Misplaced Pages

User talk:Zetawoof

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 85.210.107.2 (talk) at 19:20, 27 June 2006 (→[]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:20, 27 June 2006 by 85.210.107.2 (talk) (→[])(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
News This user page has been cited as a source by a media organization attempting to discredit Misplaced Pages. Hee hee.

Peace walk

Of course satish Kumar and his companion used ships to cross the channel and the atlantic, something I know all about myself; see Pet passport. I have changed the article but I think people can figure out for themselves that Satish did not cross water, no more than Jesus, so please do not vandalise my site--Scuiqui fox 20:52, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is no more "your site" than it is any of ours. And that was a valid question - people have walked on water (with the help of large flotation skis). Zetawoof 22:33, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Kumar could not have walked across water in the sixties on Flotation skis because they had not been invented. Besides which you could have asked not 'did they walk on water?' but 'did they cross water on flotation skis?' If they had done so in the sixties across the Atlantic we would all know about it. At the very least your comment was absurd, and your excuses lame. It is not my wiki, but I have the right to keep it clean--Scuiqui fox 13:41, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Welcome to the Misplaced Pages

Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Misplaced Pages experience:


Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 22:41, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks - I know what I'm doing.

Zetawoof 22:43, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

From FT2

See talk page over Ciz and ArbCom. Thanks. FT2 20:16, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hello

Neat, another zoo. Hellos. -- MSTCrow 05:45, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Hey, a familiar face. Neat-o. -Zetawoof 04:10, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Nope, not a mistake :). Voldy is now employing Occulmency against Harry (Ie, Harry no longer feels scar hurting). Cheers --takagawa-kun 19:45, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

AHHHHHH. Got it - mixed up occlumency and legilimency. --Zetawoof 20:47, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

LOL

Greetings, fellow Misplaced Pages user. I found your name by chance when editing stuff. Cheers.

Michael Retriever

ShadowH = Ciz

Just a quick note to say that ShadowH is Ciz. I've given him his warning, the rest's up to him. Hope your stress and busy stuff calms down soon, and look forward to catching up when it does. Feel free to delete this message when you're done. FT2 12:04, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Vfd votes pls

Hi. Can you vote on Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Lintilla_(chat_site) and Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Planes_of_existence_(chat_site) before they are deleted. Zordrac 14:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh and also edit them if you like since you probably know a bit more to add to them. Zordrac 14:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Voted. --Zetawoof 23:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
You were meant to vote to keep it. lol. Oh well your choice. Lintilla will probably be deleted now thanks to your vote. Zordrac 00:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I'll vote my mind, thank you. --Zetawoof 11:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Someone does'nt like you

http://www.theposc.com/blog/?p=7 -- anonymous

LOL. --Zetawoof 04:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Just thought you might be interested in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Battle of Hogwarts (2nd nomination) because you participated in the first vote. Savidan 04:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

VFD article on Powermuff

Why did you move the paragraphs around? If you wanted to leave a vote, it hasn't been recorded. Please leave a vote if you wish, but moving other people's votes around can be considered vandalism.
Oscar Arias 08:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Moved that vote to the bottom because it was inserted above the nomination, rendering the VFD incomprehensible. Seemed a relatively reasonable bit of refactoring to me. At the very least, I'm going to move the nomination back above the comment. Zetawoof 09:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Ok, fair enough -- Oscar Arias

Did you know? {{prod}} can have a parameter.

Hello there. You have proposed the article Kummeling for deletion without providing a reason why in the {{prod}} template. You may be interested to know that you can add your reasoning like that: {{prod|Add reason for deletion here}}. This will make your reasoning show up in the article's deletion notice. It will also aid other users in considering your suggestion on the Proposed Deletions log. See also: How to propose deletion of an article. Sandstein 20:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... I think the article makes a pretty good case for its own deletion, but I'll go ahead and add a reason anyway. Zetawoof 22:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

PIGUI deletion contested

G'day, please see PIGUI talk page for protest against deletion of PIGUI --Webaware 22:45, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Appears to be deleted already. Zetawoof 23:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Has now been resolved. --Webaware 15:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm still not sure it's got encyclopedic value, but I'll leave that decision to someone else. Zetawoof 21:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Sari Article

You add tag that shows sari article violates copyright, could you please define me why ? because i have added those notes, from AliHessami Book about Sari City, Please reply to my talk page, Thank You! --Ali 06:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Basically, it reads like you typed up, or translated, a book or web page that you found. The formatting, in particular, is highly anomalous. Zetawoof 10:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

PROD

I find your attitude objectionable in evaluation of why I unprod things. I do not have an objection to the PROD process, unlike what you intimate in your discussion on Mao Kobayashi. I infact use PROD. If I feel an article is noteworthy enough that it should go through AfD instead, I will unprod it. I will not nominate it for deletion unless I feel similar to the PRODder that it should be deleted. (I have actually unprodded and then AfD'd things). If you have a problem with people unprodding articles because they may have value, then you are debasing the value of PROD. 132.205.45.148

