Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Sniff and growl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] This guy Leo posted the following on a message board:

Click on this link which will bring you to a Wikipedia discussion edit page for deleting my entry for "sniff and growl".

At the very bottom, write Code: Keep and next to it provide a reason, like you heard about sniff and growl growing up and the like, or won a game and your team were the growlers, etc.

You know, I don't even know how widespread the practice is, but these ponces need a smack upside the head for relying upon google as the sole source of verifiability.

nice guy this Leo, eh?

Insulting people does little to change their votes. I'd just like to note that google is not the sole criterion of notability, and to the unfortunate extent that any person has given you that impression, that person is a dingbat. See Wikipedia:Google test. Slac speak up! 20:55, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
By the way, I never wrote that comment (about the Illuminati). Go look at the history. 67.81.188.159 01:14, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment This isn't "sock puppeting" it's a bunch of friends who grew up in Long Island trying to tell you it exists.

It doesn't matter that it exists. My back yard exists. That still doesn't mean it merits an encyclopedia article. And you should be aware that votes by anonymous IDs and by IDs created after the VfD listing are generally heavily discounted when the final tally is considered, so getting all of your friends to come here and vote won't do any good. RickK 20:43, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Rick. I am taking you up on that and have added language illustrating this principle in the Wiki guide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Guide_to_Votes_for_deletion&diff=0&oldid=11550001

I tried to make it very non POV. I invite you to change or improve upon it, but if this is Wiki practice, then it most certainly deserves mention in the guide. If true, please don't hasten to delete the language, unless it's duplicated elsewhere. (And be so kind as to show me where in such case) I'm sure you'll agree with me on need for this notice. Sniffandgrowl 21:22, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't have any problems with what you changed, except that it discusses nominations, not votes. RickK 21:44, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
It's frankly surprising to me that if this wiki practice, it was never outlined. You see? I'm not completely worthless. ;-) Sniffandgrowl 00:10, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Side Notation A lot of comments were moved to the discussion page without notations. People might want to check that page out. --64.121.8.32 01:30, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)



But you don't address the fact that you posted a call for support on a message board that has no interest in the subject other than supporting your political agenda. To say the least that's very slimey. user:65.161.65.104
  • Again, the above was written by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rienzo who we all know has been declared a serial sock puppet, (and rabid homophobe) lecturing me on ethics. Sniffandgrowl 00:07, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Accusations of sockpuppetry and poor ethics aside, I think it'd be a good idea to use this article's talk page for any further discussion not directly related to arguments for/against the article. It's getting really long. I've got half a mind to do this with all of the chatter on this page, but I don't know if I've got the patience to separate the wheat from the chaff. android↔talk 00:25, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
    • If you're going to repeatedly make accusations then you have to back them up. Otherwise it's idle speculation to support your overly personal attachment to this action. And your addition of inflamatory accusations is outrageous. It's very curious how much time you're spending monitoring and editing this page. At any rate, how do you respond about your posting this on a message board to gather false votes of support? 24.5.64.248
      • It's not an accusation, it's a fact. Go compare the IP address for Rienzo with his rap sheet. This guy not only is a sock puppet who for all we know cast the very votes you see in this thread just to discredit the entire entry. -- he has a history of rewriting people's web pages and creating false charges against people. These are not MY "allegations" they are very rulings of the Wikipedia administrators. Read it all for yourself. This guy is leading you as much as he's leading me. I already said that I'd be fine with this wiktionaried. Said I wasn't fine with people usign google as a criteria. Don't know where the rest of this contentious bologna came from. If you go back and read all my comments you'll see I'm not even asking anybody for a defense so I have no incentive to wage a "campaign" though I asked a couple of friends (who know sniff and growl) to check the page out (certainly not 7 people) I took issue with a summary non-notability. If anything, because this entry is by its very nature a definition, I supported moving it on the outset. Sniffandgrowl 01:00, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • You're lying. You must think you'll get by with it because it's a registered only message board, you also had the thread deleted before you posted the above, but I kept a backup for just this occasion. http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/wikipedia/85f4e220.gif Now please go on and lie some more. Tell us that that's not real, all made up in photoshop, and that's not you. Go on. Lie to us some more. UncleMeat
          • Uh...nice photoshop job. Is that one of your boards where you spoof IPs? I'm not even a Bush supporter. Don't you have anything better to do, Rienzo? Sniffandgrowl 03:27, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • Comment to Sniffandgrowl - It's foolish to assume a single person is responsible for using a public proxy. A lot of people like myslef use proxies to avoid our employers IP addresses showing up - cyberstalkers at work I don't need. To prove my point, where is all this hatemongering and homophobia you're on about? I don't see it, it doesn't exist here. What I do see is folks reasonably challenging the veracity of this entry and you foaming at the mouth to defend your questionable behavior, then claiming "I don't know how it got this far." Give me a break. --82.96.75.4 00:32, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I was a bit suprised here, but apparently Rienzo is already known for Forgery of Evidence. Yes! In addition to frequently writing anti-gay slurs on web pages, he's also a forger!!! Read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Rienzo/Evidence#Abuse_As_User:Rienzo Sniffandgrowl

