should have sufficed. And before you say it wouldn't have done anything, it wasn't even tried, so you can't categorically say that. You just skipped straight to an AfD on the flimsiest of excuses. Please note this is not a personal attack on you, I'm just concerned over a few of your AfD nominations I've seen. The Kinslayer 09:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Challenge ProMode Arena[edit]

Hello. You have voted for deletion of Challenge ProMode Arena article. Your state is: Delete - Lack of multiple reliable sources, not verifiable without original research. I've added some reliable references and proofs of mod's notability (no. of downloads, leauges and world-wide competitions). Please check this article once again and reconsider your statement. Thanks ;) Visor 12:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeFRaG[edit]

Oh, and check also DeFRaG article. I've cleaned up it and added some references. I also gave some proofs of this mod's notability at deletion page. Please reconsider your vote there also. Visor 14:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heya, I've responded to your concerns at the AFDs in question. Wickethewok 18:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Footmen Wars[edit]

I have noticed when you closed the above AfD, you did not remove the category template, "REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD". By deleting this when closing it pulls the discussion out of the category. I have deleted it from this discussion, but if you could review any other closures you have done recently and remove the tag from them it would be greatly appreicated. This is a fairly recent change. The guideline is at WP:AFDC. I have been going through the listing in each of the categories CAT:AFD and removing the tag from pages that are closed and adding the approriate category code for those in the uncatagorised group. Thanks.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 23:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ah, must've missed one. Thanks for nabbing it for me.  :) Wickethewok 23:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firearms (computer game)[edit]

I have no further information. I was only quoting the original AfD discussion. -Harmil 23:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prototype (Band)[edit]

Why did you delete the Prototype (Band) article? If your reason was because it had a small amount of information, I did say that it was currently a stub in the edit summary and that I would work on it later. I worked hard on this. - # BROWNSAY SOMETHING!!! | 14:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

  • The reason I deleted it was because it was an article about a group of people with no claims of notability. I have put a copy in your user space at User:Henry Kricancic/Prototype (Band). Feel free to move it back to the main space once you have added some sort of claim of notability. I also suggest you read WP:MUSIC to make sure the band is notable. Also please list sources you used when writing the article. Cheers! Wickethewok 14:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that they are notable, because five of their songs were featured on the soundtrack for the game "True Crime: Streets of LA" (although, it may have only been the PC version of the game). Here is a link to their website Prototype —Preceding unsigned comment added by Henry Kricancic (talk • contribs)
  • You should include information such as this in the article. As long as you include some independent sources (like music magazines, online professional reviews, whatever), you shouldn't have any problems in the future. Wickethewok 14:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So does this mean that you are now alright with me writing this article in the main space, so long as I add that information in right away? # BROWNSAY SOMETHING!!! | 15:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]
Thanks man # BROWNSAY SOMETHING!!! | 15:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

More game cruft[edit]

Please nominate these page for deletion because they need to be cleaned up, has no sources and contain gamecruft

Duke Nukem 3D monsters

List of Dynasty Warriors characters

Mammoth Tank

BFG10K

BFG9000

Regards Cs california 23:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • When I get a chance, I'll see what I can do to get them cleaned up/deleted/whatever. Wickethewok 13:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Orb[edit]

So, assuming Sasha makes it to FA, are we to look forward to The Orb getting the same treatment? I sure hope so!