Cleanup Thanks

Hello Zetawolf, thanks for your assitance in cleaning up some of my posts. I have only one re-modification found on Zeppo. I have added a more generic link to The Zeppo Network, Inc. which is the IP holder for "Zeppo. Regards, Robertholf 11:38, 7 May 2006 (HST)

Slow down

Um. You placed that speedy delete template on the tea bowl page about 2 seconds after I created it. Slow down. Exploding Boy 07:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Comes of watching Special:Newpages. I didn't look at the author and assumed it was someone messing around with the redirect button. Zetawoof 07:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Zennie

I have started an RfC concerning Zennie. I would really appreciate it if you would certify the basis for this dispute at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Zennie so that we can get Zennie's refusal to license under the GFDL resolved. You aren't under any obligation to do so, of course, but you did try to resolve this issue with the user. --Yamla 19:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

My involvement with the case is really very limited - all I've done is post a brief comment clarifying GFDL/GPL licensing in the copyvio discussion. I don't really know as I have anything to contribute. Zetawoof 19:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

BAYT

It is not a reposted thing that was deleted it is a brand new article.--Gregorykay 19:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Then what's this? Zetawoof 00:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

(...)

That was when the history was word for word copied! it is no longer it is brand new! please remove the speedy delete! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregorykay (talk • contribs) .

Zetawoof, I have put up an AfD on the page in place of your CSD, which was repeatedly being taken down. I think this is a better solution to the problem than having Gregorykay (talk · contribs) constanly vandalizing it and taking down your notices - Hobbeslover 01:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
That works. Zetawoof 07:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Deprod Story of beyblade

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Story of beyblade, which you proposed for deletion. I am leaving this message here to notify you about it. This is a perfectly fine start to an episode list article. I have moved it to List of Beyblade episodes so that it's at the right place and won't get duplicated, and I filled in the context. Hopefully others will continue to improve it. If you think notability is a concern, bring it to AfD: in my experience fancruft deletions are always somewhat controversial. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it. Instead, feel free to list the article at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Mangojuice 03:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I'm still a bit concerned about the length, though; the article is currently a massive 136 KB, making it extremely hard to maintain. There's also precedent against full episode summaries - even the Pokèmon series list doesn't summarize every episode. Zetawoof 04:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Spanish Language Redirects

Check the Misplaced Pages:Redirect policy. It says non-English language redirects are good reasons to make redirects. ---Dark Tichondrias 06:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Only for English -> foreign language redirects. Not for every single article! Zetawoof 06:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Pugaliers

Thanks for the advice on the redirect and showing me where to put it cheers --Casliber

Nurse Joy

What harm does it do to leave the article by itself? It is descriptive, concise and informative. The AfD decision was 4 - Keep, 4 - Redirect and 1 - Merge and Keep. That is about equal, which results in No Consensus. Highway 20:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The AfD was closed as merge and redirect; you can verify this for yourself by taking a look at the closed discussion. If you would like to contest the decision, you can do so on WP:DRV. Zetawoof 20:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
But I'm saying that AfD was closed incorrectly. Can't we just amend it, what happened to "so fix it"? Highway 20:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
And isn't DRV to reverse deletions? Highway 20:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
You know, I'm not sure in this case. Take it up there anyway; if that isn't the appropriate venue, I'm sure someone there can direct you to the correct one. Zetawoof 21:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
I have expand on the article a fair deal, and I have been informed that since this article is not the same as the one that nominated for AfD (content wise), the decision can't be upheld. Cheers, Highway 22:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Furry fandom

I did not vandalize that article.I just thought that it had a PPOV instead of a NPOV like it should.I'm not one of those "LOL FURRIES" people,I am simply trying to make it objective.Oh,and sorry if this username doesn't exist,I can't remember if I had an account on here.--67.23.176.12 02:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't deliberately misrepresent the time and date of your edits. It really doesn't make a good impression. Your edits were hardly objective, and have been reverted multiple times by multiple users. Continuing to make these changes will lead to your being blocked from editing. Zetawoof 04:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Animated series batman

Hi, What did you do with animated series batman. I didn't know what was a kikiproject and I'm not sure Animated Series Batman should (or souldn't) be one. It's supposed to tell the bio of DAAU version of Batman. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by T-man, the Wise Scarecrow (talk • contribs) .

