User talk:Tijuana Brass/Archive 1

Archives
September 2005 - February 2006 March - April 2006 May - June 2006 July - October 2006

Contents 1 Shooting Fish 2 Chapel 3 it was more than the anti-corporatist POV 4 Sorry, needed to move sections in a hurry 5 Still working on the Katrina in New Orleans article? 6 I've been around wikipedia long enough... 7 Katrina edits 8 Controversies regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 9 The Shepherd of Hermas 10 CVU 11 Purportedly 12 Hi 13 Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. -- featured status vote 14 Jesus 15 Help at Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. 16 reverts 17 WikiProject LDS 18 Thanks 19 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Laveesh Network 20 es:WP:SUD 21 Broken redirects 22 Wiki-adiction 23 Message to Deadsalmon 24 Cybermind 25 Wall Drug 26 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 27 Menlo Park 28 Alex Chiu discussion 29 Troll alert 30 SOS 31 Copy and paste move

[edit] Shooting Fish

You voted on the article's deletion, however there was also a film by that name which Sabine's Sunbird and I have edited the article to refer to. Note the film is linked to from both the Kate Beckinsale and Stuart Townsend articles. I hope you will reconsider your vote in light of this information. Steve block talk 21:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

• Good catch! Thanks for the note. Seems like a vote change is in order. Deadsalmon 21:43, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chapel

I notice that in the article Chapel you have changed the sentence "for instance in England and (especially) Wales many nonconformist church buildings are known as chapels" to "in England and Wales some Christian denominations refer to church buildings they consider nonconformist as chapels". I wrote the original phrase, but I'm not being "protective" of "my own" text in commenting! You're most welcome to make changes on Wikipedia.

Two comments on this:

1) Nature of "nonconformity"

I have the feeling that you are reading my origianal wording as disparaging, which certainly was not my intention. I don't think that "nonconformist" is a disparaging term, as England has an established church, to which the people I would regard in some respects as my spiritual forebears refused to conform (especially in 1662 - when the ministers got turned out of their livings for not conforming).

2) Use of "chapel"

The word chapel is not only used by "others" - the nonconformists themselves use it - take a look at this Google search for the words "Baptist Chapel" on UK internet sites: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22baptist+chapel%22+site%3Auk

Having said all that, I as a "nonconformist" don't particularly like the word "chapel" as it does suggest to me that a nonconformist congregation/building is not a "church", but clearly this something that many nonconformists do not feel.

Best wishes and welcome to Wikipedia editing :-)

--PeterR 12:33, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

(DeadSalmon replied): Thanks for the note. Yeah, it seems that the whole thing revolved around how "nonconformist" was understood differently — due to the Catholic overtone, I was't sure if it was used disparagingly or not. Thanks for the clarification. Maybe the best thing to do would be to revert back to the original sentence you wrote, but with either a different word or some sort of brief explanatory phrase for those unfamiliar with English ecclesiastical relationships. By the way, I enjoy the work you've written in the article, particularly the history of the word's origin. Deadsalmon 23:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Actually I think the sentence I mentioned was about all I did write in the article. You can see what different people wrote by clicking history. --PeterR 07:23, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] it was more than the anti-corporatist POV

Yes, there was a blatantly anti-corporatist tone, but the facts were plain wrong, which is probably why no citations were provided. Flood control has broad public support by many constituencies. In fact most of the current residents probably wish the flood control was a bit better, however, ill advised some think that might have been. Yes, canals serve the oil industry, but they also serve others, and the public has also considered enabling the oil industry an important priority, as shown by the consistent support pledged by the representives they elect. There is no reason to allow anti-corporatist POV in without notable rather than fringe attribution. However, in this case there wasn't any attribution.--Silverback 10:29, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry, needed to move sections in a hurry

My followup (also at User talk:Lexor. Lexor|Talk 11:41, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, but somebody had added an entire section specifically on the New Orleans to the main Hurricane Katrina article, that needed moving swiftly else it would be expanded on. They are clearly isolated subsections, so should be easy to spot "Summary" and "Declaration of "state of emergency" versus "martial law"", please refactor and/or delete. I don't plan any more moving to that article.

Didn't notice that; thanks for doing so. Deadsalmon 11:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Nice cleanup, by the way. It certainly needed some "cohereifying" (I often use "sectionify" and "proseify" articles, so cohereify is fine by me!) Lexor|Talk 17:10, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Still working on the Katrina in New Orleans article?

...yes. If you're wondering if I had inadvertently left on the inuse tag, no, I'm still at it. I hope to be finished by 8:45 a.m. EST. Deadsalmon 11:57, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

• Beat my timeline by two minutes, woot. The Security (now Civil Disturbances) section is significantly shorter, as I removed a large amount of information that was either repeated or extraneous for a WP article. In a few weeks, it'll be more clear exactly what's worth keeping and what's not, so some of that information may very well find its way back into the article. Deadsalmon 12:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I've been around wikipedia long enough...

