User talk:Metropolitan90/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 1 |
Archive 2
| Archive 3 →


Contents

Jonas Quinn

I see your point - both the "actor leaves and comes back later" and the "character is replaced with a carbon copy character when an actor leaves or dies" are worthy of discussion because they have happened a lot in TV but without a term like Chuck Cunningham or Cousin Oliver they can't at the moment. PMA 01:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Sahāba & the Emphatic S

I believe it is unicode: it is an s with a dot underneath (the "emphatic s") and I found it at MediaWiki talk: Edit Tools - Symbol Suggestions. em zilch 17:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Coptic

I'm having a similar problem viewing the "Coptic Font" at Coptic_language: the Coptic bits show up as squares. Any ideas? em zilch 17:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Missing Punctuation - dump #288

Just wanted to mention I finished going through dump #288 for the Missing Punctuation project. It looks like you did more than half of the links, which made it easy to finish. I didn't realize anyone else was working on it when I picked it up.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Punctuation#Dump_files_to_process http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tom7/periodbot/288.html

Meersan 23:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I've signed up for dumps on the Missing Punctuation project before, but sometimes I prefer to fix some articles without signing up, since this way I don't have to do all the articles in the group. --Metropolitan90 03:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

prod

Hi, just wanted to thank you for fixing some of my "prod"s. I didn't realize until now that we aren't supposed to use "subst:" on those. dbtfztalk 07:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

  • No problem. The reason I made those edits is because you have to use the correct format for the "prod" template to get the reason to show up on the proposed deletion log. --Metropolitan90 07:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Ashley Tisdale

Back in February, you edited Ashley Tisdale. It appears that this was a copyvio of this page. Now I'm forced to revert all the way back to before your edit. Did you know you did that? --Rory096 00:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, if that page copied it from us, I'll revert back. Sorry about that. --Rory096 05:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Church Demonination in 7th Heaven

If you don't think there should be a denomination section, then delete most of it and add in the fact that it's probably a non-denominational Christian church... Emily 20:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

AfDs

Thanks for your work on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Members of Westboro Baptist Church, it'll make it much easier for voters and for the closing admin. I'm guessing that some sort of announcement has been posted asking people to come and vote on this AfD. I think there's a template for that, which probably doesn't help but I'll see if I can find it anyway. Anyway, your help is appreciated. Cheers, -Will Beback 08:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

*** Important - Your input requested ASAP ***

Please see this Wikipedia:Deletion review#Rationales_to_impeach_George_W._Bush.

Merecat 00:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

  • I already voted on the 3rd nomination. See that page for details. --Metropolitan90 07:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Fleetwood Mac Greatest Hits

Hi, I agree that the circular links that existed for the two albums was unsatisfactory. I put them there so that when the articles *were* created, this would be under the same names that were used elsewhere, cutting the chance of duplicate articles. Perhaps you could create some stub articles if you know enough about Fleetwood Mac? Fourohfour 20:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

POV screed

What do you think about this:Bush family conspiracy theory? I think it's a WP:NOT, WP:NPOV, WP:CITE, WP:RS and WP:OR violation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.239.38.136 (talk • contribs).

But

But it was deleted with majority of votes being Keep.

Plus,76 is a huge amount for a Serbian song,because there is no many Serbian sites,76 is probaby a record for Serbian songs.Please reconsider changing your vote.Thank you very muchDzoni 23:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Tunday

Someone else has fixed it: I see in the closing an extra {{subst:afd top}} had been transcluded. -- Francs2000 13:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Edits to Legion of Net.Heroes

Thanks for your helpful edits on The LNH article; I admittedly went a little overboard with the piped links, and I will remove other tentative or questionable wikilinks. I do think that the title "Last Temptation of Causie" is a parody, and an obvious one at that, of "The Last Temptation of Christ", that it merits a wikilink, and if you have no objections, I'll put that one link back in within a couple of days. Thank you for your help; I want to make the article as excellent as possible, and your edits certainly move it closer to that state. Anonymoustom 04:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

