Misplaced Pages

User talk:Parsssseltongue: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:06, 12 July 2006 editEphilei (talk | contribs)2,028 edits →WP:Lazy← Previous edit Revision as of 03:47, 12 July 2006 edit undoParsssseltongue (talk | contribs)1,712 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{RFMF}}

'''Welcome!''' '''Welcome!'''


Revision as of 03:47, 12 July 2006

Template:RFMF

Welcome!

Hello, Parsssseltongue, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -MrFizyx 00:59, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Parsssseltongue, hope you didn't find the generic welcome too impersonal. I was concerned that you were going to be welcomed by having an article speedy deleted. I'm glad that AJJ dodged that. Hope you continue to have fun. -MrFizyx 04:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I am having a blast... thanks a lot! Parsssseltongue 22:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Jackson Jihad

Hi about the article Andrew Jackson Jihad, I have removed the speedy deletion notice that I placed on it. For I over looked the statement about national touring, do you have any references you could provide for it (see WP:CITE)? By now I hope you have found the guideline for notability WP:MUSIC, if not please have a look at it (also verification can be a major problem for new articles about bands). I hope this is of some help to you.--blue520 03:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Definitely! Thanks for your help. I'm going to contact the band directly (as I plan on doing for the other artists) to see what info they have. Parsssseltongue 22:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

unblock request

{{unblock|see notes below}}

ip 204.17.26.4. blocked by user:Nlu for "vandalism"? I have only created two pages, made minor changes in others (some which were discussed with other users if they disagreed)... I have no idea what "vandalism" we're talking about. Parsssseltongue 17:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The helpme tag is not for unblock requests. --pgk 17:50, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Unblocked. Please be aware that the IP may be reblocked if vandalism continues. --Nlu (talk) 02:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Jihad.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jihad.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 13:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Catorce

I am totally offended that someone tagged my Catorce article, when I was painstakingly careful to follow policy. :( Parsssseltongue 00:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

First, it's not yours; second, don't take it personally. — Mike • 02:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation Pages

Disambiguation pages are for existing pages. Once the articles are created, they've got a place on a disambig page. Broken links ... not so much. WP:D: "Disambiguation serves a single purpose: to let the reader choose among different pages that closely relate to various meanings of a particular term (some of which might logically utilize said term in a titular fashion)." (emphasis added) If your page isn't there yet, it's not a valid choice, and thus doesn't belong on a disambig page. Don't put the cart before the horse. — Mike • 04:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Some of my contributions, maybe you're right, maybe they don't fit. But some I worked especially hard on to meet all guidelines. You're targeting me, and as a newcomer to this community, I feel offended. Parsssseltongue 04:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, you own your own offense; there's really not much I can do about it. And, no, I'm not targeting you. But Misplaced Pages is not a gentle place. As every edit page says: "If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." Editing includes determinations whether articles deserve a place here. And I'm hardly going to be the sole arbiter. — Mike • 04:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Dispute with the Catorce article? Fine. But then you decided to hunt down all my contributions and put them up for deletion. You're petty, and I really wish you would discontinue further comment on my talk page, please. Parsssseltongue 04:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
No, I did not decide to hunt down all your contributions and put them up for deletion as some sort of melodramatic "revenge" for you reposting deleted material. That presupposes I actually care about the entire matter that much. It's more that you misinterpret Misplaced Pages's notability standards to favor your pet cause — which is certainly not an unknown affliction on Misplaced Pages, but such misinterpretations need to then be subjected to community review. I've certainly nominated articles that have passed fine and stayed with us. I've even withdrawn nominations before. It's not a mistake-free process.
But, my friend, if you're taking a bureaucratic dispute this personally, you're not going to be able to last very long on Misplaced Pages. You need to realize that you do not own your contributions or your created articles — all of Misplaced Pages is a cooperative production.
And since there'd be no purpose in us continuing to discuss things here, yes, I'll not continue the discussion here. But "your" talk page really isn't yours — think of it as a telephone. Except in rare circumstances, you really can't control who calls you. It's the method of communication here on Misplaced Pages.
Finally, I seriously suggest you read Misplaced Pages:Assume good faith. I'm being nice and not taking it personally, but community standards frown on the kind of personal attacks you've been making at me. I certainly don't appreciate it. — Mike • 04:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

