User talk:BigDT/archive2b

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Previous Archives 2 Stuff 3 HIH 4 Alicia Silverstone and Old Dominion University 5 Speedy deletion 6 Copyright violations 7 Borealocentrism 8 Conjugate quantities 9 Sign your posts 10 AGF 11 NOAC 2006 12 True Torah Jews 13 POV Question from User:Peoplestruth 14 Subst 15 Obvously Rapture 16 Peoplestruth articles for deletion 17 Userboxes 18 Proposed deletions 19 Userbox code template

[edit] Previous Archives

Archive 1: User talk:BigDT/archive1 Archive 2: User talk:BigDT/archive2 (The diffs for this archive are on archive2)

[edit] Stuff

Main page * My Contributions * Talk to me

[edit] HIH

Why do you change my edits to HIH insurance page you bugger? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.76.129.178 (talk • contribs) .

Your change looked like vandalism to me. BigDT 02:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alicia Silverstone and Old Dominion University

I myself did google and initially came to the same conclusion as you. Unfortunately I noticed that nearly every single reference is based on her IMDb trivia page. I don't know if any of those sources are reputable. If you found something more solid, great, but if not I think leaving her off the page Old Dominion page for the time being would be best. Radagast83 06:48, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• Nothing other than that ... although it couldn't possibly be but so hard of a thing to check out. At any rate, it's not "vandalism" - just a question of fact. I have no particular preference as to whether she is listed - if you want to take her back off, I won't rv it again. BigDT 07:03, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've been trying to do some google searches, and frankly almost every single hit is based off of the IMDb page. I'd rather stay on the safe side of things and keep her off considering there isn't any information on when she even attended the school. Just giving you a heads up. Radagast83 08:37, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion

I noticed that you tagged the page Canwest Flight Services for speedy deletion with the reason "Unremarkable people or groups/Vanity Pages". However, "Unremarkable people or groups/Vanity Pages" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, at least not for companies, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use WP:PROD if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violations

Thanks for tagging Interpride as a copyright violation. I just wanted to bring you up to speed on some details of process that you might not be aware of.

• If you tag a page with {{copyvio}} it is customary to delete all the text from the page, in order to stop the copyright-violating text from propagating to mirror sites.
• A page can only be speedily deleted for copyright violation if:
  • The page was created in the last 48 hours (this one was)
  • The article and its entire history contains only copyright violation material (this one was)
  • Uploader makes no assertion of permission or fair use, and none seems likely (this applies)
  • Material is unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider
• The final criterion did not apply here. A website with a .org address is not a commercial content provider.
• You should either tag a page with {{copyvio}} or {{db-copyvio}}, not both.
• If tagging a page with {{db-copyvio}}, the template {{nothanks-sd}} should be placed on the uploader's talk page.

Thanks again for your help! Stifle (talk) 13:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for the information BigDT 15:55, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Borealocentrism

I hate to say it, but this is not my neologism. It is an obscure term, but has been around for at least twelve years to my knowledge. --MacRusgail 18:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure someone somewhere has used it ... but I find it hard to believe that it is at all notable given the complete lack of google hits BigDT 23:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conjugate quantities

You commented on the article Conjugate quantities on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conjugate quantities. Since then I've completely rewritten the article. Could you have another look? Thanks, Lambiam^Talk 06:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sign your posts

Please remember to sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful. Stifle (talk) 18:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, I am aware of that, but occasionally forget. BigDT 18:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AGF

Please see WP:AGF, because you are flagrantly violating it over and over and over at WP:TFD. --Cyde Weys 20:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

After your vandalism with Template:User Christian, exactly what should I assume? I would quote this passage from the WP:AGF policy:

Of course, there's a difference between assuming good faith and ignoring bad actions. If you expect people to assume good faith from you, make sure you demonstrate it. Don't put the burden on others. Yelling "Assume Good Faith" at people does not excuse you from explaining your actions, and making a habit of it will convince people that you're acting in bad faith.

This policy does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary. Things which can cause the loss of good faith include vandalism, personal attacks, and edit warring. Assuming good faith also does not mean that no action by editors should be criticized, it only means that one should not ascribe said action to malice. Automatically accusing the other side in a conflict of not assuming good faith regardless of their motivation is failing to assume good faith in itself.