Your words. Yes, I have. Long enough to know when a newbie's onto an utterly daft idea. Trinity College will not be merged into Trinity disambiguation, ever. There is no discussion, just an ugly note on the page. Please do not do it. There must be something on this at wikipedia:disambiguation. Dunc|☺ 18:57, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

So far, the only reasons you've advanced for your position are that it is a "silly" "daft idea" by a "newbie." This is less than compelling. In my case, I'd suggest merging as there is an education section on the main Trinity disambig, and including a redirect. This is for the interest of keeping things together into one page. Again, if you're as experienced as you claim to be, why worry about the outcome of a consensus and force through change on your own? Please be patient and wait for the outcome. Deadsalmon 19:02, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry if I didn't make my point clear. I did not say you were daft, just that you had a daft idea. Now, there is no discussion at [[talk:Trinity (disambiguation) at all, only PeterR who's spoken out against it, and it's been stagnating there for a week now.

I shall elucidate. The point of a dab page is that someone thinks "ooooh! I wnat to know about Trinity College". Therefore he puts "Trinity College" into the box and bonks it. He should be taken to a page on Trinity Colleges, not a general dab page for Trinity, though which he then has to search for what he wants. It is really quite simple how this concept works. Or would you have William Hamilton merged into Hamilton? Dunc|☺ 19:11, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

There! Now that wasn't so hard, was it? Thanks for the opinion. Please post it on the talk page, and if nothing else shows up in a day or two, go nuts with your edit. However, it would be far more productive to not only remove the notices, but include a notice on the original Trinity disambig page, and create one for Trinity University as well. Deadsalmon 19:15, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Katrina edits

Thanks. The hardest thing is having to constantly filter changes in Hurricane Katrina down into the subarticles and keep the main article sections nice self-contained summaries. What part of "Main article:" do people not understand? Lexor|Talk 07:55, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Controversies regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

I've responded to your question on my talk page -Visorstuff 17:13, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I've responded to your note on my talk page. Would love to continue dialogue via email or talk pages. -Visorstuff 13:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Shepherd of Hermas

All of my contributions to this article was simply adapting some PD source in the beginning, then hoping other Wikipedians would continue the work. And after looking at the changes since my edit in March 2004, I'm not sure that I could take credit for much that is currently in this article. But I'll gladly accept any compliments that come my way! -- llywrch 18:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] CVU

Hmm. Looked all over the CVU page, but I didn't see any specific directions on how to jump in. I'm guessing that it may be the same as everywhere else — edit my name into the list and go at it — but I thought I'd ask here first. Got any guidelines? Gracias. Deadsalmon 09:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I created a guideline section on cvu page, what do you think? --Cool Cat ^Talk 08:56, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Purportedly

Hello DS, I went back to your edit on Moroni and delted "purportedly" in the article. We have discussed this multiple times on most of the LDS and other religious articles on WIKI. Articles that are centered on issues of faith are typically told from the perspective of the "believer" or the group. WIKI is not sponsoring or claiming the validity of their claims only telling the story from their perspective. It is assumed that the reader knows that the subject of the article is one of faith.

On a more personal ntoe, when one reads an article where one is constantly reminded by the interjection of purportedly and other similar words the writing becomes clumsy. I prefer to just be able to read an article to gain an understanding of a group's perspective. Storm Rider 00:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Copied from Storm Rider's talk page: Thanks for the note. I've been monitoring vandalism today and I think I mistook that change for a malicious change when it wasn't. Deadsalmon 00:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hi, Deadsalmon. Welcome to Wikipedia. Ive been away for months, but I want you tho know how glad I am to have you here with your perspective. Tom Haws 23:46, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I added a clarifying sentence to my user page User:Hawstom#Personal_life. Do you think it distills the essence? Tom Haws 13:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely. Plus, the belief-o-matic reference is entertaining. Deadsalmon 00:07, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. -- featured status vote

The Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. article is now up for featured article status. If you get a chance, please vote here. COGDEN 23:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jesus

Check out the Jesus article and edit it to keep it focused on Jesus and a biographical account of Him. Watch the Jesus page to keep it focused on Him. Thank you. Scifiintel 21:47, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Help at Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr.

Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. will be featured on the Main Page on the 23rd. Vandalism will probably be frequent that day. Could you help in monitoring the page? The 23rd starts at 7 pm ET on Dec 22nd, since wikipedia goes by UTC. Thx in advance. Trödel•talk 02:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Thx Trödel•talk 12:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] reverts

I noticed your message to Naconkantari. He has admin privileges, one of which is being given a little "rollback" button when looking at diffs, contribution histories and RC for one-click reverts. The rollback button gives an automated "Reverted edits by BanyanTree to last edit by Deadsalmon" type of edit summary, which is how you can spot admins. I still get beaten to reverts by users doing it manually, which is a little embarrassing, but some non-admins findnavigation popups useful, which give you a revert option when you point at an article revision in a history. Cheers, BanyanTree 15:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject LDS

Hello! I noticed you were on the list of members in the LDS WikiProject, and I was wondering if you were still interested in helping out there. You see, over the past few months, it appears that it has slowly drifted into inactivity. But you CAN help. Please consider doing both of the following:

1. Take ONE thing form the To-Do list and do it. Once you're done with it, remove it from the list, and from the<>{{Template:LDSprojectbox}}<>, so we know its done. Keep the page on your watchlist. We have a backlog going for more than half a year. Please help to work on it, and remove it.
2. Vote on the LDSCOTF, and work on it!
3. Tell your friends (esp. LDS friends, & esp. Wikipedian friends) about this WikiProject, and enocourage them to join (and be active).

Remember: your involvement in this WikiProject is just that - involvement! Please help us out.

(Note: I'm sending this out to everyone who's name was on the membership list, so I will NOT be watching this page for a response. If you want to contact me, do it on MY talk page, please.)

Thanks for all that you do -Trevdna 15:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the nice note and barnstar. You are too kind. -Visorstuff 21:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Laveesh Network

Hi there,

I noticed that you voted "speedy delete per Coolgamer" in your contribution to the above AFD. However, Coolgamer did not propose a speedy deletion, nor did he suggest which of the criteria for speedy deletion this fits. I would be obliged if you could clarify your comment/vote in order to provide this information, or change your vote to a regular delete, or something.

Thanks for your AFD contributions! Stifle 15:07, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Gah. Rushed through it and forgot that advertisements alone aren't SD criteria. Got it revised, thanks. Deadsalmon 19:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] es:WP:SUD

Another hand at putting an arm around the shoulder of potential Spanish-speaking LDS movement editors would be very much appreciated. As I mentioned to V, there is mostly ambassadorship to do at this time, giving a cheerful welcome to those well-meaning anons who may seem to be doing more harm than good, and hopefully building them into a es:WP:SUD team someday. Why don't you get yourself an es account, sign in as a participant there at the SUD project, add whatever Mormonism articles you can find to your watchlist, and welcome any passerby you happen to catch? Or whatever you see that could use your help. My own es watchlist is pretty tiny. There just isn't much of a project or body of work at this point, which is why we non-natives need to hang out there, I guess. Tom Haws 21:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

For your very own convenience, I listed at es:WP:SUD all the articles I have found. Tom Haws 21:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you at least sign up there as a participant? Tom Haws 17:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Broken redirects

Going through the broken redirects page, I noticed there are several created by you. Last I checked, they were numbers 275 - 282 on the page; you may want to take a look. Deadsalmon 22:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up, the numbers seem toi be actual articles, can you link me to the broken redirect pages? I have over 18,000 edits hence have lost track of all :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Whoops, meant to do that. Here you go. User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/Fr-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/En-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/Ja-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/Bg-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/Pl-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/It-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/Es-lang.txt, User:Coolcat/IRC Bot/De-lang.txt. Old bot stuff, I suppose. Deadsalmon 22:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

All fixed... :) Thank you again for the headsup... --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem. On a different note, if you've got a minute, mind explaining to me if you've got a bot or some other easy way to copy text between talk pages as you've done? Do you just cut and paste? Thanks. Deadsalmon 22:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

The text files (now much more complex) are the language files on the bot. I paste it in english and people transalate it to their native langage. The IRC vandal fighting bot covers many wikis (9 languages) and 13+ projects I actualy lost count and am too lazy to check. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Good deal. Thanks for indulging my curiosity. Deadsalmon 22:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

...and addiction. At least now I can diagnose how bad it really is! Deadsalmon 22:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem with what you're doing. Admins can easily work out that CSD R1 applies, and I don't believe there's a direct template to deal with broken redirects. Check WP:CSD though. Good work. Harro5 22:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki-adiction

You may want to take the test. ;) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Message to Deadsalmon

Deadsalmon,

You sent me a message: "Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Deadsalmon 04:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)"

I agree with your sentiments, but should explain that I was attempting to bring fake articles to the attention of admins so that they can be removed. I became aware that a single user contributed a number of fake articles (look up the 'Ghosh factor,' for example), and I'm trying to correct the problem.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.170.246.166 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 13 January 2006.

