User talk:TonyTheTiger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Approved for AWB! 2 Query 3 Argo Tea 4 Promontory Point 5 Eh? 6 RfA 7 Comment on your withdrawn RfA 8 Re: E. Normus Category 9 Action City 10 Mass mailing 11 Excellent candidate statement 12 Category:African American businesspeople 13 admin part 2 14 Argo Tea 15 Wow!

[edit] Approved for AWB!

Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. I have approved your request and you should now be able to use the AWB application. Be sure to check every edit before you save it, and don't forget to check out the AWB Guide. You can get any help you need over on the AWB talk page. Feel free to contact me with any questions, Alphachimp 02:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Query

I noticed your documentation of milestone edits. Is there a tool you can use to identify such milestone edits?

I also notice that you have several notations of race and religion on your user page. May I ask if you have ever gone through an AfD or CfD on a topic related to race or religion on wikipedia?

I am an Afro-american and have noticed that often times administrative debates stall due to lack of support. What is the debate that you most wish you had gotten support for? TonyTheTiger 15:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

There are several edit counters available at Wikipedia:WikiProject edit counters#List of counters that would assist you in finding your total number of edits currently. Alternatively, you can just look under your contributions, set it to show 500 at a time, and begin at your earliest contribution to see your 500th, 1000th, 1500th, etc. edits. I'm sure I have been in a few AfD or CfD debates that involved race or religion, but none stand our and I can't really say there is one I most wish I had gotten support for. -- tariqabjotu 16:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you do something other than cut and paste for your response to appear on both of our talk pages? Also did you know that using 500 at a time causes count lags because it starts with 1-500 then goes to 500-999, then 999-1498? Do you have a preferred counter? At the top of my user page I use Kate's tool. However, this will not help me to go back and find my 1000th or 2000th edit. Do you have any specific suggestion for that purpose. TonyTheTiger 16:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I just cut and paste the response. About the contribution counter, I think you might have discovered a glitch (to some extent). If you begin at the oldest contribution, it will show edits 1-500, 501-1000, 1001-1500, etc., but it appears starting at the newest contributions, it shows the 500 oldest edits, then the 500 oldest edits beginning with the 500th oldest edit, then the 500 oldest edits beginning with the 999 oldest edit. I reported the possible bug. -- tariqabjotu 16:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Argo Tea

Sure, why not? Maybe next to the blurb about the room itself. I wish folks wouldn't be so eager to delete something they can't find a million hits for on Google (and I don't get why the same person keeps picking on this one article). Google isn't a good gauge of notability at all. I really wish I knew more about the place itself so I could improve the article. TheQuandry 21:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Promontory Point

What are they trying to argue? It's a pretty factually complete article, from my viewpoint. There are a few grammatical typos, but nothing major. I guess you could expand on the Save The Point community task force portion (I know a person or two involved with them), and maybe talk about the planned seawall reconstruction itself (which was actually started 5 years ago and is incomplete to this day due to the fight between local residents and the preservation society (who want the wall rebuilt with the existing limestone blocks) and the park district (who want to plow it over and use concrete) but from my one time read through it seems like a pretty decent article. Good pictures, too. TheQuandry 23:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I made some grammatical fixes, reworded a couple things, etc. If you disagree with something, just revert it or let me know and I'll fix it. TheQuandry 00:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eh?

"Aborted"? You make it sound as though it's some complex process putting banners on two pages. The reason for merge is rather obvious, I should think, as one article is a direct and exclusive subset of the other, and neither has so great a volume of content as to warrant keeping them separate. Thanks for letting me know; I'll do it again when I get home this evening. JDoorjam Talk 00:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

Hi,

My comment wasn't intended to make light of the issue of race, only to suggest that an RfA is not the best place to raise that issue. RfA is concerned with the candidate's record as a contributor, and personal biographical or ideological details, when introduced, almost always result in a negative impression. Among other reasons, this arises because of WP:POINT. RfA is not a forum to "crusade for fairness," one might say.

Demographically, Wikipedia is populated largely by liberal-minded white people. This means that ignorance of the depth of racial injustice is sometimes a problem (User:Deeceevoice's efforts in the cause of Afrocentrism are an example of this that dismayed me especially.) However, that ignorance (when it does arise) is usually easy to defeat with calm, dispassionate discussion. While a small segment of the editing community (especially occasional vandals) is undoubtedly racist, I have not encountered malicious racism in any admin. Unconscious racism is a problem for all people, but this is, again, easily counter-acted by reasonable discourse. Wikipedia is not a project to foster world peace, and we do not need to all love each other; what is required is that each of us is devoted to the encyclopedia and its quality. Every admin I now know understands this, and (whatever their private demons), they are fully capable of focusing on content-merit questions in a relatively open-minded way.

Volunteering to build a free encyclopedia for a non-profit organization is, in my opinion, an extraordinarily noble goal. That goal helps self-select for intelligent, kind-hearted folks of every color. While there exceptions to every rule, I have found the community quite wise in its general conduct. If folks get the impression that a person's primary reason for editing is to advance a cause (even one as well-meant and sorely-needed as social justice) rather than to build the encyclopedia, they may exhibit a lack of patience with that person after a time. This might have happened to you.

