User talk:AmiDaniel/Archive1

This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome

Hello, AmiDaniel/Archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 06:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

• Just a reminder...any information about you goes on your User Page only! Kukini 06:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Many things here to help kill boredom

Happy hunting...have fun! Kukini

Origin of water on the earth

Hi there, it seems we are both translating the same article. I've put up a little more - do you agree with the translation generally? I'm sorry I didn't put up any indication I was working on it, as I knew it might take a while what with my current workload; I think we may have to make a decision as to who translates what to avoid confusion! Your call! Cheers, Mark Lewis 12:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Germany portal and noticeboard

I just noticed your nice translation of Sinzig. If you translate more Germany-related articles (not stubs), it would be great if you could list them in the right section on the portal page. (Sinzig, alas, is a bit old already and would only be there for a day and a half, so I won't list it now). Also, I would like to invite you to the German-speaking noticeboard, another good place to talk about and list translation requests. Hope to see you there, and happy editing! Kusma (討論) 20:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Academic dress of Durham University

User:Veledan has sugested that I tag Academic dress of Durham University as WP:CSD A9. My intention is to have Academic dress of Durham University as the main article and Academic dress of the University of Durham as a redirect pointing to that page. To do this I first need to remove Academic dress of Durham University so that I can then move the article there. The motivation is for consistancny of names of universities, so that they reflect the names actually used by the university and also it is consitant with the name of the main article about the university Durham University. I can only do this if there is consensus, so unless you object I'll proceed with that action. --Salix alba (talk) 00:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

UTC+0:30

thx for changing your mind :-). Tobias Conradi (Talk) 00:58, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Please stop tormenting me

Please stop torturing me!!! How would you feel if everywhere you looked you were forced to see this being staring back at you with that quizzical look on its deranged little face File:AAAAA.gif? Please go to my userpage or my talk page to read the hideous and tragic story of my existence. I think you will come to sympathize with my plight and will not be so quick to judge me. RotundityTheory

A tragic tale, but you nonetheless need to stop vandalizing or you will be blocked. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

World War II

Thanks for your message. It seems to me that not to say the Versailles Treaty was unfair is the actual 'vandalism'. That has been accepted by just about every politician and every historian since 1919. If it had not been unfair how do you explain its unpopularity and the rise of Hitler? 213.122.118.148 09:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• I have removed my vandalism warning from your talk page. This edit was not vandalism but a content dispute. I apologize. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. 213.122.118.148 09:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

DDT (band)

Hi AmiDaniel. You just treated by edit in the 'DDT (band)' article as vandalism but it is not. According to the book "DDT Empire" ("Империя ДДТ") by Nikolai Kharitonov (Николай Харитонов), the "Vremya" albom was recorded not in Sverdlovsk, but in Moscow, in a studio in the district of Serp i Molot. Also a number of web search requests return the place of recording as Moscow. User:62.118.80.132

Sorry, will remove warning immediately. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Firkraag

It's me Nick, about the article firkraag, i actually wrote a few sentences before just for a quick, but now there is a lot more and i wrote why its a significant article, check it out now.

Pece Kocovski 09:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

As you've asserted the significance of the topic, I've removed my speedy delete nomination. The article still needs serious improvement, but I do believe the topic warrants an article on Wikipedia. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Its okay, if you have deleted the article without telling me, then i would have been upset. don't worry, before i only wrote what i could remember from playing the game, and readind the walkthrough (at the top of my mind). I'll put on some more info later.

Pece Kocovski 22:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Time Assasins

I wrote the Time Assasins article but, due to the incorrect spelling I deleted it and began a new one spelt correctly. I do not belive this to be vandalsim. --Science Lord 11:06, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I will remove this warning from your talk page and restore your request for speedy deletion. AmiDaniel (Talk) 11:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandal Hamsacharya dan

Thank you ever so much!

No To Frauds

Book of Mormon

The section I removed was preachy, POV, had no introduction, and generally felt out of place in the article. It had been posted only hours earlier by another user who said nothing on the talk page. I posted my reasons for removing the section on the discussion page and believe they are valid ones. Had the section been rewritten NPOV, had a significant point, or been placed in the section devoted to critical analysis, I would not have removed it. As I type this, other users have agreed with me and attempted to remove the same section as well. I kindly request my vandalism charge be reconsidered. Thanks for your time. Mapache 06:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep your suggestions in mind Mapache 06:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism warning removed: not vandalism, but a content dispute. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Please block user for vandalism

User:24.77.227.107 continues to vandalize Big Bang. Please block. Thanks. --ScienceApologist 08:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Kent State University Phone Center

I have edited Kent State University Phone Center. Please leave it for those who are interested in the workings of the university —This unsigned comment was added by Adegaeta (talk • contribs) .