You seem to have taken the userbox war to a crazy extreme. BigDT 20:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NOAC 2006

I am interviewing as many arrowmen as I can find on this website and was curious as to what you think about NOAC 2006. I am also curious to find out lodge names for Wikipedia users. I'm essentially trying to meet new people on Wikipedia who share a common interest. My lodge is the Anpetu-We Lodge chartered to the Greater St. Louis Area Council. If you would like to contribute to my listing, please place it on my userpage.

Yours in Brotherhood,

Anpetu-We 23:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

• I'm from Blue Heron ... I don't really "think" anything about NOAC per se. When I was a youth, I couldn't afford to go. Now that I'm an adult, I can't really take the time off from work to go. So while I'd love to go sometime, I don't see it happening any time soon. BigDT 00:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] True Torah Jews

Hi, I posted a defense of the article True Torah Jews, I would like to ask you to be so kind and read it, and than rethink your position on deletion.

Bloger 00:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• Good grief - that's a nice-sized dissertation. ;) But you took the time to write it, so I'll take the time to read it ;) BigDT 00:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time

It may be that many hits are from blog commenting, but there are 21,000 sittings according to Google. And I do not think, you think that a few people did all this.

With so much time on there side you don’t think they would try to get some attention from any notable media outlet, for crying out loud people with much smaller issue’s and much less time on there side get signifying more attention.

The truth is TTJ isn’t in the market for good looks all it does is trying to get there massage across and according to there web director (you can contact him just like I did by e-mail) they get thousands of hits a month and that satisfies them.

About the rabbi’s you missed the point all I was trying to say is that for example if the pope, the secretary of state of the Vatican and cardinal Edward Egan of New York sign a proclamation on something doesn’t this mean that a significant amount of people in the catholic religion think the same way?

The same way when rabbi’s in the position of the ones mentioned take a position on anything it carries the thinking of a nice majority if not all of satmar.

And about the newsletter it’s not only e-mail the reason I spoke about e-mail is that e-mail is blocked very easily and the fact that thousands of people let this in there inbox and don’t spam it means a lot in my opinion

Bloger 02:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV Question from User:Peoplestruth

i don't understand why i'm being flagged for POV for certain articles.

there are currently numerous incorrect entries or they lack NPOV in its present state. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peoplestruth (talk • contribs).

• Peoplestruth, one of the goals of Wikipedia is to write articles that are neutral in their point of view. Your come across as having a message you are trying to convey in your edits. For example:
  • [1] The United States is the most powerful imperialist country as evidenced by the presence of US brands, corporations, culture and media in most countries. IN YOUR OPINION, the US is the most powerful imperialist country. That isn't a statement of fact, rather, it is one of opinion. If you can find an article about, say, North Korean opinion on US Imperialism, a meaningful statement would be, "Premier Il of North Korea says that the US is the most powerful imperialist country".
  • [2] ...US Imperialism which is economic and political domination by the US and US corporations. Again, you are stating as fact your opinion. You could say, "... what they view as US Imperialism ..." AND provide a source verifying that this is, in fact, their view.
  • [3] The NPA is incorrectly classified ... Again, this is your opinion that they are incorrectly classified, it is not a statement of fact.

I hope this helps. You are welcome to contribute, but you need to work to have neutral edits, not ones that push a point of view. I would suggest taking a look at this policy paper - Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Please feel free to post here if I can be of further assistance. BigDT 02:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the first two are not as strong as i'd like, but for the third one, it is technically true since the NPA was classified as a foreign terrorist organization, which they are not as they do no operate outside their national boudary. it IS an incorrect classification.

[edit] Subst

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. --Cyde Weys 03:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Obvously Rapture