Inspired by the nice comments on the latest KLF FA, I'm currently working through the Library of Mu on K Foundation stuff (and a newspaper archive with the keyword "KLF") so check my contribs out some time if you like :) With Vinoir gone I don't get a second opinion :( --kingboyk 22:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would love to take a crack at The Orb. I was originally planning to do The Orb first, but had some trouble finding a large amount of sources. I don't know enough about The Orb history-wise as I would like, so it'd certainly be good for me personally as well. I'm a big fan of your work, so I'll certainly offer my opinion wherever I can. Wickethewok 02:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There ought to be sh*t loads on The Orb, but alas I suspect much of it is hidden away in old music papers, magazines and books rather than online :( I'm currently attending to the Jimmy Cauty article, so no doubt I'll be scratching around for material too when I get to the ambient house part of his career.
      If you want to see some works in progress, I've given K Foundation, K Foundation art award, and The K Foundation burn a million quid a lot of attention in recent days; they're nowhere near ready yet but they're taking shape nicely. I've also removed a small chunk from The KLF and pasted it into K Foundation, and added a couple of new snippets to the former. Feel free to comment or tweak! --kingboyk 14:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking perhaps I'd extend the {{WPKLF}} template to catalogue Orb articles, so that they'd get a Wikipedia 1.0 worklist like this: Index · Statistics · Log. I like the tight focus of WP:KLF so I don't want to bring post-Cauty Orb articles into our scope, but I figure that if in the future there is interest in creating a WP:ORB we could share a template, and perhaps have a parent Wikipedia:WikiProject The KLF and The Orb with the 2 Projects as children. The parent project page would just be a pointer to the 2 projects and a note about the template, basically. On the other hand, I think all of The Orb articles are already within the scope of one or more WikiProjects (WP:WPBIO, WP:KLF, WP:ALBUMS, WP:SONGS)... --kingboyk 14:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hopefully in the future, there might be a demand for WP:ORB or something, but,yeah, right now I don't think there is really a demand for a WP:ORB project. If you wanted to extend the {{WPKLF}} template in future that'd be cool, though maybe just copying most of the code to Template:ORB and replacing relevant text might be easier? Also, in the near future, I may steal your {{The KLF}} and {{The KLF singles}} codez for Orb templates. In case you didn't notice in the article talk, I'm rewriting The Orb article at a user subpage, User:Wickethewok/The Orb, as I tend to leave notes and other assorted nonsense when I write from scratch. Its still excessively rough at the moment and the info is only from one or two sources right now. Wickethewok 14:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think shared templates are the future; they cut down on clutter. Anyway I'll think about it.
Yes, I found your work in progress when checking a what links here for Malicious Damage (which I've interrim redirected to Killing Joke). --kingboyk 15:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks[edit]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 66/11/5. I learned quite a bit during the process, and I expect to be learning a lot more in the days ahead. I will be taking things slowly (and doing a lot of re-reading), but I hope you will let me know if there is anything I can do to improve in my new capacity. Cheers! -- Merope Talk 13:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I know! I didn't plan that. It is fudging a little -- I became an admin last night, but it was after midnight UTC. But the dates in the contribution log match up, so I'm counting it.  :) Also, I wanted to add that I blocked the user who has been repeatedly vandalizing my userpage -- the one you've blocked twice? FrankJordan? Delightful. -- Merope Talk 15:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kylie Said To Jason[edit]

Should you be interested, there's a new KLF article available for your perusal - Kylie Said To Jason. --kingboyk 15:23, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mileage[edit]

Wikipedia, as I understand it, is meant to be an encyclopedia of everything.

You recently removed an article about my prominent brother as if it were a vanity article. On what basis do you make such decisions and why would you do so? If Wikipedians are adding vanity articles, then isn't that part of the open-source encyclopedia of everything? And my brother is legitimately worthy of inclusion in wikipedia. I have not written anything about any other family member.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mileage (talk • contribs)

  • Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia of "everything" per se. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of verifiable information - that is, information that can be confirmed through published reliable sources. Please refrain from writing about yourself or people that you know. Wickethewok 19:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the help with the Earth's Special Forces article--M8v2 03:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of wikis about St. Louis, Missouri[edit]

