User talk:GunnarRene

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Thanks 2 An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Manseibashi Station, was selected for DYK! 3 Klan member cats. 4 SGSPOILER template 5 Over-long 6 so 7 the road not taken 8 Formatting 9 KKK cats 10 Saikano's new sig 11 RV request of {{further}} 12 The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar 13 Revived discussion concerning fair use in portals

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your touch-up edits to the defense of marriage amendment gif. I just noticed that you blew up the year text, among other tweaks, all of which were much needed. Thanks! · j e r s y k o talk · 16:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. As long as I didn't have to do any actual research. :-) --GunnarRene 16:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Manseibashi Station, was selected for DYK!

On January 29, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Manseibashi Station, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 03:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Klan member cats.

I have reverted some of your edits regarding the categories for members and former members of the KKK. While I might be inclined to support your position in a CfD discussion, These might have been too big of steps to have taken without discussion. For one, this cat has helped keep a relatively good consensus going on the once controversial Robert Byrd article. Let me know if you should decide to do a CfD on the Ex-members cat. I would look forward to hearing your arguement. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 13:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, by the away, I agreed with you on Dan Burros and some other guy (can't remember which one) that seemed to die as Klansmen. The Ex cat, if it exists, should only be for those that left the KKK while living. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 13:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SGSPOILER template

Please stop removing them from the various SG related pages you've edited. The sgspoiler was kept, why are you doing it?

Faris b 18:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. We got to keep Sgspoiler and Spoiler-season because I promised to do this fix. --GunnarRene 18:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Over-long

Hi. I advise you to discuss the situation of overly long plots at the project, frankly I don't find them at all overly long. So you're welcome to bring it to the project to see if we can get a consensus as to what is and isn't over long plot. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

What articles do you challenge me on? I also refer you to the guidelines linked in the template {{Plot}}, which have consensus across Wikipedia.--GunnarRene 21:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

All of them. One man's long is another man's short. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Then I advise you to start discussion to make changes to WP:NOT (p), WP:FICTION (g) and Wikipedia:Fair use (g). I am tagging articles for cleanup because they violate those policies/guidelines. --GunnarRene 21:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not need to, if you can show me where there is an artificial limit stated though. Otherwise it's just your POV, which I dispute as being wrong and thus will remove the tags. I welcome you to start a conversation however. HTH HAND. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stargate/Episode style sheet: The "Plot" section should not be an exhastive list of everything that has happened in the episode, but instead a succinct synopsis of the important elements of the plot. Special attention should be paid to character and conflict development and how the episode relates to previous and future episodes.

In other words, you need to change those guidelines before you can remove all those {{Plot}} tags. If there are some which you find are border-line, we can discuss them but several of them are rather unquestionable. --GunnarRene 22:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any artificial limits (nor any guideline tag or consensus backing it) thus it's open to interpretation and of little value. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 23:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:NOT is official policy. WP:FICTION and Wikipedia:Fair use are guidelines with wide consensus support, as well as support members of the Board of Trustees. --GunnarRene 23:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] so

I would LOVE for that to happen! I live near MANY sex offenders. I would real love for that to happen! REALLY!!! But anyway i can handle my self & for all you know i could live in a state that the AOC is at 16yrs!

AOC for sex might be 16, but AOC for being brutally raped and murdered is still 18. :-) --GunnarRene 17:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

i am in no danger! anyway i want...well saikano reviewed!--Lolicon(Down With Child Porn)Saikano 17:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the road not taken

the road not taken aired less than a month ago. Editors must be given time for sources providing behind the scenes info, reception, etc. to become available. So soon after its original airing very little if any publications or interviews pertaining to more than the synopsis exist. please be more considerate in the future. Mwhope 05:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Formatting

There are several problems with the formatting of the KKK cat articles. Firstly, do not ever use tables in XFD discussion. It is a discussion, not a vote, and people cane discuss whatever they choose. Also, You thoughts on the topic are implied by your nom, so no need to do a "as nom" thing. Additionally, do not strike or edit other user's comments in a discussion.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. We may disagree on this topic, but we are both working to improve Wikipedia, so I'd be glad to help. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 20:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

