This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Seicer (talk | contribs) at 14:45, 15 September 2008 (→"Take it further": c). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 14:45, 15 September 2008 by Seicer (talk | contribs) (→"Take it further": c)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)User:Seicer/Icons User:Cream/scrolling
Latest updates:
- The Banks at UrbanUp
Other:
|
This is my talk page! Heres a few tips:
|
 |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
Just checking...
Now you said that 09jcsherrard was blocked indefinetly, but the notice said 31 hours. Can you tell me which it is, please make it clear.
HairyPerry(Talk) HairyPerry 13:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Listen, 09jcsherrard is one of my friends and he is sitting right next to me, you can tell me so he knows for sure. If you can't tell me make it clear for him...would you do that?
HairyPerry(Talk) HairyPerry 14:13, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's been made quite clear on his talk page why he was blocked indefinitely, and the template was replaced with one that reflects his duration. seicer | talk | contribs 14:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Dude don't be getting smart with me, i was just trying to be cool with my buddy. HairyPerry(Talk) HairyPerry 15:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, if this wasn't a trolling account before... seicer | talk | contribs 15:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea what that means man...trolling, and whos account are you talking about I have made useful contributions to a lot of sports teams on Misplaced Pages, if you talking about me. HairyPerry(Talk) HairyPerry 15:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Courtesy Notification - ANI Thread
Hi,
I have started a thread that you may be interested in. Its about your extention of my block and the violation of WP:CIVIL that is your trainwreck remark.
Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Seicer «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l» (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Undeletion Request
Please undelete the article Javier Flores, the reason ism because is a young filmmaker in my country and is one of the few people who is intrested in making things work for salvadorean cinema.
He is currently working on the show Juventud En Linea broadcasted by channel 10 in El Salvador, he has two years working there and many others working alone, and i have no notice of newspaper or magazine references for him, but it will be added when i found them.
thanks for reading my request and i hope you can undelete the page i created Guasinay50 (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please see Deletion Review and submit a request for Javier Flores to be undeleted. If you need to create a page, but do not yet have enough sources or information, you may want to try creating the article in your User:Guasinay50/Sandbox for the time being. seicer | talk | contribs 15:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of male film actors (A-K) (2nd nomination)
A delete from you, but it's still a blue. RMHED (talk) 23:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Interesting. The script I'm using has its quirks which I've noted and will pass along. seicer | talk | contribs 23:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Articles for deletion/Michael Sandefer
Hi there. You closed the AfD for "Michael Sandefer" yesterday, but you forgot to take Michael sandefer (lowercase 's') with it. – SJL 03:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Semih Aydilek and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Matt Henney
Why have you closed these AfDs before the 5-day period is out. The Matt Henny one is less than 48-hours old. Unless you close as a speedy keep, they need to stay open longer.
Can you please revert your close?Nfitz (talk) 16:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I should have added that the articles were being snowed in. The "5-day-period" is not a binding date; if it is reasonable to judge that the article is going downhill (or uphill) fast, with solid arguments, then one can infer that it could be closed speedily. Deletion review is where you would need to take it. Thanks, seicer | talk | contribs 16:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is evidence that Matt Henny is notable given articles such as . Under WP:SNOW "If an issue is "snowballed", and somebody later raises a reasonable objection, then it probably was not a good candidate for the snowball clause". I'm not sure that simply closing a debate after less than 48-hours when the only people who have commented are the usual "Me too" crowd, who have simply parroted the nominator. The contestion on the prod was that he met WP:BIO, however the nominator simply argued that he didn't meet WP:ATHLETE ignoring that he meets WP:BIO, despite it being long established that WP:BIO trumps WP:ATHLETE. As for Semih Aydilek - I don't think a case could be made - but I still think it is proper that the 5-day period should be carried out for these borderline cases - he's signed for Championship team, if he were ever to play then a very-fine line would be crossed and the article would be back without objection. Nfitz (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Seicer. How about re-listing both AfDs, for a new 5-day interval? The deletion will probably go through anyway, and we will have saved some extra process. EdJohnston (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Done. seicer | talk | contribs 17:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. Don't forget to take them out of the original logs and put them in the Sept. 12 deletion log. (WP:RELIST). I am obviously an authority, I have never relisted anything :-). EdJohnston (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I would, but I can't find the damn things :P seicer | talk | contribs 00:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- At great trouble and expense, I have found and deleted the entries in the old logs. (It helps to have a browser that can do searches in wiki text, which alas Safari can't do). Also I added {{subst:relist}} to the Henney discussion, which looks quite official. Relisting is more fun than I thought, but has many steps! I wonder if Twinkle can do this automatically. EdJohnston (talk) 01:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Odd thing is, I did multiple searches in the logs and could not find it listed. I think there is a plug-in to make searching in Misplaced Pages much easier and I should probably install it. I've been so busy today that all I have had time to do is peacemeal edits. And yes, Twinkle adding this functionality would be a lot easier! seicer | talk | contribs 01:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- At great trouble and expense, I have found and deleted the entries in the old logs. (It helps to have a browser that can do searches in wiki text, which alas Safari can't do). Also I added {{subst:relist}} to the Henney discussion, which looks quite official. Relisting is more fun than I thought, but has many steps! I wonder if Twinkle can do this automatically. EdJohnston (talk) 01:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- I would, but I can't find the damn things :P seicer | talk | contribs 00:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. Don't forget