The page List of wikis about St. Louis, Missouri was a compromise as a result of a discussion on the St. Louis, Missouri talk page, as I noted in the edit summary when I created the page. I don't know why you think it should be deleted when users have decided on this as the best solution, and when you weren't part of the concensus process. --69.150.42.75 03:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Are there really that many wikis that meet WP:WEB about St. Louis that it requires its own article? I don't think there are. Instead of PROD-ing it, I'll take it to AFD instead for a consesus discussion. That cool? Wickethewok 04:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds good to me. The main point of contention is that another user said that there have been many instances of people posting their local wikis about St. Louis on the St. Louis, Missouri page, hence the "List of wikis..." page. Thanks. --69.150.42.75 06:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Trenches[edit]

Hello there, I've updated the "The Trenches" wiki. I hope it's now worth a wiki entry ;)

----Hawk-- 18:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forgotten Hope deletion[edit]

Hi,
I am one of the developers of Forgotten Hope, and it was just brought to my attention that the Forgotten Hope article, as well as the Forgotten Hope 2 articles, had been deleted.

I do not take it personally that you were a strong advocate of the deleting the Forgotten Hope wikipedia article. I understand that you are trying to help maintain Wikipedia as a reliable, and properly sourced, repository of information, which may require the elimination of things which, while potentially interesting in and of themselves, are not sourced well enough to meet the minimum standard of verifiability, even if all the info in the article was self-evidently true, in the eyes of the article's original authors and editors.

While I had nothing to do with creating and editing the original article, I would like to see a properly sourced and verifiable version return to wikipedia. To that end I would like to collect sources that could be used for the resurrection of the article at a higher level of verifiability. I believe the lack of proper sources cited in the original was due to the lack of understanding by the original editors of the difference between truth and verifiablity, but that the verifiability standard could have been met, since, based on my examination of the verifiability and reliable sources [4] pages, there is enough published material to go on, between online reviews, various awards given to the mod by game community sites, interviews, and some print articles.

I don't want to go to this effort, though, only to find that Forgotten Hope is on the deletion list again for the same reasons. The verifiability and reliable source guidelines seem a bit subective, and I am not confident I will interpret them adequately. Could you possibly do me, the hopefully small, favor of pointing out an article of a similar genre (semi-underground popular internet culture), that you feel meets wikipedia's verifiability standards? I could then use it as a baseline for which to collect sources. A game modification would be ideal, but possibly an unsigned band or 'zine or a similar subject would be close enough. I could identify some pages myself, but I do not feel I am enough of a wikipidia veteran to know which are really OK, and which may have inadequate sources, but simply have been overlooked, up till now.

I appreciate your input on this issue.
--Stranger TF

  • There is a formal review process if you wish to question the close of an AFD debate. It is called WP:DRV. If you use this, I suggest you read the guidelines to find out if it is appopriate to use regarding your concerns. As for examples of notable/verifiable mods, one that pops to mind is Garry's Mod. As you say, most mods are "semi-underground", which reduces the chances that there is much reliable information on them. There haven't been any mod articles that I've seen get up to the rank of "good article" or better. I highly suggest that you do not immediately recreate the article, but instead go to deletions for review if you wish to appeal the deletion. Wickethewok 19:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, the Garry's Mod article gives me of baseline target to meet for a very similar subject, which is much clearer than if I took a more mainstream subject as a model, which would be probably be impossible to equal. I was not planning to recreate the article, I just wanted to know how many references and of what quality, I would need to collect. Thanks also for the info about the deletion appeal process. I will start that process once I feel armed with some verifiable references. Thanks very much.StrangerTF 20:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, if you would like a copy of the article as it was before it was deleted, feel free to ask. Have a good one! Wickethewok 20:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would be great, actually. How could this be accomplished? StrangerTF 01:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure Garry's Mod is a great example of a game modification page: it's marked up as "reading like an advertisement" and is in the "has unsourced statements" category. I suggest Dystopia (computer game) is a better example. Which also has been repeatedly nominated for deletion. It's rather a pity that most game modifications have had their pages deleted, seemingly for one reason or another (first Forgotten Hope was VFD'd for being non notable and when that failed, it was VFD'd again shortly after due to not having cited sources). It strikes me somewhat as a crusade -- all the deletions seem to be started by ~4 users and most pass, or are supported by fans of the given mod (at which point accusations of sockpuppetry abound). It is most disappointing that articles on popular game modifications are not welcomed here. Ctz 01:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the Garry's mod article is not a good one. I was merely pointing out an example of a notable mod. Perhaps you could point out a well-written mod article to StrangerTF to help him? Thanks! Wickethewok 05:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