  • "The Last Temptation of Causie" is clearly a reference to The Last Temptation of Christ, but I don't know that it necessarily merits a wikilink like that. I would refer issues such as this to discussion on the talk page for the article. --Metropolitan90 05:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Cal Dining

I have rewritten the article to include citations and points of notability. Please review the newest version of the article. Also i have posted commnets on the article's deletion talk page in response to the nomination and cruft allegations. Thanks for taking the time to listen and I appreaciate your comments. Presidank 05:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Sort AfD comments

Should I try correcting my error, or have I already done enough damage?--Kchase02 T 17:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

So the nominator withdrew the Protest Warrior AfD and I closed it. My understanding is that virtually any editor in good standing can close a nom withdrawal, mostly based on this one, but I'm not certain about this. Could you give me your take?--Kchase02 T 21:52, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Name of Mel(l) Lazarus

My apoligies once again for the poor phrasing of my first comment on this subject. I guess the best way to phrase it might be that, based on some of the sites I have seen, he may have initially used only one "L" in the pseudonym Mel Lazarus, and later changed it to two, for whatever reason. And, I acknowledge, I am basing this on the information collected earlier. I do remember seeing it listed that way at other sites as well, although they may have been influenced by Lambiek. I also acknowledge that I am far from an expert on this subject. The impression I got is that the name may have had the second "L" added later, and that I was going with what seemed to have been the first version of the name. If you can give me any information on how the name first appeared on the strip, I would be very happy to correct my mistake, if it is one, or stand by whatever the concensus is based on that information. Badbilltucker 13:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't know how he originally spelled his name, I just know how he spells it now. --Metropolitan90 03:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

AFD Greg Bravo (Gary Scott)

I admire your editing work -- nice job on the Del-Vikings, etc. -- but I have to disagree with your speedy assessment of the above article and subsequent vote for deletion. At least one editor was an eye witness to the subject performing when the one-hit wonder band he was in had it's heyday. No reliable or readily verifiable sources can be found to say exactly who was in the so-called "band" back then. The fact that the "band" was actually only formed after the record (apparently recorded by separate studio musicians) became a hit, and has been reformed a number of times over the years makes it unclear just who was who when. Let's face it, as someone put it these guys aren't exactly wearing name tags or punching time clocks in the studio and on stage. I also know of few, like Martha Wash who never got any performing or recording credits until after years of battling in court. By the way, the sources only say that he "reformed" the band in the mid-90's (instead of five years ago as you had indicated) -- not only joined then. Ostensibly, he was in past line-ups as well.

A fair compromise was offered to make the article read he is the lead singer now, and has been involved in reforming the Vanilla Fudge, recorded with Freddie Scott, etc. The fact that he has recorded and performing with other notable and also major label artists indeed makes him notable.

I joined Wikipedia to make significant contributions and keep it accurate, but apparently it seems to me that whoever can round up the largest coalition says what is or is not history almost like a blog. I invite you to take another look at this, and will try some other (less controversial articles) for now if I can find any that are interesting to me. Although I am in an altogether different field, music and old TV programs/movies are sort of a passion for me.

--Countdewiki 05:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  • The source I'm relying on is The Billboard Book of Top 40 Hits by Joel Whitburn. I have the 7th edition published in 2000 available to me, and it states regarding Steam: "Group from Bridgeport, Connecticut. 'Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye' was recorded by the trio of Gary DeCarlo, Paul Leka and Dale Frashauer, and released as by Steam. After the song became a hit, Leka assembled an actual Steam group: Bill Steer (vocals), Jay Babins and Tom Zuke (guitars), Hank Schorz (keyboards), Mike Daniels (bass) and Ray Corries (drums)." Note that neither Greg Bravo nor Gary Scott is mentioned.

Since Steam was not exactly a personality-driven band, my preference would be to say that membership in Steam is not enough by itself to warrant a Wikipedia article for any of the individuals mentioned in the preceding paragraph, although I believe Leka has sufficient other credits (such as writing the Lemon Pipers hit "Green Tambourine") to merit an article.

At any rate, Wikipedia has to focus on verifiability, and the article needs to stand or fall based on the subject's verifiable activities.