The header of the page described it as a WikiProject: "Some Wikipedians have formed a project to better organize information in articles related to Animated Series Batman. This page and its subpages contain their suggestions; it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians." There appears to be a partially formed article halfway down the page; do you want me to split this out to a proper article? Zetawoof 22:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
So does that mean that you are leading this Project? Cause I don't see any discussion anywhere about turning it into a Project - I see discussion about merging the article. A more complete explanation of why you did what you did, on the talk page, would be appreciated. CovenantD 22:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
No, I have no interest in leading the project. I simply noticed that the page opened by describing itself as a WikiProject, and moved it accordingly. If the WikiProject header was added inappropriately, then I'd fully support a move back to article namespace. Zetawoof 22:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, there has been such mention. I made it, the only problem is that I didn't know what was exactly a wikiproject. I think I'm gona undo the whole thing.--T-man, the wise 22:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Zetawoof, please do move it back. As you can see from T-man's post, he didn't know what he was doing when he added that. The article itself probably isn't going to exist for much longer as most people support merging it into other articles. CovenantD 22:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Will do. (Never mind; appears to be done.) Zetawoof 23:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

List of Japanese female porn stars nominated for deletion

Hi, Zetawoof. You seem to have some interest in the topic, so I thought you might want to know, List of Japanese female porn stars has been nominated for deletion. Maybe you'd like to contribute to the discussion? -- Dekkappai 03:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Yup, and I've already voted. Zetawoof 04:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film)

Given that the OotP movie isn't expected to be out for another year or so, it's unlikely that much has been done toward getting started on the HBP film. Zetawoof 00:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Correct...though Muggle Net and IMDB are reporting this. Obviously, they haven't chosen a director yet but then David Heyman's going to produce this film and Steve Kloves will do the Screenplay and it is highly likely David Barron going to "Execuite Produce" the film. Also, it is likely Dan, Rupert and Emma will return. ForestH2
Replying back on the article talk page, where it belongs. Zetawoof 01:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


Furry fandom Edits

Please read the edits I have made to Furry Fandom before deciding to revert them. The edits in question removed POV and added information. 68.69.194.125 06:36, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The fact that you referred to the edit as a "wiki war" was reason enough for me to revert it, no matter what the content involved was. Add to that your multiple previous blocks for revert warring, and... Zetawoof 08:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

So basically you are saying that once a person has been blocked for vandalism, every edit they make from then on is vandalism? How about reading my edits before you revert? Better yet, try not to whitewash wikipedia articles. 68.69.194.125 04:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Once a user has vandalized sufficiently that they've been blocked for vandalism, it's generally considered a fair assumption that subsequent edits they make to the same article may be considered suspect. Zetawoof 04:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thats one theory. Another is that you are simply a furry zealot who automatically changes edits that might paint the furry fandom in a negative light, regardless of whether they are relevant or sourced. 68.69.194.125 05:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Why the deletion?

Hi Zetawoof, Why did you propose the deletion (and I'm assuming, you carried it out) of the Mourning September article I was writing? Did you read my defense on the talk page? --eudaemonic3 07:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a Misplaced Pages administrator - I didn't carry out the deletion. In any case, the group didn't appear to meet Misplaced Pages's criteria for band notability - they only had one album listed, and no charted hits. Zetawoof 08:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Watford office Options

Your recent edit to Watford office Options was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Misplaced Pages articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 08:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion

Thanks for the advice!WilyD 12:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Zetawoof 20:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the info on FurrySettersr 21:15, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. Zetawoof 21:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Section "Cursed News Groups" (from Curse)

I assume that you intend to follow the policies and guidelines of WP participation. Correcting a newly added sentence that you know to be wrong is also much better than simply deleting it.

Blanking, the removal of all or significant parts of articles is a common vandal edit.

Please do not remove content from Misplaced Pages; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ste4k 19:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Sir, you have so far been reverted by no less than four different people, and have been blocked twice under 3RR for reinserting the section. The text you're attempting to insert is largely unsourced, and borders on patent nonsense. If you want to discuss the insertion of this section, you may do so on the article's talk page; however, until a consensus can be arrived at that the section belongs in the article, it stays out. Zetawoof 00:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Ma'am. And the requirements for both verification and NPOV have been met as discussed in the talk-page.
You should yourself supply justification for your POV which declares "patent nonsense". Your reasons are
opinionated and do not challenge the discussion presented. Thanks. Ste4k 02:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
There has been basically no "discussion" on the talk page. And I suppose "patent nonsense" is a bit harsh, but the fact remains that you've presented some bizarre but non-notable claims without any real kind of support. Zetawoof 04:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Again, all of the various curses listed on the page are "bizarre" from the NPOV and on that point we
agree. The purpose of the list is to show the various types of bizarre curses. It makes the article
interesting. Due to a person whom was blanking the addition and not participating in discussion, I
requested that the page be frozen. The 3RR which you refer to above was mainly due to the actions
of that person and my failing to report the same in a more apparent fashion. I am not very experienced,
but am learning very quickly. Please have some patience. Support in numbers has never indicated much
more than numeric superiority. :) I took the brunt of the war, but I would still like to see this
article expanded. There is also no mention of the Video Tape even though it was mentioned before.
I added to the bottom of the discussion this morning showing how the newsgroup section meets each of
the tests givin in the documentation about verifiability as a self-published source. Please review.
The weak point in that verifiability is that of notability, however, because of the source itself
that the article speaks about being considered unverifiable, what appears to be an infinite loop
in logic then ensues. Consider the following statement: Some people on UseNet believe in curses.
True? Yes. Verifiable? Yes. Per the tests of verifiability?  ???? Thanks. Ste4k 05:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Take it to the talk page. Zetawoof 06:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I just checked there again, and you haven't commented. Please see notes below the heading there
"Self-published sources in articles about themselves" which are verbatim from the documentation with
reasoning interspersed. Those are my comments. I didn't see your rebuttal. Thanks. Ste4k 08:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I said, take it to the talk page. I haven't taken the time to write a response there, but I plan to. Zetawoof 08:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Next Door Nikki