10cc[edit]

Hi there, You made a small edit to the 10cc page. Maybe you can help: why does the list of band members at the end of the infobox not show? I've tinkered with it repeatedly, compared it with infoboxes from other acts (Led Zep etc), but still the list of names doesn't appear. I've contemplated changing the infobox to a different template -- there seems to be a range for musical artists, bands etc .... any thoughts? Grimhim 21:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Just like that. Thanks mate. Grimhim 23:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something you might be interested in[edit]

Since you requested deletion for the One Peice attacks, I thought you could help out here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dragon Ball special abilities. Hydromasta231 04:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of Enfield Brass article[edit]

I'm, very upset that you have removed my article on the Enfield Brass band. While it it true the article said "c-grade" this is only relevant to contesting regulations and has no bearing on the quality of the ensemble. If it would make you feel better, I will remove this information, or better specvify that Enfield Brass is a brass band that contests at C-grade. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Band Boy (talk • contribs)

  • I have restored the article and nominated it for AFD instead, where the community decides whether to delete it or not. Go HERE for the debate. Wickethewok 23:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

who are you to tell me I'm wrong ?[edit]

First of all I would like to point out that I began to edit the page because the information you have on there is incorrect !!!! it wasn't Andrew Archer and Scott Dawson that founded Global Underground it was James Todd and Andrew Horsfield, the reason I know this is because I worked for them for 6 years !!

I admit that a few things that were changed were in jest and obviously not correct but 80% of what was added is THE TRUTH, half the things written on here for the description are almost straight from GU press releases and quite frankly a load of bollox, I was adding information that (as I worked from them) know to be right and if you dont like it, is it really your job to hide the truth and print lies ?

Yours sincearly

John-Paul Denton

  • First of all, chill out dude. Second, feel free to change the information if you know it is incorrect. This is Wikipedia after all. Third of all, I wasn't the one who added that to the article. I've removed that information until its verified one way or the other. As far as I can tell, you've never made an edit before, so I don't know why you're accusing me of removing your edits. If you're the anon editor who made this edit regarding Global Underground being Nazis and what have you, I must inform you that this is unacceptable and you will be banned if you vandalize pages. Wickethewok 02:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy editing[edit]

Hey man, If you're doing a lot of editing on an article can you put {{inuse}} on? I have a little tweak for The Orb and I just know I'm gonna get edit conflicted but I won't know you've finished :) --kingboyk 19:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heyas. I'm going to be starting stuff on the non-history sections, so I won't be working on the history/bio stuff. Wickethewok 19:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Did you get my email? I have Orb stuff from a newspaper archive for you. --kingboyk 11:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, sir. Did you not get my email? I'll email you again. Wickethewok 13:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • En route, 3 emails. --kingboyk 13:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bf2 ranks[edit]

Hi Wicketthewok,

I was looking for the article BF2 ranks, and ended up in a page saying it's no longer there. The .log shows that you moved it to "Table of ranks in Battlefield 2", but it's not there either. Could you fix the link or restore the article when you get the chance?