Also, I did not say that Bravo/Scott joined Steam five years ago, but rather "sometime like 25 years after the band's only hit single", which would mean sometime like 1994, since "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" was a hit in 1969. I don't know exactly when he joined, but even if he had become involved with Steam in 1984, that would still have been long after the group's heyday. --Metropolitan90 06:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Eh?

I'm finding it very hard to undrstand you reasoning on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garden City Christian Church. The article assertes that the college has 50 staff, and runs a college. That would certainly make it notable. If that's unverifiable then, of course that would be different. But you nominated the article not for being unverifiable but for not asserting notability - it does. Strikes me you should with have marked it as unverified, or attempted to verify it yourself (did you?) and not nominated it under false pretenses. Further, your last post to the afd makes no sense after the extensive evidence I posted to the afd [1], which I think establishes beyond dount that this is a very important megachurch. --Doc 19:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Cent

Hello, I see you've recently edited {{cent}}. I hope we can work together. There are no black bars in the template -- neither in my browser nor according to the intent of the markup. I'd like you to take a screenshot of what you see, upload it, and show it to me. Then, we'll work together to address your concerns. In any case, please don't forget to log your changes at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Template log. This will help us stay all on the same page -- no pun intended. Thank you. John Reid 04:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Here it is (click on it to see what I saw):
How Template:Cent looked on September 1, 2006.
How Template:Cent looked on September 1, 2006.

I think the problem may be that you're using background color "#adf". Usually background colors are specified by six hexadecimal digits, not three. Whatever the six-digit equivalent is to adf, maybe that would work better. --Metropolitan90 05:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that is a valid gripe. You shouldn't be seeing that, though. Three-digit hex codes are standard since CSS1 ref: The three-digit RGB notation (#rgb) is converted into six-digit form (#rrggbb) by replicating digits, not by adding zeros. For example, #fb0 expands to #ffbb00. This makes sure that white (#ffffff) can be specified with the short notation (#fff) and removes any dependencies on the color depth of the display.
I suspect your problem may lie closer to the fact that the same tint is specified in two different ways. At top and bottom, it is an old-style table bgcolor; the three mini-section headers use straight CSS background. This renders just fine in my browser but breaks yours. Sorry. The template is a pretty messy accumulation of historical bags, patches, and outright kludges. I'll fix it temporarily. A complete redesign is just weighing anchor at {{cent/work}}. Apologies for the inconvenience and thanks for the screenshot. John Reid 02:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Katie Couric

Calm down its only a couple days until the 5th. Right now she is the anchor Bob Schieffer just stepped down.

Thanx...

...for creating the AfD on that noxious walled hoax. 68.39.174.238 21:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

More hoax AfDing

Since you created the deletion request page above, can I just ask you to do this next one? 68.39.174.238 17:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Which next one? --Metropolitan90 17:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

University of New Jersey at Durham

I also responded on my talk page. Thanks for the heads-up regarding Vanguard. I changed it to a source that is not associated with such a nasty group. The original source was okay for what it was intended to demonstrate, but having such a dubious source would only cloud the issue and distracts from the merits of the article. Dubc0724 14:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

My Editing

Hi Metropolitan90,

Thank you for the comment that you left on my talk page regarding my attempt to repair vandalism which had removed about 20 entries. I would like to point out that, not only have I never even visited that page, I was in my kitchen cooking eggs at the time the edit was made! I am very new to editing, and have so far restricted my activities to copy editing or removing small amounts of obvious vandalism. I'm not even sure how to go about reverting a page to a previous version.

The edit is listed in my contributions, though, so you were absolutely right in bringing it to my attention - I don't have an explanation for what has happened here, but I loudly protest my innocence, and will change my password immediately!