Zetawoof Having stated your perspective, I wonder if you would give me your opinion on another article which I have recently made changes to. Please review the history over the past day or two carefully before making any assumptions. Please reply here on your page if you wish, I have it on my watchlist for that purpose. Thanks. Ste4k 00:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You're removing sources. Don't. Zetawoof 00:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for that. Should unqualified sources remain on the article then? Ste4k 01:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Depends on what they are. The sources that you removed are definitive for the subject - the first one was the very web site that the article is talking about! - so they should stay. Zetawoof 01:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again, I put them back under external links. You being familiar with the curse page, and how its layed out wiki style, could you take a look and give me a 2nd opinion on what sort of list of things should be included here for sections? Thanks. Ste4k 02:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey now! :) You took out the reference links that were the cites for the statement that the same company owning both web sites. Why?

Ste4k 02:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Ack, no, you made it worse. A few points:
  • Never, ever use phrases like "it is alleged" or "some say". They're considered weasel words. Cite a source, or find a way
  • Don't link to the Misplaced Pages meta namespace (WP:whatever) from article space.

I removed those links because they weren't obviously relevant. Zetawoof 05:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

After some investigation I was able to uncover some notoriaty, however, the name of the woman on that site is owned by the company she works for. That same company (based on P.O. Box address in Vancouver) has been cited for fraud, spam, and all sorts of things. Send me an e-mail if you'd like the address, etc. Thanks! :) Ste4k 09:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I am, quite honestly, not all that interested, and I don't expect the encyclopedia is either. Misplaced Pages isn't investigative journalism; it's an encyclopedia. Zetawoof 19:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

AI USA

Amnesty International USA is a large organisation with a seperate history to that of Amnesty International. Many of the things the organisation campaigns on are unique to AI USA. It has over 350,000 members, and as such is far more notable than the vast majority of orgs on this encyclopedia. Plus you created a double redirect - if you think that the org is deletable then you should AfD it. Not asking for comment on the talk page is another blatant discourtesy. Mostlyharmless 05:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Responded on article talk page. Zetawoof 05:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Slow down, there's no real urgency Mostlyharmless 22:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Noted. Zetawoof 23:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Tutawa copyvio

Thanks Zetawoof. I was in the process of making the entry when you got there first :-) I got the edit conflict message. But I found a different page ] with the exact text. Should that be noted on the copyio page too? Thanks again. Brian 10:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)btball

Probably not necessary. All that's needed for a copyvio is at least one other source. Zetawoof 10:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. —Xyrael / 15:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Zetawoof 19:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Authorship of A Course in Miracles

Ste4k wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, since you've been at this awhile longer, okay? I went through the citations of this page and converted them all to cite-web templates and tried to find the correct author and so forth. If you get any spare time, would you mind swinging over there and giving it a once over? I'd appreciate you letting me know if I screwed anything up. Thanks. :)

That looks more or less OK, with the minor "gotcha" that dates in {{cite web}} don't need to be bracketed - I think the template does that on its own. Zetawoof 01:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Furry fandom

What would you suggest we do to get rid of this IP who's so single-mindedly replacing his incorrect edits on this article? I pointed out the problems with his edits on the talk page, but he's just reverted yet again. Suggestions? My patience is wearing very thin. Tony Fox (speak) 05:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh man, ha ha! Editors like yourself are doing far more to discredit Misplaced Pages than any "vandal" (or in your case, someone with a different opinion that refuses to be coerced into submission) could. Congratulations on contributing to making Misplaced Pages the laughing stock that it's rapidly becoming. - 85.210.176.196 06:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Um, which one of us are you talking to? You're probably wrong either way, but I'm curious. Zetawoof 06:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Work it out gaylord. Who does it look like my comment is addressed to? - 85.210.107.2 19:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)