Please refer to User talk:129.170.246.166 for the resolution of this issue. Deadsalmon 04:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cybermind

I have never done it before, but I would think that the best thing to do is make a note of your view on the AfD page, which you have already done. If indeed a user can retract an AfD, I think an administrator will take the necessary steps to do so (I have at least once seen an admin move a deletion page). The worst case scenario is that the AfD page has to sit around for a week before being kept. C'est la vie. --Hansnesse 06:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it can be closed early, under the Speedy keep guideline. I have performed the speedy keep, thanks for letting me know.--Commander Keane 06:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wall Drug

I'm new to the wonderful world of wiki, and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to post my response to your Wall Drug question here on or my talk page. At any rate, I found the picture in an old box of my grandmother's photos. I don't know much about it, although she thinks it was taken somewhere in Africa, as her sister was a missionary there for many years. Ojibberish 17:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The modern edition of D&C uses the church's current caps and hyphenation, indeed, but the paragraph in question specifically states those were changed at a later date, so your edit left that inconsistent. If you can verify the precise name as of 1838, then you ought to change the latter statement, too. I've commented on the article talk page, which might be the best place to follow up... Alai 17:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Menlo Park

Thanks for your message. "The bookstore" and "the coffee shop" are the two places everyone knows, landmarks for sure. Kepler's Books has its own article. The cafe gets probably at least 100 patrons at a time from 6pm-9pm sitting outside on the huge patio area. I'm an inclusionist about these kinds of things. I would much rather have detail than scrub for commerce-related material. I know it's hard to draw the line. You were absolutly correct, by the way, on the POV in the parking thing. The reason people put it in is that I think it's rare in car-oriented California. --James S. 09:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alex Chiu discussion

While I'll agree on the discovery channel one (I honestly never heard of it, and I shouldn't take any rumour someone puts up as fact) and I guess the Fanimumation link is annoying, I think a lot of the links are relevant. Many of them are for discussing the guy, and far more informative than his website, which would be solely biased towards his products, not to mention very messy. I'm not sure which of the guidelines some break... but what's wrong with forums? Tyciol 00:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Generally, forums don't contribute much, if anything, in terms of adding encyclopedic content (or verifiable reference material). Take a look at the guidelines at WP:EL for some good pointers; among these, two important quotes that are especially relevant for this article: "In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose [should not be linked to]," and "Fan sites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. In extreme cases, a link to a web directory of fansites can replace this link."

I tend to be somewhat deletionist when deciding what external links to keep, though. Another general guideline I try to follow, although others may contest it, is not linking to sites that don't take a serious approach to the subject in question. Of course, there's some flexibility to be allowed there, but it's why I removed sites like the "Loser of the Year" award, the RPG game, and the satirical Fade to Black interview (as entertaining as I found them). The Slashdot one is sort of a grey area, since some people are asking serious questions and others are just making fun of Chiu. I suppose I have something of a "WP is not Google" mentality. In the end, if an external site is of sufficient importance, I figure it'll wind up here again eventually.

In any case, I wouldn't be wholly opposed to bringing a few more links in, now that you've read a longwinded explanation of my link-erasing tendencies. Were there any specific ones you had in mind to restore? I'd be glad to collaborate some more on this. Deadsalmon 02:04, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I guess my main issue is that the three websites only link to his sites, meaning there'd be a bias. The one I'm largely interested in restoring is the first three forum links, since it is where people chat about the sites, and he posts on it and stuff. The rest are pretty useless, I'd agree with you. The Kazaa Lite thing doesn't belong in a link I guess, I'll probably mention it in the article instead, since it's so longwinded. By the way, don't you think Wiki needs to get some kind of new chat system? Having to edit both user-chat pages every time must be exasperating eh? --Tyciol 19:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Troll alert

Don't worry, deadsalmon, I can handle this. I have encountered things much worse than this on Wikipedia. No need to apologize and of course you were right about the article talk page. I thought he was a troll from the get-go, but I wanted to address his questions anyway, just in case. At least now his comments don't stand without a counter. Nice "user page" you have, even though you are not "a joker" or a "midnight stoker". Str1977 16:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SOS

I don't know if your recent edits to Save Our State were in your capacity as a member of the CVU or out of genuine interest, but regardless, I'd like to ask you to review my proposed new version at User:Rockero420/Save Our State. Gracias,--Rockero420 21:58, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy and paste move

I believe the way you fixed the Two thousand stripling warriors article is know as a Copy and paste move. I am going to fix it per Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page, please don't edit it while I do this. If I am mistaken please tell me so on my user page. BrokenSegue 02:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

All right it's done. You'll notice that the edit history is now at the correct title. BrokenSegue 02:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)