various AfDs

Hi Parsssseltongue, I see you're having a rough go of things. Though Mike's many nominations at once may seem excessive they are not unfair, if he had not put up these nominations someone else might have eventually anyway. I myself have been looking for a reason to vote keep in these debates, but am having a hard time doing so based on WP:MUSIC and WP:BAND. There are some things that may help if you have the info. Can you find a tour schedule for these groups showing that they've performed throught much of the U.S.? Are any of them on a record label that we can reference (indy labels are OK)? in the AfD debates you really need to make the case for the bands on the criteria, not against the nominator. -MrFizyx 05:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, MrFizyx! I have gone back and made my case for meeting the criteria. Thank you for all your help, and your hand in editing the articles to make them a better fit for inclusion. Parsssseltongue 15:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
    • though... I'm afraid label info (these are independent artists) and tour dates (just having a hard time finding that kind of info) aren't part of my argument. :( Luckily, I do have more citations, plus I am weaving through the logic of Misplaced Pages guidelines to clearly refute the shaky grounds for the deletion nominations. Parsssseltongue 17:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I hate to say it, but don't get your hopes up. In a few days an admin will close the debate and make a decision based on all of the opinions given. With all the delete votes currently stacked up...it doesn't look too good for your articles. -MrFizyx 03:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
        • The problem is, I feel like there are people whose sole purpose on Misplaced Pages is to look for articles to delete. I came here to contribute, not tear down. And you'll notice, there are the same three or four individuals who follow the person who nominated the articles onto the AfD discussion. It seems to me that if they're all voting for deletion "per nom," and the nomination is wrong (or an editor has added info to the article to help it meet whatever guidelines the nominator said the article was violating), then the article should stand. But, we'll see... :) Parsssseltongue 05:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Trigger Happy AfD Discussions

Thanks for your comments about people being too eager to delete perfectly good, good faith stubs for minor issues (lack of sources at the moment of creation). I'm referring especially to what you wrote about Aleem Pahalwan. I hope the author of that article is about to find sources. I my comment, I insisted we should distinguish between "verifiability", which that article certainly possesses, and "verification", which it happens to lack for the moment at least. Interlingua 01:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

It's a sad phenomenon. Glad you agree! Thanks for the note. Parsssseltongue 16:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: speedy keeps

First off, I understand why you voted speedy keep. I don't think it necessarily met the criteria, but as you pointed out, that was up for interpretation. And don't think I wrote what I wrote because it was you- I've frequently noted when people have voted to speedily keep something when that's not allowable.
I think the most obvious cases for a speedy keep are a bad faith nom or a withdrawal of nom, both of which we see all the time. Looking at the WP:SK criteria, I think these are perhaps the most easily spelled-out rules on all of WP; it's pretty clear that AfD'ing Star Trek is a bad faith nom, or that a template or redirect is being AfD'd instead of an article, or what have you. The only aspect that is a bit vague is what constitutes a bad faith nom, but we can usually just go by whether it's very obvious that an article is notable, well-sourced, etc. As far as your vote, I can certainly see why you thought the speedy vote was appropriate, and I hope you don't think I was trying to attack you, as this was absolutely not the case. -- Kicking222 21:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The Glands

Job done. If only Bar/None Records had been mentioned WITH the "/" in the article. Now it has the makings of a great article. Ohm and no offence taken. I just hate that phrase with a passion. Nom withdrawn. AfD works when used well. It is only when used badly and noms are "hit and run" that it gets a bad reputation. I tak the view that you should only nominate if you can stand by your nomination and withdraw when things are improved or you are proved to be in error. Fiddle Faddle 23:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Fleas and Lice

Actually, sad to say but I don't know a whole lot about crust. I like the little I've heard, but as of right now I'm more on the outside of the punk scene than I would like. I have heard of the band though, and I'll look online for what I can. Thanks for the heads up! The Ungovernable Force 23:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

for the support with The Warrios AfD. It took months to finally get get my Cancer Bats article complete after 3 speedy deletes and 2 AfD listings. And I use the word my with pride, because I was able to put that article together and fight for its rights. to party. Avenged Evanfold 08:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Girls At The Cairo National Stadium

Hi. can you try offering more help by addressing other users to vote at the Girls At The Cairo National Stadium case? it's clearly a troll's plot by a user called Haham hanuka. Marina T. 21:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

WP:NPA

With regards to your comments here Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Misplaced Pages. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. Pegasus1138 ---- 01:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion message

I have nominated WP:LAZY for deletion as I feel that it is an essay used only to make personal attacks. You can contribute to the discussion on the MFD page. Stifle (talk) 19:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I have restored the comments you removed at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Don't be lazy as they were not egregerious personal attacks. Please use WP:RPA very sparingly, especially on comments directed at you. If they're that bad someone else will remove them. --Sam Blanning 16:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I've gotta agree with Blanning here. References to past AfDs didn't look like personal attacks to me either. I would have restored them if he had not. -MrFizyx 16:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I have tried to narrow down what I feel are personal attacks, restoring the part of the message that I feel is not. PT 16:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
PT, "isagreements about content" and "civil language used to describe an editor's actions" are specifically listed as things that are not personal attacks on WP:NPA. I have replied more fully to your concerns on my talk page, where you contacted me. — Mike (talk • contribs) 17:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Just so you know, I'll reply to your concerns on my talk page, where you left the message. — Mike (talk • contribs) 16:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:Lazy

Thanks for the heads up and keep up the good inclusionist fight! (But honestly, the article needs a lot of work.) Let me know of any other nn articles under attack. Have you checked out WP:NNOT yet? It's going slowly, but so far the best hope I know of for inclusionism in the long run. --Ephilei 22:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I might actually suggest not worrying if the article is deleted or not. If it is, just rewrite it (download a copy before deletion) and take others' criticism into view. BTW, I also make edits on religion, often creating new articles on almost nn topics and have felt the sting of my hard work sometimes deleted. --Ephilei 03:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)