16:02, 28 September 2006 Wickethewok (Talk | contribs) deleted "Battlefield 2 Ranks" (r2 content was: '#REDIRECT Table of ranks in Battlefield 2' (and the only contributor was 'Zxcvbnm'))

Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Il consiglieri (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Total Annihilation mods[edit]

Hi there. I undeleted the List of Total Annihilation mods article that you have proposed for deletion, as it has been recreated with the same content just after it has been deleted. I nominated the article for deletion. --Conti|✉ 01:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the heads up, ContiE. Wickethewok 05:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing notable artists on the Live page[edit]

I noticed that once again you've removed "redlinks" from the Ableton page. In the most recent artist that was probably justified, but in the case of revision they are in fact notable and in many cases are listed on the Ableton site in their list of notable users. Red-links do not need to be removed; they simply indicate portions that haven't been written yet. (Just for reference, I wrote the Live article, so I'm not just sounding-off.) Granted, it looks like we may do away with the list in general, but the point still stands. Scott.wheeler 11:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Feel free to add them back in if you like. I'm aware that red links don't need to be removed, its just that these type of lists seem to attract spam easily. I think I may start the category today btw, since no one has objected. Wickethewok 13:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Jackson Jihad[edit]

Please review this newest AfD, your opinion would be appreciated. PT (s-s-s-s) 00:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steadman[edit]

I wouldn't say Steadman are notable either, but Elektra pushed them enough so they would probably scrape through an AFD. However the albums flopped (or at least I can't find anything written about them or evidence of chart-placings). Albums don't get a free pass. Catchpole 15:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I make no claims as to the band's notability. Feel free to nominate the albums separately on AFD if you wish. Wickethewok 15:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Demented Cartoon Movie on deletion review[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Demented Cartoon Movie. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. (Yes, sorry about the unsign. Must've had a refresh problem, because I was sure I had signed it! Thanks!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridesim (talk • contribs)

  • Evidently, the majority of anonymous Wikipedia users don't approve of you deleting the article on The Demented Cartoon Movie, as someone has requested that the article be put back on the website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.212.78 (talk • contribs)
  • Actually, so far there have been four endorses for my deletion and no one else has asked to have it overturned. If you would like to participate, I suggest you go HERE to weigh in. Wickethewok 21:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happend to the "Mega Man Weapons" article?[edit]

I am doing a report on the Weapons in the Megaman World (More especifically The Mega Buster and X-Buster) I was using it as reference but i notice it was deleted, and now most of the information in my report cannot be proven, i was wondering is it possible to to repost the same article and if not can u give me the references to the article since i dont have the cache of the article and the i didn't copy the references either. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiMCX (talk • contribs)

Microscopics[edit]

Hi Wickethewok

Microscopics is the new label that has just released the remastered version of the much sought after Gas 0095.

http://www.discogs.com/forums/topic?topic_id=113720

http://discoproductions.org/drama/viewtopic.php?t=421

This is very big news in the ambient/ electronic community.

I feel that it is inaccurate to redirect 'Microscopics' to 'Microscope', especially as 'Microscopics' isn't even in the dictionary. Microscopics is a record label. If people want to find Microscope they will enter Microscope.

Also, someone (Vitamin?) got there before me.  :-)

Thank you Wicketthewok :-)

Jenny

  • Has the label been written about by independent sources? It doesn't even seem to be listed on discogs yet. I'm just concerned that it meets the criteria in WP:MUSIC and WP:RS. The information might be better served in the Mat Jarvis article, since neither of those articles really has much available information. I'll leave that up to you though. Wickethewok 17:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • OK, great. I'm sure it won't be long before it's in Discogs. I've already seen links added from some pretty major, non-music sites.

Thanks Wickethewok

Jenny

The Demented Cartoon Movie (again)[edit]

Many people are still quite upset about you deleting the aforementioned article and are still demanding that you put it back as soon as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.212.78 (talk • contribs)

  • I have no idea who these "many people" are. So far none of them have weighed in HERE, which would be the appropriate venue for voicing your concerns. Also, it was not I who singlehandedly decided to delete this article – I judged this based on consesus of Wikipedia editors. Wickethewok 22:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Proposed deletion of Mobile Weapon[edit]

I have noticed that you have tagged Mobile Weapon for a propsed deletion, due to the following reason Non-notable game. Fails WP:RS, WP:V. 20 unique hits for "Mobile Weapon" "tyler projects", and would like to express the objection regarding to it.