Cosmopolitan (magazine)

Excuse me for my so called vandalism, but are you or are you not a smoker of hashish? —This unsigned comment was added by 60.229.63.200 (talk • contribs) .

If that is not vandalism, then maybe I am smoking hashish. AmiDaniel (Talk) 17:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Igor Cassini

What are you talking about, re vandalism? I'm editing Oleg Cassini and you sent me an email about some sort of vandalism. 67.142.130.21 02:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I added information re Dimitri Cassini, which is taken directly from his resume and other online sources. How is this vandalism, pray tell? My member name is Mowens35, and although I have signed on, it is not showing up. 67.142.130.21 02:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I hope I am now signed on and you remove the erroneous vandalism report. Don't you think it would be more politic to send a message with a question than to preemptorily declare an edit "vandalism"? 67.142.130.21 02:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed, see Incorrectly Reverted Edits. AmiDaniel (Talk)

Frankly, it might not be the most polite way to deal with vandalism, but I simply can't ask every user I believe has vandalized to explain their edits ... that's what edit summaries are for. I do, however, try to provide as much information about edits I revert as I can, so that users like yourself can explain themselves and don't simply wonder why their edits simply disappeared. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

thanx

i feel welcome already! could you possibly tell how i can get those cool little boxes like, user is a native Afican, she is a drug user/ user is a pacifist etc and how do i put it on my user page like yours. thanks --Crazypinkster 08:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC) whoa this is real difficult, how about a step by step guide! or is there anywy you can add it to my user page? hope so, sorry for bugging you so much.......Crazypinkster 09:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Automated vandalism log

I really dig your log dealy. is it in your monobook.js or something? I'd really like to add something like that to my account. stubblyhead | ^T/_c 09:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for your quick reply. I'm just really jealous of your cool toy. Seems like you've come a long way in a short time. Do you know if other people have similar tools that are already availabe so I can get an idea of how it works? stubblyhead | ^T/_c 16:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome

Thanks, AmiDaniel (whatever your name is), but what do you mean by the editing changes to the Buru pages? And you can call me by my nickname Remy. I'm English, but I like the name Remy.

Steve Filson

Steve Filson is an Eagle Scout and wants to bring our troops home.

Do you still think I'm a vandal? 132.241.245.49 22:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed, see Incorrectly Reverted Edits. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Edit summaries

Sorry about that....I didn't receive the message that you sent me about edit summaries until i finished editing the Nowitzki page, and therefore I'm really sorry. I will use edit summaries every time from now on, thanks for the heads up! MCDRLx 07:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Why be nice to vandals?

As in this comment. Do you really think this is going to deter anyone? Seems to me this is a mass WikiDelusional concept; just be nice to the vandals and they'll see the light. I really am curious.

I could see being nice to someone who might have, say, accidently blanked a page, but someone who leaves racist comments? --ILike2BeAnonymous 09:33, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the mentality is "let's be nice to them and they'll go away," but rather that vandals are usually looking to provoke a reaction and giving them one often encourages them further. A message that let's them know that their vandalism was innapropriate and that it has been spotted and reverted after mere seconds, as will any vandalism they add, seems to be most effecting in detering vandals. I personally feel it acceptable to tolerate one or two cases of vandalism from newbies (as in the case you mentioned), as they are usually just testing, seeing whether anyone really can edit the encyclopedia. Leaving them an insulting and "uncivil" message will then do nothing but discourage them from contributing positively to Wikipedia. If they continue to vandalize, they will then be warned that such behavior will result in their being blocked. I, too, am very annoyed and disgusted by the crap that vandals add to pages, but cussing them out about it makes us no better than they are. You might want to check out Wikipedia:Do not insult the vandals. I don't feel the guideline applies in every situation, but it does tend to be a decent general rule of thumb. AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

On another note, when dealing with anonymous users it's very possible that an unintended user may receive your "uncivil comment" and might feel insulted or annoyed by you--might even refer to you as a "vandal." I personally am against anonymous editing, but so long as we still have shared IP users, it's essential to consider that your remarks may be received by the wrong person. AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Fine, doesn't bother me in the least. We're talking about situations, for the most part, like schools that have a shared IP address and maybe Internet cafes. So just consider it a form of collective punishment. There's a chance the wrongly-offended person knows the vandal and might get them to stop. Normally, I'm against the idea of collective punishment in the real world (for a particularly egregious example, the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis), but in this context, the "virtual" world, I think the bad effects are inconseqential by comparison. So what if a few people get offended? Get over it. --ILike2BeAnonymous 22:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