to take them out of the original logs and put them in the Sept. 12 deletion log. (WP:RELIST). I am obviously an authority, I have never relisted anything :-). EdJohnston (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Done. seicer | talk | contribs 17:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Seicer. How about re-listing both AfDs, for a new 5-day interval? The deletion will probably go through anyway, and we will have saved some extra process. EdJohnston (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is evidence that Matt Henny is notable given articles such as . Under WP:SNOW "If an issue is "snowballed", and somebody later raises a reasonable objection, then it probably was not a good candidate for the snowball clause". I'm not sure that simply closing a debate after less than 48-hours when the only people who have commented are the usual "Me too" crowd, who have simply parroted the nominator. The contestion on the prod was that he met WP:BIO, however the nominator simply argued that he didn't meet WP:ATHLETE ignoring that he meets WP:BIO, despite it being long established that WP:BIO trumps WP:ATHLETE. As for Semih Aydilek - I don't think a case could be made - but I still think it is proper that the 5-day period should be carried out for these borderline cases - he's signed for Championship team, if he were ever to play then a very-fine line would be crossed and the article would be back without objection. Nfitz (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
User:Loveyourfaith
Hi Seicer, will you look at this and take whatever action you think is appropriate? This user has been disruptive from day one, mainly regarding genre related edits. He/she removes sourced edits and adds back unsourced. User has received a block in the past for this and has been warned by multiple users. He/she is now manipulating their talk page warnings and vandalizing multiple articles i.e. . Landon1980 (talk) 04:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm
If I didn't know better I'd wondering whether you forgot to log-in as your Kurt Weber sock before making that last comment at AFD. ;) Spartaz 13:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Note
Just wanted to notify you that both Pedro and I have agreed that Octaviusc is probably an SPA. I hope you didn't count that vote. I'm going to file a RCU sometime soon to check it out. Cheers, —§unday b 01:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oops! Forgot to say which AFD! Sorry, this one. :) —§unday b 01:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Lucy Power Assertions of notability
I found that article while patrolling the ass end of the new pages queue (I wonder how it was missed). I've been sending hoaxes to AFD because I've always thought that an assertion of notability is an assertion of notability, even if you don't buy it. Perhaps I should propose that CSD A7 be changed to "reasonable good faith" assertion of notability before someone creates an article saying that "Joe Shmoe Huckleberry" in Hicksville Georgia is "Jesus Christ".
In practice, I've noticed other new page patrollers tagging hoaxes G3. That's probably what would have happened if this article was caught when created. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Sesame Street
Seicer, not that I mind, because this article seems to be heavily vandalized as a rule, but could you explain why you semi-protected it? Just curious. Thanks, --Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- WP:ANI#Disney Vandal issues, until we can get a rangeblock (which I'm not terribly effective at) or resolution at the school. I just don't want to protect one article and then have the issue crop up somewhere else. seicer | talk | contribs 04:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Deletion review for Visual gallery of toucans
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Visual gallery of toucans. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Nikola (talk) 05:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
A7, G11 and Firestarter Racing Mini Monster (Truck)
From the ANI/DRV thread and your recreation for G11 speedy I gather that A7 is unacceptable for products or, well, physical objects of any kind. Which is, embarrassingly, news to me; just goes to show you shouldn't assume too much. From the comments on those threads I also gather that expanding A7 is a debate that has seen some action. But my question is an innocent one, because I really don't know: are there any speedy criteria are categories that can be applied to products? Or, to bring it home to this example: if there hadn't been blatant advertising, which CSD category could I have used? 9Nak (talk) 06:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- WP:CSD#G11: "Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote some entity and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion."
- Entity in this instance was inteperted as the monster truck and the company or organization that the user ran to promote the truck. seicer | talk | contribs 11:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Think I see what you mean. entity is very broad but exclusively promote is very narrow, so the force remains in balance. Time to rethink my use, clearly. Thanks for the help. 9Nak (talk) 12:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is a lot with CSD that is pretty unclear or unambitious. It's about time that we receive clarifications, because these issues occur on an almost daily basis. I'm only guessing that 'entity' isn't exclusive to corporate products and the like. seicer | talk | contribs 13:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Think I see what you mean. entity is very broad but exclusively promote is very narrow, so the force remains in balance. Time to rethink my use, clearly. Thanks for the help. 9Nak (talk) 12:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
"Take it further"
What I meant by "Take it further" was to report Edward321's comments to whomever deals with that side of things on Misplaced Pages. I believe my comments were wilfully misinterpreted so that he doesn't have to issue me with an apology for claiming that I stated that I made something up when I clearly never made any such comment. --Bravo Plantation (talk) 11:15, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- While this may have been 'resolved' in respect to me not making a "legal threat" (which by the way was completely preposterous and totally over-the-top), Edward321 has still not issued me with an apology for stating publically that I had admitted to creating an article which I blatently did not do. Also, it would have been courteous on your behalf to inform me that the matter had been 'resolved' on my talk page rather than not bothering. --Bravo Plantation (talk) 13:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Uh no. I'm sure you can check the ANI page all by yourself to see it. seicer | talk | contribs 13:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
What a patronising response. Either way, may I suggest that if you are going to start a conversation on my talk page, at least have the good manners and courtesy to update my talk page with the conclusion. --Bravo Plantation (talk) 14:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- A user is not required to apologize for whatever they may have done. seicer | talk | contribs 14:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)