I would like to point out that, according to the the second hosting site (Newgrounds/adventure games), this game has been viewed for 280,602 times, and I haven't included the figures from the official website. I personally believe that it is not advertisement to include such figures, just to prove that it has a good amount of propularity.

Following the second point, for any deepened discussion, they are either checked against the programmer's information (both on their blog, and related discussions on their forum), or the information are simply presented in the game--in the background story section. For example, by clicking the "story" at the title screen of the Mobile Weapon 0 section, a player can see the story so far. The wikipedia article is merely paraphrasing it.

However, I'll be happy to take notice and amend the above article should the need arises. If necessary, please put the above text into the talk section of the article.

In order to maintain the integrity of this discussion, please answer on this page. Alternatively, I can be reached on the user talk page. See: User_talk:Blackhawk_charlie2003. --Blackhawk charlie2003 06:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Typically, subjects only get their own articles if their verifiable by secondary sources, that is, those outside of the people who created it. If you like, this can be taken to AFD instead for a wider debate. Wickethewok 12:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A quick google turns out that there are 20+ sites that are either hosting, or having a review of the game. IMO the notability should not be an issue. However, it may seem appropriate to clean up the section if it contains possible original research. I'm currently looking for external sources for further reference. For now, it may seem more appropriate to tag it with a cleanup. I have placed suitable tags to the sections that require rewriting / cleanups. On the other hand, the reviews from various sites may be incorporated into the gameplay section. I hope that it'll help. --Blackhawk charlie2003 03:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think any of the sites would qualify as a reliable source. If you wish, we can take this to AFD instead of PROD. Wickethewok 03:34, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minerals (StarCraft) and Vespene gas[edit]

I've contested the prod for these two articles. Please feel free to take them to AfD -- I just think that articles this old deserve real debate. --N Shar 23:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sasha[edit]

Re: 'has been influential on'. Hey, seems to me that the phrase 'influenced', rather than 'has been influential on', implies past tense, as if his influence has passed. Not trying to fight you on this, just trying to incorporate the fact Sasha is still an active DJ. Good work and great article, BYT. - Coil00 00:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not sure exactly, but it seems like that if they were influenced at some point, it follows that it still has a current effect on them. I hope to get the language up to FA quality in the near future. Thanks for all your help btw! Wickethewok 07:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem - it's interesting to work like this with another user, I notice we're correcting each others grammer ;) Anyway, I think your very close to getting this to the front page, the copyedits needed were very minor, and you've done great work to bring it to this stage. - Coil00 21:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cheers, Coil! Wickethewok 21:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BF2 Table of Ranks[edit]

If it wouldn't be too much of a burden, I would appreciate a copy of the table of ranks page for BF2 as it was before it got deleted. Table of ranks in Battlefield 2. The associated discussion page would also be appreciated. Alyeska 16:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've put it at User:Alyeska/temp. Keep in mind that this is only temporary and will need to be deleted at some point. Wickethewok 18:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1987 got promoted :)[edit]

That's 4 FAs from 44 articles - 9%! :) No idea which one to take to FAC next though. (Suggestions welcome). --kingboyk 13:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • High five! (wha-pish!) I'd vote for Chill Out to be next, as thats my fav KLF album and KLF subject I know most about. Whatever you end up choosing though, I'll try to add whatever info I have or, at the very least, provide a second set of eyes. Lemme know which one you end up picking. Wickethewok 13:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's a good idea. It's about time we concentrated on some classic KLF as opposed to JAMs crap, K Foundation antics etc. --kingboyk 13:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cool, hopefully I'll get a chance to do some article writing soon. I'd like to help out where I can. Wickethewok 14:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

‎Responses to Michael Schumacher's retirement[edit]