Regards, TunaSunrise 13:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Eccles College

I wonder if you would revist the article and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eccles College. I have removed the vandalism in the article and you may or may not wish to revise your opinion. I am passing this message to all who gave an opinion prior to my removal of the vandalism, both keep and delete. Fiddle Faddle 15:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

  • The article has already been speedy kept after removal of the vandalism, which I agree was the correct thing to do. --Metropolitan90 16:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Andres Useche, Vana Espuma

Thanks for your comments and well done research. As you may have suspected, I mixed up the awards with the French César Awards and hence didn't even click the link on IMDb. I've changed my "vote" on the director to Conditional delete and on the film to Neutral for now. Prolog 18:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Private Eye

Please redirect those two articles back again. If you read the discussion, you will see that work is under way to break down the massive Private Eye article into more manageable chunks. It cannot be done overnight, and needs a framework of secondary articles setting up first. These will be very thin for a time while the work gets done. Guy 13:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

List of series connected to the Tommy Westphall Universe

I am not sure if you are aware of the fact, but the article above has been listed for AfD. Since you have expressed an opinion on this matter previously, I thought you might like comment on this current debate. ---Charles 21:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Ha ha, oops. re: Todd marriott

Well, crap. Sorry I didn't read more closely! The article's gone now. -- Merope Talk 11:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

You are right

This is why I added Maybe keep to the article's entry. Please add your insight and reason to the bottom of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Religious democracy.--Patchouli 15:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sadeq Mallallah

Can you take a look at the AFD discussion and new article version. The nomination was withdrawn by the rewriter, but your delete opinion remains and I only muster up to a weak keep myself. I think that if you don't change your opinion the AFD notice should be restored to the article, and if you do change your opinion it should be said and the AFD should be closed as having no remaining delete opinions. GRBerry 21:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I am undecided as to what to do about that article. I may follow up later. --Metropolitan90 05:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Empty links

May I ask why you delete empty links of the form:

  • [[]]
  • []

I left these at Wikipedia:Galleries as a convenience for other editors. Do they cause some problem of which I'm unaware? I'm always ready to learn. John Reid 13:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Because they display as empty brackets. See [2] for an example. It looks strange to readers to see [[]] or [] appearing in an article with no apparent reason, just as it would to see some empty parentheses appearing in the article () (()) without explanation. --Metropolitan90 15:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Please; yesterday I submitted a stub about Rosa Navarro Duran. Could you make it be an article in the Wikipedia? It is about a really important (and polemic) subject about which there are lots of arguments in universities because it totally changes the interpretation of a very important book.

Article submitted

Please; yesterday I submitted a stub about Rosa Navarro Duran. Could you make it be an article in the Wikipedia? It is about a really important (and polemic) subject about which there are lots of arguments in universities because it totally changes the interpretation of a very important book. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.244.129.138 (talk • contribs).

  • I believe that it would be more useful to discuss her writings in Lazarillo de Tormes, the book with which she is associated as a scholar. --75.0.159.62 03:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

richmond election

i messed around with measure T a little to make it clearer, as for not listing the links to anderson or bell websites they didnt list their websites on their campaign statements on the voter guide, ill google for them, but i dont see how that is in any way favoring mclaughlin, more information on bell and anderson is simply not available to me, that wasnt going to deter me from creating the article, youre welcome to expand it, look for more information on the other two, i created a link to gary bell (politician) but the article does not exist, yet. maybe ill put somthing together tomorrow if i have the time. thanks for your concerns and please tell me what you think of my "improvements" and ask me any questions about the content i have added, or anything else, im glad to help. cheers. Qrc2006 05:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Lostpedia AfD

Metroplitan,

In your Lostpedia AfD comment, you say, "if Lostpedia were not even worthy about being mentioned as a link in an article about the subject it relates to, how could that justify making it a separate Wikipedia article of its own?" While I agree that a Lostpedia article would be a bit of a stretch, what your statement assumes is that Lostpedia is excluded from the Lost article for a good reason. The Lost/Fansites discussion is too long to reasonably expect anyone to absorb, but the principal current argument against a Lostpedia link is that it's not owned by ABC, or run by the series writers. I don't think that's a particularly relevant criteria, if we're talking about worthiness. I agree that there should be a compromise, to put the Lostpedia link where it belongs: in the Lost article. I only wish the more obstinate Lost editors saw it that way. --Loqi T. 11:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I see your point. What is up for discussion at AfD is the separate article for Lostpedia which I do not support. But it looks like a majority of the participants in the Talk:Lost (TV series)/Fansites debate did believe that it was acceptable to include a link to Lostpedia from the main article for the series, and I would agree with that majority. Nevertheless, they have not been able to get a consensus for that yet. I don't know exactly what should be done to build a consensus. --Metropolitan90 21:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Larger than Life (science)