That was actually part of the concern that I expressed. There is no actual need for you to "Vote," as it is implied in your nomination and it kind of comes across as an attempt to vote stack to some (but I see that you are acting in good fatih). I'll put it back, no prob. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 20:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] KKK cats

thanks for the vigorous debate on the above topic. It isn't too often that brains actually get excersized in XfDs, so when something interestign pops up, its always a good time. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 14:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, and ditto. --GunnarRene 17:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Lol...I have never seen a KKK cat, although my parents did have a racist dog when I was a teen. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 20:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Saikano's new sig

Is that number in his new sig (Lolicon3043910) his telephone number? I didn't see the number before, but it seems odd that he'd tack on a random 7 digit number to the word lolicon. Leebo⁸⁶ 17:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

NO sr noway nonono notimes 1000000 no! that is no phone number. that is my ID number on this site--Lolicon3043910 18:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Your username is Saikano, you have no such "ID" on this site as 3043910. Leebo⁸⁶ 18:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got it. Leebo⁸⁶ 18:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Username: Saikano

User ID: 3043910 --Lolicon3043910 18:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Saikano is correct. It's the user ID. I didn't save the deleted page. I did a phone search, but the closest phone with that number seems to be a cell phone from Norfolk, VA. --GunnarRene 18:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

i dont think an wiki person is going to try out that. is there a thing you want me to do?--Lolicon3043910 18:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

No, it's OK. --GunnarRene 18:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RV request of {{further}}

So

It has broken over a thousand mainspace articles.

– GunnarRene 11:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

. Did you not read template talk:further on why the code of the template was changed? Please discuss before you request a rv.100110100 08:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I did. Please do more testing before changing a protected template. --GunnarRene 08:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Then you had not grounds for your request. I'm not at fault here, you are.100110100 07:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

NO U! You broke stuff. Which would be OK if it wasn't protected from editing. --GunnarRene 10:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, you like the airyfairy look of articles, the status quo, both of which you think is more important, than the improvment of Wikipedia.100110100 03:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Stop being an ass on my talk page and go bother an administrator instead. --GunnarRene 16:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, the person who added a "deprecated" note did not reference the relevant discussion, but I was able to find somebody who knows why: It offers no benefit beyond {{further}} and adds the complication that users need to use multiple parameters, plus processing of the existence checks. That is why it was deprecated.

If you still want to un-deprecate this, add an {{editprotected}} here and ask for it to be undeprecated until the relevant discussion has been properly linked to. --GunnarRene 21:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused.100110100 21:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

So was I, until I did some digging through the "What links here" page for {{see}} and looked for discussion pages there. --GunnarRene 22:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I mean I'm confused by what you said (regarding what I blockquoted).100110100 20:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The first paragraph is a possible explanation for why {{see}} was deprecated. The second paragraph is me having an idea about how to move forward.

I have asked the administrator who deprecated the template to link to the relevant discussion, but there seems to be no answer. --GunnarRene 20:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It offers no benefit beyond {{further}} and adds the complication that users need to use multiple parameters, plus processing of the existence checks.

I'm confused about this. But thanks for the earlier attempts anyways.100110100 00:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For your overall warm demeanor. Your comment in an RFC I was involved in was not the one I was hoping for, but your professional polite tack was most appreciated. Thank you. Yours, Smee 17:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• Feel free to post on your user page and/or leave on your talk page as you see fit. (Except of course for this last bit itself, hehe.) Smee 17:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC).
  • Gee, thanks! My first barnstar. :-) --GunnarRene 17:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revived discussion concerning fair use in portals

I am contacting everyone who participated in the discussion that became inactive in December. Due to the length of the previous discussion, I have proposed a new amendment and you like you to weigh in so that we may actually have a consensus on this matter as it doesn't seem there exists one either way. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria