| Revision as of 18:57, 6 November 2006 editPanarjedde (talk | contribs)3,432 edits →Removing warnings← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:58, 6 November 2006 edit undoKingjeff (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users87,419 editsm →Removing warningsNext edit → | ||
| Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
| Don't you have anything else to do? If your warnings were credible, they would still be there. ] 18:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC) | Don't you have anything else to do? If your warnings were credible, they would still be there. ] 18:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| Sorry about that, he can't stop annoying me in someway. He has serious problems. ] 18:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:58, 6 November 2006
La page du parle du Proto
Archive 1 (March 05 - August 05)
Archive 2 (August 05 - September 05)
Archive 3 (September 05 - November 05)
Archive 4 (November 05 - December 05)
Archive 5 (December 05 - February 06)
Archive 6 (February 06 - March 06)
Archive 7 (March 06 - May 06)
Archive 8 (May 06 - July 06)
Archive 9 (July 06 - October 06)
Please place your comments at the bottom of the talk page.
I may reply on here, or on your talk page. It depends how whimsical I'm feeling.
This talk page is archived when I feel like it. Usually when it goes over 30k.
Wheeeeeeee.
New administrators - please direct your RFA thanks message (or the messages where you curse me for opposing you, whatever) to User talk:Proto/RFAs. I will read it, don't worry.
 |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
Welcome back
- Assuming you are, in fact, back, and not just dropping by for some maintenance, welcome back! Hope you had a good wikibreak and all. Cheers! Wickethewok 21:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Adrian Zielonka
Thanks for deleting that nonsense. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to tell users who post stuff like that - the account's name indicates that it was created in order to post the attack page. AlexTiefling 12:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Highway's RfA
I've left a message for you at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/HighwayCello 3. Highway 18:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Block of Akanemoto
I've unblocked User:Akanemoto, as they say they are not a bot and that was your reason for blocking them. If you have any problems with them in future, I will not revert your block again.-gadfium 08:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Mark Dalton (porn star)
Please undelete this page. Unless this was "A substantially identical copy of previously deleted material", the article does not meet any of the Criteria for speedy deletion; however, it does specifically countermand one of them. Dalton meets the criteria of WP:PORN BIO as being "Man of the Year" for Men; the equivalent in the gay community of Playboy, Penthouse, or Playgirl, which asserts his importance. That would bar a speedy deletion of the article until an additional {{AfD}} discussion is held. If you want to nominate it via an {{afdx}}, that would be the way to go. Thanks.—Chidom 03:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I personally don't think there should be an article; however, the magazine's own website does show that he won Man of the Year, the site qualifies as a reliable source. He now meets WP:PORN BIO which didn't exist in April, and whether I like it or not, his article should be allowed at least until arguments can be put forth to countermand the new criteria. I feel that basing the speedy deletion on the "substantially identical" clause in light of the article now meeting criteria that weren't in place when the article was first deleted is not very fair. I'll go through the hassle of listing it on WP:DRV just out of a sense of fairness, not because I particularly want the article to exist. (I was in the process of adding the {{afdx}} template when you deleted the article.)—Chidom 08:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- So I have more information about the contents of the article itself, would you please post a copy at User:Chidom/Dalton? Thanks.—Chidom 16:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Image:Owenpuma.jpg
You removed the speedy delete tag; I restored it. The reason is that (1) the license is not right for the image and (2) you did not fix the license.--Panarjedde 14:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
He put a bad faith nomination on a photo I uploaded and I wouldn't doubt that this is a bad faith nomination. Kingjeff 18:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Photo deletion
Why did you delete our photo? Cebo22
chinese knots
I realize that the article titled "the art of chinese knots" has not yet reached an acceptable level for wikipedia. However, it is no where near completed and we intend to add much more properly referenced material. As you well know this cannot be done in one day, as this is a fairly new article, but we do intend to bring this up to an acceptable and comprehensive level.
Could you please specify what you mean by "not notable" and perhaps what would be a more appropriate name for our article (and how to change it), we will also fix the duplicate problem or perhaps consider merging the article with the article titled "Decorative knotwork in East Asia"
On the note of "not notable" - if this means that this subject is of low popularity or of little interest to the general public then this would be very disappointing indeed, as i believe that encylopedias should cover all subjects regardless of notability.
Further improvements to our article include:
History: A detailed, comprehensive, and properly referenced history of the origins of chinese knots.
Different Types of Knots: Main types of knots with their meanings and influences (also includes western influences).
Different techniques: Details the different techniques used to tie Chinese knots (main techniques, traditional techniques, and modern techniques)
Current uses: uses today and moderations from traditional knots
External links
Thank you for reading this, as this is my first time writing an article on wikipedia, and i would be devastated for it to be deleted without it being completed. I will hopefully complete this article within the week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cpl.ouch (talk • contribs)
- A page already exists on the topic, at Decorative knotwork in East Asia. Perhaps you could contribute to that page. Proto::type 14:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Photo deletion
Hi- Thanks for the reply! Obviously I am new here so apologies if I am not following correct protocol. We definitely have the right to use our photo and I thought I had followed the instructions given for posting it. I had also used another band site with a photo as guidance. Is there any way to restore the photo and change the license to what ever it is supposed to be or must I go through the upload process again? Cebo22
Image:Bleep pic11.jpg
Could you explain to me why a photo whose use was explicitly permitted has been deleted? I'm not new here but the deletion of Image:Bleep pic11.jpg completely puzzles me. I don't see anything in the criteria for deletion which justifies its deletion. It seems that the photo was just fine for over a year, until it was recently re-tagged with what seems to me to be inappropriate tags. Its deletion discussion only included the two users who added the new tags, and it seems it was summarily deleted without time for discussion, apparently "because it is for non-commercial use". Has wikipedia become, or is it in the process of becoming a commercial site? If so, why would anyone contribute thousands of hours writing articles for free? User:Pedant 17:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
I thought that only images for the Commons needed free licenses? When did Misplaced Pages become a commercial site? User:Pedant 18:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Removing warnings
I saw you were prompt to claim that removing warnings is rude and should be avoided. Was that only against me, or do you think other users should comply too?--Panarjedde 18:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Don't you have anything else to do? If your warnings were credible, they would still be there. Kingjeff 18:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that, he can't stop annoying me in someway. He has serious problems. Kingjeff 18:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)