AOL IPs are actually often shared by thousands of users (which one could easily say is their punishment for using AOL lol jk). It's already bad enough when they come to Wikipedia for the first time and immediately see this, but it's much worse if their first experience on Wikipedia is having someone call them shithead, pussie, and being told to stop "adding their racist crap." Imagine if you were told that the first time you ever logged on to Wikipedia? I doubt you'd come back. I personally don't feel it appropriate to punish people for the acts of others because they're using the same IP as a vandal, just as I wouldn't send someone in the real world to prison for having the same name as a "terrorist". Therefore, it's always best to just assume good faith and be civil. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, OK, I guess it would be a bit extreme to lash out at the entire AOL-verse of users (joke received–serves them right for signing up for that service, right?); I forgot about that one. But a school? Anyhow, point taken. --ILike2BeAnonymous 23:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding "Dreamless" on the Amazon Trio page...

The "Correct" mistranslation is "Remless" not "Dreamless" If you read the subtitles on the uncut DVD or even listen to the dub track you will clearly see/hear "Remless." Also, there is no 'd' sound in either the Japanese or English pronounciation of "Lemures," so "Dreamless" would be an unlikely translation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.81.188 (talk • contribs)

Warning removed. See Incorrectly Reverted Edits or the user's talk page for more details. AmiDaniel (Talk) 08:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Ohio

The great Casey Benedict does live in Ohio and it should be noted on the front page of Ohio. If it were not for Casey Benedict Ohio would not exist! —This unsigned comment was added by 71.65.78.174 (talk • contribs) .

I still believe the edit in question to be vandalism. Casey Benedict is a non-notable person (see Casey Benedict at Blogger.com). AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...

Thanks for reverting my user page ;) --Greedy 21:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

jackson 5

BUT THOSE WERE THE MEN WHO BURGLED MY HAMS!!! HOW CAN I NOT SEEL VENGENCE UPON THE PACK OF VISCOUS HAMBURGLERS!?!!??! —This unsigned comment was added by 64.12.117.5 (talk • contribs) .

It's really not funny. Stop wasting my time and destroying the hard work of others. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, using sockpuppets to evade a block is not permitted. I'm going to list this account on WP:AIV as a sockpuppet of 64.12.116.137. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:58, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Felhound

The subject is non-notable. --ProDeletionist 06:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand what on earth you are doing, but I'm tempted to accuse you of vandalism. Every contribution you've ever made (since you became a user 6 minutes ago) has been to post AfD notices on clearly notable articles. Read over Wikipedia:Deletion and I urge you to stop at once or I will report you to WP:AIV. You cannot nominate an article for deletion without providing a clear reason. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Prodeletionist

This editor [1] is putting AFD's on several aricles. He must be mad at something.--71.28.246.73 06:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I've reported him to WP:AIV. Hopefully he'll be blocked shortly. Very advanced form of vandalism. This damage will take an hour to undo. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, an admin got to him quickly and has already removed all his AfD tags. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

User:ProDeletionist

Yeah, saw him via the vandalism channel on IRC. Waited about ten minutes to give him a chance to justify his AfDs. Per the advice of others on the channel, blocked him for disruption. Pepsidrinka 06:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Iranian peoples

I just accidentally stumbled upon this edit war, but I have to say the four tags you've placed on this article appear to serve only to undermine the validity of the article in order to make a point. That can easily be considered vandalism, as can WP:3RR, no matter who is right and who is wrong. I urge you to remove at least three of your tags, leaving perhaps "the facutality of this article is disputed," and please have a mature discussion about your dispute rather than simply spitting on the article. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

They constantly keep removing tags. so that now although the article is totally wrong but I'm afraid of 3RR to add it again. I want to add the tag but don't know really what to do. Xebat Talk + 06:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