If you have a moment, can you take a look at this article ‎Responses to Michael Schumacher's retirement? I tagged it db-nocontext, but the original author has made some small improvement. I suggested he place a hangon tag and I would request an administrator take a look. I still believe it is a mess, and in need of a great deal of work, not least of which would be a page move and a new title. Your thoughts would be appreciated. ---Charles 18:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is now a moot point, as NawlinWiki has already deleted it, and advised the author on how to deal with the matter in a more appopriate manner. Thanks anyway. ---Charles 18:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again on Forgotten Hope[edit]

Hello. Can you return the article Forgotten Hope 2 to User:StrangerTF's page for example. But, Forgotten Hope has been reviewed by multiple gaming magazines, for example the biggest magazine in Germany, GameStar, atleast one other German magazine, some English language magazines and Finnish Tilt-lehti magazine which I own a copy. here is one scan about FH2.

And here is my scan. How do you suggest I use it as an reference? Should I somehow cite some info with "Tilt magazine March 2004, p. 78" or just write that it was reviewed like it's said in Garrys mod. FH2 also was 2nd in the mod of the year moddb. It seems a bit pointless but as it's needed... --Pudeo (Talk) 18:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I will move it to User:Pudeo/temp. If you wish for the article to be brought back into the article namespace, I suggest you take this issue to WP:DRV to get the article undeleted. There are several citation styles you can use, see WP:CITE. For magazines I recommend using {{cite news}} or some other template. Wickethewok 19:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MacIrssi Deletion[edit]

I saw you deleted my article, why? I don't get your reason. MacUsr 21:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was deleted because of a prod tag that was left on it. The user who left it there requested deletion due to a lack of sources and claims of notability. Since the tag remained there for 5 days uncontested, I deleted the article. If you wish to have it undeleted, please follow the few short simple steps at WP:DRV. Wickethewok 21:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned commentary and edits[edit]

I prefer to remain an anonymous editor on wikipedia, there is no need to add an "unsigned comment left by <name>". Please refrain from doing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.172.183 (talk • contribs)

  • If you don't sign or whatever, then we can't tell who its from. This disrupts the conversation and makes it very difficult to tell who said what. Can you just sign "ANON" or something then? Because otherwise its difficult to tell where one person stops talking and another person starts. Wickethewok 23:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Modus Operandi (online game)[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you deleted this article. I guess it had a prod tag on it? I'm sorry that I didn't notice it to remove it. In any case, with all due respect, I would like to please protest the deletion. Could you please undelete the article? If someone else wants to AfD it, we can go through that process, but I still think that the subject is notable. Thanks, --71.81.246.83 04:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • This should be taken to WP:DRV for a quick review. Just follow the couple easy steps listed there for "PROD"s. Wickethewok 13:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Messages[edit]

Does anyone respond to anonymous messages anymore? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.212.78 (talk • contribs)

  • I do (clearly!  ;-P). Is there something I can help you with...? Wickethewok 01:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Natural Selection (computer game)[edit]

Hi, I added a line about the popularity of the mod along with a link to Valves official list for reference, as per the AfD. I was wondering if you could suggest any other changes you think should be made to the article? Thanks, The Kinslayer 17:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm, maybe some footnotes or something in the gameplay section to say where the information came from. Right now there's a bunch of info there, but you can't really tell where it comes from (I assume from the NS website, but I could be wrong). Also, there's still some POV/OR stuff in there about what typically happens in games (camping, strategies, techniques) - this information should probably either be cited or removed. Also, pretty much almost any information from other outside reliable references would be great and most likely usable in the article. Wickethewok 17:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shades of Gray[edit]

Just out of curiosity, why did u delete the shades of gray article? Sure it was not the longest, but there is a large fan base behind the movie and its creator (www.jeskid.com and www.jeskidsworld.com) just to name a few. Is there any way possible to get the site un-deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.8.129.223 (talk • contribs)

The 4th Coming on deletion review[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The 4th Coming. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean K (talk • contribs)