Well, if you really want to know, i heard the "larger than life" expression on a 'the killers - when you were young' review and so i wanted to find out what it is by searching on wikipedia. But I was disappointed when I saw that on the disambiguation page, there was only the (blank) page Larger than Life (science) which was approximately fitting to my search criteria, I then put the transcription of the definition of larger than life that i've found on google, and put the resulting stub on requested articles in hope that some people arrange the article to finally tell me what this really means, and if you want to know what the Larger than life science fact is, well keep in mind that i'm also trying to figure it out.--SamiKaero 08:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Maybe you might not be an admin, but feel free to check out my case at the page protection centre right now. (And thanks for reverting whatever evil Brainyshane640 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) brought forth on my page. Hasn't he got anything better to do among us?) --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 17:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Glad to help. The problem appears to be under control for now. I am not an admin, so there's nothing more I can do at this time about that user. --Metropolitan90 19:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


Thedrunkendialer.com

I am wondering of this site could be considered an internet phenomena or not. I know it is rather popular and extremely humorous. It features a guy who holds a weekly contest offering $100 via PayPal to the individual who leaves him he best Drunk dialing message on his voicemail.
I did not add this site to this article yet for fear that people would think I am self-promoting. I have no affiliation with the site and can’t find any direct marketing used to purchase products. I just think it is very funny and well known around my area.
I look forward to some objective input before I add, or do not add this site to the list. Take a look for yourself, you be the judge…
  • Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Promotional articles about yourself, your friends, your company or products; or articles written as part of a marketing or promotional campaign, may be deleted in accordance with our deletion policies. For more information, see Wikipedia:Spam. (Would this apply?)

Thanks, 69.167.102.181

P.S. I posted the same message on User_talk:Wavy_G for more opinions. Look forward to hearing from you...

Thanks for your help

Thanks for your work on the Mike Stark page. I really appreciate the work of editors such as yourself who work on articles that they may not even have any interest in. Thanks again! - F.A.A.F.A. 06:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for changing the stub

thank you for changing the stub tag on stannous fluorine. i created the article but didn't know which stub category it should go under. :) Javawizard 18:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)Javawizard

World crime league (group)

Actually, I only created it using information that someone else had tacked onto the original World Crime League article. I originally had deleted it citing lack of citation and notability. It's not my contribution really, it comes from User:Helicopter01, who replaced it when I removed it. Rather than get into an edit war, I made it its own page and notified him/her so that it could be made to stand on its own and justify its existence. --Bdoserror 07:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Black eyed peas

I tentatively put the text back up and removed the copyvio template, since, based on the edit history, it does seem more likely that the external source copied from Wikipedia than vice-versa. What led me to suspect that the article was a copyvio was it's extremely NPOV tone - it seemed lifted out of promotional material - but on second thought, the article does seem too long to have begun as a ticket sales outlet's promotional material. I'll try to look into it a little further, and at the very least, try to edit the article into something resembling neutrality. --Hyperbole 05:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The Guildhall at SMU

I've created a new article as suggested. I guess it sure would be possible to get allowance to directly copy&paste excerpts from the website to a corresponding Wikipedia article. But I highly doubt the university would accept the GFDL because this would mean that anyone could use it, not just Wikipedia. --Pizzahut2 13:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The Polar Bear Club

Sorry for taking so long to respond to the polar bear club stuff. I'm sorry if the article was inappropriate. It's a game that has been around for about 30 or so years with a bunch of spin offs, at least in the area I live, so it is all true. I had forgotten when I wrote it that ice swimming is sometimes called the polar bear swim. Perhaps there should be a disambiguation like you said. --Belugaperson 20:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Pimenov

an anon delted your speedy deletion tag in this article--Tresckow 02:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/e/t/User_talk%7EMetropolitan90_Archive_2_32c9.html"