"(How about if we split the difference and say, "Obviously, none of these predictions has come to pass"?)". Fine with me. We got into this linguistic mess because, originally, there were some predictions with future dates in there. So the last line said something like "have not yet come to pass". Someone took those out because they were Apocalypse predictions, rather than specific Rapture predictions. So that phrase had to be revised. Right now, I can't find any future Rapture date predictions from any prominent people, but if you know of any, feel free to add them. (If you think this is complicated, take a look at date-setting in Peak Oil). --John Nagle 04:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• I don't know how many notable ones there are. It seems like everyone got out of the game of predicting the rapture after it didn't happen in 2000. There are plenty of random little websites where someone has their date that they have set, but those are the product of one person's imagination. I don't know of a denomination or notable individual who has predicted the rapture date recently. If you google 2007 and rapture, 2007 is a pretty popular number these days. Israel took over Jerusalem in 1967 and the rapture (obviously) has to be within a generation of Israel taking over Jerusalem and a generation (obviously) is 40 years, meaning that the rapture will be in 2007. Never mind that the same logic was used for 1988 (40 years after 1948) and 2000 (2007 minus a 7-year tribulation). But that said, I don't know that anyone notable is claiming it - just random websites with one person's opinion. BigDT 04:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with that. Date setting seems to be somewhat out of fashion right now. Pat Robertson made a prediction for April 29, 2007, but he made that in 1990. On his web site, he now mentions getting ready for the 2008 election season[4], so he apparently no longer thinks that the world will end before Bush's term does. --John Nagle 06:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peoplestruth articles for deletion

Hi Would you please consider withdrawing this mass deletion and nominating the articles individually? Certainly US Imperialism should be deleted, but the other articles just need cleaning up and NPOV'ing. Vizjim 11:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes

The points you bring up are just unbelievable. I don't know how to even begin to deal with the abuse of process by Cyde, it's so great. Maybe an RfA?

For now, I'm just going to minimize my involvement in the userbox stuff so I don't become a missing Wikipedian. I take comfort in Wikipedia's eternal preservation of pages, which means that if justice is ever done, the userboxes can be undeleted. I would suggest that you mostly stop arguing on talk pages; it's useless. Wait for something like Wikipedia:Userbox policy to be approved, and then start working on undoing the damage done. But I do appreciate your pursuit of honesty and openness. TheJabberwʘck 04:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Cyde was not the one who closed that TFD. His behavior on Template:User Christian was rather bad, but he had nothing to do with closing the sums of pi thing. As for an RFAr, if someone more familiar with WP policies and hoops and bells and whistles else wants to start one, I'd be happy to put my $.02 in, but honestly, (1) I don't care that much and (2) one way or another, it's going to be moot - either WP:MACK will get implemented or it won't.

I really don't care too much. Abuse of power is something that just irks me out of general principle. But anyway, I didn't sign up for an account so I could fight userbox wars - I signed up for one because I have an interest in Christian theology and I wanted to improve some of the woefully bad articles. I just got irked over the weekend when I saw my user page had been changed and then looked at the history and saw the vandalism on template:User Christian. BigDT 04:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the profanity; that's just a grumpy me losing sleep at 12:30 AM. I'm glad you don't care too much, because many of the people who really care a lot are getting caught up in the debates and losing contact with the encyclopedia (me included, I'm trying to get back on track). See you around. TheJabberwʘck 19:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletions

This is a friendly reminder to be sure, when proposing an article for deletion using {{prod}} to include a reason in the tag, by adding {{prod|[REASON]}}. Also, please make sure the reason you give is explicit about your concern regarding the article. Thanks! Mangojuice^talk 05:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox code template

I've managed to get it working, but eeww. I'm not proud of this mess. It's at User:SeventyThree/Sandbox 3.

{{subst:User:SeventyThree/Sandbox 3|id=Hk|info=[[Virginia Tech]] is going to win the ACC|border-c=#900000|id-fc=#A00000|info-c=orange}}

gives:

{{subst:Userbox |border-c = #900000 |border-s = 1 |id-c = #DDD |id-s = 14 |id-fc = #A00000 |info-c = orange |info-s = 8 |info-fc = black |id = Hk |info = [[Virginia Tech]] is going to win the ACC |float = left }}

Hk Virginia Tech is going to win the ACC

There's got to be a way to improve the code, but hey, it works. SeventyThree^(Talk) 15:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Beautiful! That's what I was trying to do! I'll make a copy at Template:Userbox Sample BigDT 01:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Allow me to refer you to my comments at Wikipedia_talk:Mackensen's_Proposal#The_Revised_Sample_Box, which I hope you will consider. I have some other concerns about userboxes which I intend to mention in the near future at Wikipedia_talk:Userboxes, but it will be easier to express these concerns after your templates have been polished a little. Zerrakhi 11:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)