  • Wiki people: I don't even know how it got this far. I really don't give a fart about proving this article any more than I can. It exists, it's notable, but probably not as notable as Pokemon, and well, while I think people are too fast on the delete button, I also had no idea it would get this contentious to argue AGAINST deleting. Do what you will and I'll obviously respect it. As for this OTHER crap, I have no idea what Rienzo's malfunction is (aside that he's a proven hatemonger and page vandal by the wiki admins) or even if he's accusing the right guy. I'm not responsible for what other actions anybody else here may have taken.
I do ask that you consider Wiktionary. Otherwise, there's ZERO hard feelings here, other than a minor misunderstanding on a few points.

Sniffandgrowl 03:40, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Moved from vote page:


          • Comment: With your numerous and unsubstantiated ad-hominem attacks, petty arguing, the attempt to delete the original VfD tags, combined with your profile stating that you're the self-annointed "wiki policy watchdog", you've pretty much screwed the pooch. --65.161.65.104 23:38, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment to Sniffandgrowl - It's foolish to assume a single person is responsible for using a public proxy. A lot of people like myslef use proxies to avoid our employers IP addresses showing up - cyberstalkers at work I don't need. To prove my point, where is all this hatemongering and homophobia you're on about? I don't see it, it doesn't exist here. What I do see is folks reasonably challenging the veracity of this entry and you foaming at the mouth to defend your questionable behavior, then claiming "I don't know how it got this far." Give me a break. --82.96.75.4 00:19, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


  • You're the same guy who is claiming I use a bulletin board when it's probably you. You ARE the user Rienzo, who has been found by the Wiki administrators to vandalize people's pages COUNTLESS times and replace them with homophobic vitriol. Anybody can go read the evidence. You've also been found to put up forged and falsified quotations, so this sort of thing isn't beyond you. Your IP isn't a proxy, it's a DSL line from Florida and nobody works on Saturdays. Please stop attacking *me*. This discourse doesn't belong here. Sniffandgrowl 01:00, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Dude, you're completely nuts. Try putting my IP address in your location bar. It's a public proxy. Read slowly. I'm . using . a . public . proxy. I . don't . live . in . florida. I'm . not . whomever . you're . talking . about. You're . out . of . your . mind. --82.96.75.4 08:26, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Moved this spam from Vote page --82.96.75.4 01:21, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


      • That pure subterfuge. But it doesn't matter because it is a fact that the author posted that on a message board.

user:65.161.65.104

        • The above again is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rienzo. Please take note of another of his so-called [1] facts. (Evidence from the decision to suspend him) If you want to ad-hominem in this thread, I'll do it right back to you.

And apparently in the Wiki world, facts are worthless without backup. So back it up! Sniffandgrowl 00:12, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)


So let me get this straight... you all think that this now doesn't deserve entry because you think that all the 'keep' responses are proxies that the original poster is using. Is this correct? Is that the "sock puppet" thing? I suppose you also belive that Masons secretly rule the world and the Illuminati is alive and well.

Insulting people does little to change their votes. I'd just like to note that google is not the sole criterion of notability, and to the unfortunate extent that any person has given you that impression, that person is a dingbat. See Wikipedia:Google test. Slac speak up! 20:55, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Comparing Free Masons and Illuminati to this entry? You're placing undue weight and concern here. This diversionary statement isn't a productive contribution to this community. If you really did post that on a message board you have some serious issues beyond our scope. But concerning this entry I'd say that all comments are now questionable at best and this mess should be deleted.
      • I am absolutely amazed at how seriously some people take themselves. You know what? You're right. "sniff and growl", while funny, while absolutely true and something that exists in the real world (versus say...minor characters from star wars publications) it just doesn't meet the wikimustard apparently. Please continue to give TV/movie/gaming fandom entries a pass, you know, because they're easily attributable and obviously of identifiable cultural significance.
Sorry this had to be my first entry. I think I'm going to go write a Wiki about YuGiOh or some s*** like that. I'm sure it will get monumental support.
Addendum: The cynicism is rank. If independently signed votes aren't counted (puppet problem or otherwise) then this process is purely subjective. I'm sure that when you look at the IP's you'll recognize those are not proxies. Sniffandgrowl 21:04, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)


  • Comment As the douchebag that started this article, I am pretty mystified at how seriously everybody is taking themselves here. But by the way, "sniff and growl" is a real thing, and obscure entries are precisely what make a thing such as Wikipedia useful, not useless. Sniffandgrowl' 00:17, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Whether that's true or not, it's a pretty cynical thing to say. Do some here get their rocks off on browbeating the newbies? Anyway, I'm the douchebag who started this article and I stand by it. Sniffandgrowl 23:53, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)