Nanaca Crash Article[edit]

Please do not delete the article---its actually popular to other areas as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JZX100 (talk • contribs)

well, I might have one idea of merging it to the Cross+Channel (Can't stop thinking about it) article, if thats ok. JZX100 8:53, 29 October 2006

  • You should probably bring that up in the same place as above. That, too, goes through a community consesus. Wickethewok 19:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orb[edit]

Great work on Orb related articles man. Don't forget to add categories though! --kingboyk 18:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yah, thank ya sir. Thanks for helping out btw. I'll try to remember the cats. Wickethewok 19:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dancing Water[edit]

Hi, You deleted the entry for Dancing Water. Can you tell me why in more detail and how you recommend creating a listing on this site. I thought a site (wikipedia.org) talking about NZ wine/wineries would want a contribution from as many of the wineries in NZ as possible. NZ is made up of some 500+ wineries, the majority of which are small. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.48.197 (talk • contribs)

    • Would have it not been more appropriate to use {{not verified}}

OR {{unsourced}} in the first instance for this information?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.48.197 (talk • contribs)

  • If the PROD'er or I thought they were, in fact, sourceable, then yes. However, I did not believe it to be sourceable, I went ahead and followed through with the PROD. Slapping a tag on unverified/unverifiable information doesn't make it OK. Wickethewok 22:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

demented cartoon movie[edit]

WHY DID YOU DELETE THE ARTICLE "The Demented Cartoon Movie!"??? I found it helpful! please undelete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happy8 (talk • contribs)

You deleted the list of mario items.[edit]

Like the title says, you deleted the List of Mario Series items, with no explanation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.62.244 (talk • contribs)

  • The PROD on it expired and I agreed with the deletion reasoning. If you wish to protest it, go to WP:DRV and follow the simple instructions for articles deleted using the PROD process. Wickethewok 06:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ambar - deleted and then restored[edit]

Not sure if this has been pointed out, but it looks like AfD screwed up. Just to start the ball rolling and institute a culture change, I'm trying to get all admins closing things at AfD to remember to check the page history of an article before deleting, so that drastic changes in the nature of a page are spotted, and also urging those voting at AfD to do the same. See the following for details:

Copied to closing admin, restoring admin, deletion nominator, all who voted in the AfD discussion, and the AfD talk page. Carcharoth 23:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I'm back[edit]

Thanks for the message - I see you're an admin now, congrats :) Proto::type 23:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, they hand out the sysop bit just for asking these days ;) --kingboyk 18:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Empires[edit]

That AFD is a fucking farce, you might like to see my comments here and here. Anyone who proclaims it to be a popular mod is lying. - Hahnchen 16:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the update Hahnchen and thanks for digging through this now ugly AFD - its practically unreadable. I agree it should be re-done as there's no way a closing admin can come to any conclusion reading that. If its closed no consesus or keep, I'll probably take it to DRV to see if other people think it should be re-run. Wickethewok 16:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you want to start it afresh be my guest. I have absolutely no problems with that. Discounting the sockpuppets and those arguing against policy looked pretty clear to me though :) Ball's in your court matey! --kingboyk 18:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, if you managed to sort through it, props to you!  ;-) Wickethewok 19:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Layo and Bushwacka page[edit]

Hi,

Sorry I'm not sure if this is the correct place to post. I'm Khalil Yousaf, the DJ at the Savannah Beach Club who mixed the Finally accapella with Love Story...Just wondering how you got that info for the Layo and Bushwacka page! I can confirm it happened on Sept 11th 2002 but I never thought this information would ever come to light! I guess what I'm trying to say is "thank you!"

Cheers Khalil

Thanks for the info Wickethewok :) KhalilYousaf

Nanaca Crash edit[edit]

Hi there, thanks for reminding me to sign in - appreciate it :P --Storm Boy 09:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wickethewok/Archive_3&oldid=1184721458"