It's perfectly legitimate to leave one tag, such as {{totallydisputed}}, on the article if you disagree with aspects of the article--that is until one side of the dispute has gained a clear consensus. The problem here is that posting four redundant tags appeared nothing more than a blatant attack on the article and its editors. Anyone coming to read about Iranian People would see those tags and go running the other direction, convinced that the article had absolutely nothing to offer. In looking over the talk page, no one is really presenting any clear arguments about what they find wrong in the article, just one side saying, "the article sucks," and the other saying, "the article is wonderful!" I in no way want to take sides on this issue, but I feel the issue should be discussed. Therefore, to prevent you from being targeted for 3RR, I will add the 'totallydisputed' tag to the article for you, given that you stop adding ridiculous and degrading tags to the article and that you have a mature discussion and explain what you disagree with--that is, if you want me to. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. I see you've added a reasonable tag to the article. If they keep removing it, just let it go, discuss it on the talk page, or, if necessary, seek mediation. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

It is a long time that i've been sitting behind the computer and discussing But really they push their personal POV. This is my link http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/I/R/Iranianpeoples.htm and the other one is their link, their link does not describe Iranians but Kurds. But they say no, no, no, it is clear without explaining. they only say the link is clear. while it is totally irrelevant. Xebat Talk + 07:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I really don't want to get involved with the actual content dispute, just so long as the dispute is being discussed thoroughly and fairly. The only advice I'll give you is to try and reach a compromise, rather than refusing everything but your own opinion. Unfortunately, if every other editor disagrees with you entirely, you will not be allowed to include any of your opinions in the article; however, there may be some common ground where both you can express your opinions in the article, and they can express theirs. Once a consensus has been reached, however, it really is common courtesy to concede and stop pushing the issue. Please try to be civil in your arguments. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Esperanza!

Welcome, AmiDaniel/Archive1, to Esperanza, the Wikipedia member association! As you might know, all the Esperanzians share one important goal: the success of this encyclopedia. Within that, we then attempt to strengthen the community bonds, and be the "approachable" side of the project. All of our ideals are held in the Charter, the governing document of the association.

Now that you are a member you should read the guide to what to do now or you may be interested in some of our programs. A quite important program is the StressUnit, which seeks to support editors who have encountered any stress from their Wikipedia events, and are seeking to leave the project. So far, Esperanza can be credited with the support and retention of several users. We have a calendar of special events, member birthdays, and other holidays that you can add to and follow.

In addition to these projects, several more missions of Esperanza are in development, and are currently being created at Esperanza/Possibles.

I encourage you to take an active voice in the running of Esperanza. We have a small government system, headed by our Administrator general, Celestianpower, and guided by the Advisory Committee comprised of KnowledgeOfSelf, JoanneB, FireFox and Titoxd. The next set of elections will be in February, and I would be glad to see you vote, or even consider running for a position.

If you have any other questions, concerns, comments, or general ideas, Esperanzian or otherwise, know that you can always contact me via email or talk page. Alternatively, you could communicate with fellow users via our IRC channel, #wikipedia-esperanza (which is also good for a fun chat or two :). If you're new to IRC, please see the IRC Tutorial, which was written by one of our members. I thank you for joining Esperanza, and look forward to working with you in making Wikipedia a better place to be!

Thanks! - Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 10:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Tramadol report on WP:RFI

I've added it to the watchlist, though it seems to have died down for now. In future if you want to request page protection the best place to ask is WP:RFPP. Cheers, Petros471 15:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

help

people from 1700 i am doing a research paper can you help me thanks —This unsigned comment was added by Bluefreak-126 (talk • contribs) .

thanks well whats absoloutist —This unsigned comment was added by Bluefreak-126 (talk • contribs) .

Thanks

Thanks, sometimes I get a little slap-happy (User_talk:A.Armbruster vs. User:A.Armbruster) Shenme 02:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

There was a vandal

At the Public Library in Pinellas County, please do not block this IP. This IP is no longer owned by that Libary though. Please don't block me. —This unsigned comment was added by 65.32.158.193 (talk • contribs) .

What?

It's been years since I read her bio but I know Harriet Tubman's brain damage was the result of her standing in the way of a white man who was trying to catch a runaway slave. I also remember she played up her brain damage when it was to her advantage. 132.241.246.111 03:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Warning removed. See Incorrectly Reverted Edits or the user's talk page for more details. AmiDaniel (Talk) 08:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Yeah hi, this is Jlhc, you said I vandalized an article. Well, according to hrwiki.org this is completly true, but I do have ADD so I did go a little off topic while trying to explain. —This unsigned comment was added by Jlhc (talk • contribs) .

I might just not understand what you were attempting to say, but I still believe the edit in question to be vandalism. If you could point me to a specific source, rephrase your statement, or begin a discussion with other editors via the article's talk page to better articulate your point, however, I might reconsider my decision. I apologize if your edit really is intended to be a constructive contribution, but it does not appear so to me. In the future, using edit summaries might help explain the changes you make and prevent your edits from being flagged as vandalism and reverted. If you truly do believe that this edit is not vandalism, please don't hesitiate to contact me or an admin to further debate the matter. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism Not!