If there are any AfD decisions you find offensive, please refer me to them, and I will examine them and see if a DRV is in order. Best wishes, Xoloz 02:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Your reply is wonderful to read, and I now see that you are dedicated to the project. Your RfA nomination statement probably rankled a few people (not me -- I commented strickly on wiki-space experience, an area of focus for me in evaluating candidates.) If you continue along your present course, and contribute regularly to XfDs, I'll be happy to nominate you for RfA myself in April or May. A nomination by someone else has an extra virtue besides the obvious: if a small misstep in the statement occurs, people blame the nominator, and not the candidate! ;)

Ah, pornography -- a true hotbed of policy formation always. As my userpage suggests, I too have an affection for erotica, especially those more obscure facets outside the mainstream (sexual fetish.) I share your concern that Wikipedia should be careful not to allow censorship in this sensitive area; at the same, I recognize that any controversial area will be held to the highest sourcing standards, if for no other reason than because there will be a large population of editors, with conflicting views, who might take an interest in the subject. This is a good thing -- I wish that every subject might provoke the depth of thought, policy-wise on Wikipedia, that pornography has, but pornography is one fine "jumping-off point" for further policy clarification.

I'm sure you know of WP:PORNBIO. This is the cornerstone of notability for pornography, and establishes a good set of criteria for the inclusion of individuals. The inclusion of organizations distributing pornography would be generally covered by WP:CORP. Unfortunately, no consensus guideline yet exists for the inclusion of awards, but a partial list of some notable ones is given within WP:PORNBIO. I am not certain, examinining your talk page comment, but it appears you've had trouble with objections to the inclusion of "lists of awardees" (CyberPlaymate of the Month, etc.) Such lists raise not only notability, but also copyright concerns. While Wikipedia may reference the fact of award to a person in his/her article, the compilation of a list of such awardees as an individual article may violate copyright, depending on the circumstance.

The admin(s) who closed any AfDs on Playboy Online did a tiny bad thing, administratively speaking. They did not list the outcomes of the debates (with links) at the relevant article talk page. When you see this happen, prod the admin gently. Every (non-delete) XfD outcome should be posted on the relevant items talk page. As a result of this failure of proper process, I cannot easily find the AfD discussions to which you refer.

Userpages with images of the KKK may be eligible either for speedy deletion (CSD G10), or consideration at MfD. There may be good reason for the use of the image. The aforementioned African-American user Deeceevoice (whose works, if not always her interpersonal relations, I admired) used a Klan picture on her page as an "empowerment/shock" tactic, similar to the employment of the N word in African-American authored works. Even this proved somewhat troubling to many (for an analogue, consider the African-American activists who asked for a total ban on the N word -- even among black performers -- in the aftermath of Michael Richards' recent stupidity.) Ultimately, her userpage was personally deleted by Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales. Please refer any such userpage to me, and I will pursue appropriate remedy.

Best wishes, Xoloz 23:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment on your withdrawn RfA

I'm really not sure if I was going to switch to support or oppose as I had reasons to go either direction. However, I do want to say that I appreciate the candor of your nomination. That was one of the things that made me want to support. —Doug Bell ^talk 02:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Re the thank-you message: my advice is this - don't carry out what you wrote, because ultimately it will be used to oppose you in your next RFA. Try to maintain a balance between learning the behind-the-scenes processes at Wikipedia, while at the same time, continuing to contribute to the encyclopedia. Good luck. – Chacor 15:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: E. Normus Category

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 December 5#Category:Fictional heroes. In future you can see what day the discussion was on by checking my deletion log. the wub "?!" 10:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Action City

Hello,

Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply {{stub}}, if you can.

Thanks! --Vox Causa 00:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mass mailing

I did them all individually. You might have a word with the friendly bods at WP:BOTREQ they're usually really helpful but I've never asked them to do a mass mailing before - let me know what happens. --Mcginnly | Natter 15:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Excellent candidate statement

Would you help me with citation marks? I'm crap at learning some things. The article is James McCune Smith. I have the goal of removing all the red links and...well, I have several goals related to this page. Thank you. NinaEliza 17:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the information and edits. To clarify, I didn't submit this article for review myself, but I liked the results. It's so close, I just need citation marks. I'm really trying to educate myself, but I realize now I asked someone to "do my homework for me". I need to know these things if I'm going to create these articles. Thanks again,NinaEliza 18:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:African American businesspeople

Category:African American businesspeople was changed to Category:American businesspeople to remove the ethnicity from categories. Do you have an opinion? Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December 14 --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I invited you as a friend with common interests. I assumed both reasons would make the topic of interest to you since you have written on categories and on business people. Remember both are of interest to me too. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 23:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget I still have a subscription to the New York Times archive if you need something looked up. I also have access to the Census and other historical documents from ancestry.com. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs) 23:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] admin part 2

I think that if you follow those guidelines you left on my talk page for another 3000 edits or so you definitely will be ready for adminship, and I'm sure I'll support. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 01:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Argo Tea

Hi, just to let you know the article was kept when the nomination was withdrawn. I've closed the nom and removed the AfD template from the page. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 02:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow!

Whoa, Tony! Don't stress yourself out. It's good to be strict, but don't let it dominate your life. bibliomaniac15 06:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)