Ok I found my source. http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php/highschool#Explanations —This unsigned comment was added by Jlhc (talk • contribs) .

After looking over your source and conferring with a few admins and members of the CVU, I've arrived back at my original decision regarding the edit. The article Enterobacteria phage T4 is intended to be a serious scientific article about an actual virus; replacing its content with jokes and other nonsense (no matter how well sourced) is a form of unconstructive vandalism. While there is evidence to suggest that you made this edit in good faith, you nonetheless need to be aware that such contributions are not tolerated and could result in your being blocked from editing if you continue in such fashion. That being said, I do not want to discourage you from participating on Wikipedia, and if you would like to contribute positively to our encyclopedia, please check out the welcome page. I apologize for any incovenience, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask me. AmiDaniel (Talk) 00:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page! Dismas|^(talk) 11:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

PROD tag and Why Make Clocks

Even as I appreciate your re-adding the removed PROD tag for the Clocks article, which article, in view of [{WP:BAND]], surely won't survive AfD, I must note that, unlike a speedy or AfD tag, a PROD tag is not to be re-added once it's removed; indeed, the PROD tag is intended for situations where, though speedy is not appropriate, there is no objection to an article's being deleted. The removal of a PROD tag signals that someone objects to the deletion of the article and that the discussion must be taken to AfD (see WP:PROD, which notes, in pertinent part, "If anyone removes [the template] for whatever reason, don't place it back. If the creator (of an article} removes the tag, the deletion...should go to AfD. If the tag is removed without an edit summary, the deletion is controversial and should go to AfD."). In this instance, I'll remove the PROD tag and confirm for myself that the article is about a non-notable subject and will then list the article at AfD. Cordially, Joe 20:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I see that you also warned Bwiksell, who created the article and first removed the PROD tag, about vandalism, ascribing that appellative to his having removed the PROD tag. Wrong though we may think him to be about the notability of the article's subject, it is wholly inappropriate to warn him for undertaking a perfectly legitimate activity, scilicet, the removal of a PROD tag; even as his removing it without an edit summary explaining his intentions is perhaps untoward or in bad form, it is surely in worse form to warn a user who has acted properly under WP:PROD. Joe 20:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for informing me of my mistake in restoring the article's PROD tags. I had just finished restoring a long series of speedy and AfD tags that were wrongfully deleted by editors, and so I didn't even think twice when restoring this one. I am aware of the policy (I've even deleted several prod tags from articles that I didn't believe met the criteria for deletion), but I just spaced it this time. Hopefully you won't object, but I've just nominated the article for AfD. I'm sorry for my incompetence, and thank you for bringing this to my attention. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all; I am well aware of your very competent work to defeat vandals and improve the project, and, in that spirit, I too have made similar oversights. On the AfD, I voted "very weak keep" because I found that music from one of the band's albums is available on MSN Music, which generally confers notability. That said, the group seems altogether nebulous and has fewer than 1000 Google hits, so I may change my mind (I tried improving the article in order that it should demonstrate notability, but I didn't find much toward that end). Joe 23:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Userbox debates

Text supplied as requested. --Doc ^ask? 08:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A silly little edit

Regarding this edit:

There is a link to that entry earlier under a different name. No reason to link to it twice, right? Surely someone could figure out that Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band was later abbreviated as Stanford Band. This seemed to follow from the principles mentioned here.

In any case, the edit was somewhat intended as a jab at Steverit, because I happen to know the guy, and he would be real burned that I corrected his little error ON HIS OWN PAGE. —This unsigned comment was added by JoelC (talk • contribs) .

Oops, sorry about that. 99% of the time when users edit userpages that are not their own it's vandalism, so I've been (more or less) systematically reverting all such edits (unless they're by an admin or whitelisted user). Anyway, I've restored the page to your version. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Warning removed. See Incorrectly Reverted Edits or the user's talk page for more details. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

F.U.C.K.

Hey, what's going on you can't propose a speedy deletion, then delete the article within 2 mins Please revert the article and I will bring it up to wikipedia standard —This unsigned comment was added by 82.68.153.36 (talk • contribs) .

are you going to respond? or just leave an unsigned message their! —This unsigned comment was added by 82.68.153.36 (talk • contribs) 82.68.153.36.

I apologize for my indecisiveness in what to do with the page, and I shouldn't have posted a vandalism warning (sorry, hit the wrong button ... tonight's just not my night). However, you replaced a perfectly valid and necessary redirect with an article on a non-notable topic (159 hits). An article on this organization has already been deleted by majority consensus (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/F.U.C.K.) and as such cannot be recreated without a supermajority to "undelete." If your article had not replaced a necessary redirect, it would have been speedily deleted under CSD/G4 and CSD/A7. As the redirect, however, should not be deleted I simply removed your changes to it. If you would like to campaign to preserve your article, I suggest that you register for an account and create an article on the topic independent of the current redirect (titled perhaps "Feminists Uncovering Censorship Knowledgeably"); if the article is not deleted, you can then create a disambig page in place of the current F.U.C.K. article that redirects to both your article and the album. (You might be aware that anonymous users are not allowed to create new pages, which you bypassed by converting an existing article into an article on a totally different topic.) You might also consider contributing information about F.U.C.K. to the article on Feminism, where you'll be less likely to be attacked by notability policies. Believe it or not, I actually support F.U.C.K.'s cause, and my removal of your article has nothing to do with "masculine repression of women." I appologize for the inconvenience, but we simply have to hold to certain policies to preserve the integrity of Wikipedia. If you still disagree with me or have any questions, please feel free to contact me. AmiDaniel (Talk) 10:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Never mind the former AfD--it was related to a band, rather than to this cause. AmiDaniel (Talk) 11:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to add another note, my decision on this page is in way binding. If you truly believe F.U.C.K. to be a notable organization, by all means restore the text I deleted (it's all stored in the article's history) and I'll nominate it for WP:AfD, where multiple users will give their input as to the notability of the organization and decisions are made only by consensus. If you choose do that, however, I would urge you to read over WP:N, WP:BIO, and Wikipedia:Deletion first. Once again, feel free to ask me if you have any questions. AmiDaniel (Talk) 11:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you but...

Thank you Daniel, but I -am- OrbitOne. I had to get the IP number for this network. I use it once in a while (school) and I wanted to make sure it was known it belongs to a school. —This unsigned comment was added by 80.209.54.2 (talk • contribs) .

Sorry, my bad. I thought you were a new user testing on OrbitOne's talk page. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

No prob. I have another IP I need to test too, just to make sure I am not framed in the future. --OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 05:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW, thanks for the template; I do not know all of the templates myself.--OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 06:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Gprim

It deserved a PROD, but I AfD'd it because I forsee socks coming to vote once it gets to their board. T K E 07:31, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy by far though! T K E 07:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Prod removal

Ah, I see. Sorry about that, it was an honest mistake. I assumed prod was just a simplified AfD, with the same conditions. I should have read the policy regarding that. Paul Cyr 00:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Danger Danger How I Met Your Mother Medieval metal Madonna Wayne Gacy Home Front during World War II Hollywood Undead Spain in the Middle Ages The Powerpuff Girls Movie Port Everglades Warren DeMartini Arab philosophy Hip Forums Zurna Lest We Forget (album) Electronic drum Military history of Canada during World War II Military awards of World War II Mark Ryden Nitro (band)

Cleanup Woo myung Gidget Gein Josh Freese Merge Third-World Feminism Music workstation Incorporated territory Add Sources Police action ZZ Top Extra-sensory perception Wikify Joseph Cultice Operation Tempest Laszlo Heller Expand The Basketball Diaries (film) Pentonville (HM Prison) Brahmanbaria District

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 05:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Dehydration

AmiDaniel I beleive my addition to be both valid and contributive. Anyone can search the internet to look for information, but when they search Wiki, they search it for th human element that is inherent in each article. I must admit the comment was a bit cheeky, however I felt it nessicary to inject a skoche of wit in a more or less vanilla(bland and homogenous)article. I would apreciate your un-removal of verbage. Good evening and good night.Do write back, would you? Thadius Q. Merrywhether thr Third —This unsigned comment was added by 24.8.36.16 (talk • contribs) .

Warning removed. See incorrectly reverted edits or the user's talk page for more details. AmiDaniel (Talk) 08:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

AmiDaniel, thank you for for your consideration and please know that no edit I make will be vandalous in intent. The reason I did not leave an "edit summary" is because I was not aware of such a thing; I'm new, you see. This is also why I have not registered. I was just galavanting about when I made my edit. In the future, I will follow due process and make life easier for us all. Once again, Thank You. Thadius Q. Merrywhether the Third —This unsigned comment was added by 24.8.36.16 (talk • contribs) .