User talk:Christopher Parham/Archive08

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form. New additions to this page are unlikely to be seen; please direct all comments to my latest talk page at User_talk:Christopher Parham. Thanks!

Welcome to my talk page. I will respond to comments made here on this page, so please watch. If I messaged you first, I'll be keeping an eye on your talk unless it's been an awfully long time.

Archive 1 -- November 21, 2004 to October 14, 2005
Archive 2 -- October 14, 2005 to December 5, 2005
Archive 3 -- December 5, 2005 to January 11, 2006
Archive 4 -- January 12, 2006 to March 11, 2006
Archive 5 -- March 12, 2006 to May 5, 2006
Archive 6 -- May 5, 2006 to October 19, 2006
Archive 7 -- October 19, 2006 to March 9, 2007

I think the main federalist papers page has been vandalized. Take a peek.

Contents

[edit] Campbell's Soup Cans FAC2

You were fairly vocal in FAC1 and have not chimed in on FAC2. Your comments and hopefully support are welcome. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 16:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

 Archive08, thank you very much for your support in my successful RfA.

I am thankful and humbled by the trust that the community has placed in me,
and I welcome any comments, questions or complaints that you may have.
Again, thank you for your support, and happy editing!
Hemlock Martinis 22:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Curious

Hi Chris, Not in the least am I attempting to get you to reconsider your response to the FARC poll on global warming. But I am interested in your thinking. Did you know that the article has been sufficiently fought over and unstable that it has been blocked for 2 of the last 3 weeks? Did you know that a member of Arbcom was blocked for edit warring on that article? And about Sandy's comments, she seems to be completely neutral and only interested in doing the mundane but somewhat difficult housekeeping chores to clean the article up for FA and found herself unable to do it because the changes and reverts were coming so fast and furious. I am wondering if you knew that? If you did know that, then I am bemused and curious how you came to your conclusion.

I promise Im not asking you to change your vote and if you do I'll feel guilty. But I am curious!--Blue Tie 22:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I think the edit warring taking place on the article has misled Sandy into believing that the article is unstable. While the featured article criteria speak of edit warring as a problem with regard to stability, this refers to cases where edit warring indicates a need for further consensus-building on the article. This edit war, on the other hand, appears to be caused (as many previous edit wars on similar articles have been caused) by intransigent attempts to impose a fringe POV on the article. It speaks poorly of Wikipedia that we allow this problem to inhibit good-faith work on improving the article, but it doesn't indicate any problem with the article itself. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I that was interesting! --Blue Tie 00:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Hello Christopher Parham, thank you for supporting my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0.
Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen. Vivat Regina!

[edit] Deletion review for Template:User no GFDL

Just thought you'd like to know:

A template you participated in a Tfd for (Template:User no GFDL) has subsequently been speedily deleted, and is now under deletion review. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   16:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg

Hello, Christopher Parham. An automated process has found and removed a fair use image used in your userspace. The image (Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Christopher Parham/Archive05. This image was removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image was replaced with Image:Example.jpg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image to replace it with. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] shock and awe

The Tarkin Doctrine follows very closely. Regardless of whether it is fictional, it is relevant. Consider The Prince – a work of fiction, cited continually in contemporary literature. I think it belongs there. And really, what is it hurting? 69.143.136.139 00:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

We don't need articles on serious topics disrupted with pop culture trivia. Aside from this, to my knowledge none of the existing literature on shock and awe refers to the Tarkin Doctrine, which suggests that it is not a particularly relevant topic. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 17:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vietnam War

Christopher, if memory serves me from my school years, the following is correct. These chemicals continue to change the landscape, cause diseases, birth defects and poison the food-chain.

The following is not correct. These chemicals continue to change the landscape, cause diseases and birth defects, and poison the food chain. There should be only one "and". Purgatory Fubar Converse or Snafu 22:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

No, because "cause" is not the verb that goes with "poison the food chain". Your sentence could be rearranged as "cause poison the food chain," which of course is wrong. There are two lists here: the three verbs, and the two objects of "cause." Each list has its own "and." Christopher Parham (talk) 23:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyrights

It shouldn't matter if it's copyrighted, since it was the truth. I wasn't doing this for monetary gain, plagirism, nor was I being slanderous I was providing factual and credible information about two deceptive corporations who has a history of racial profiling. So please do me favor and tell me not to post information just because it's copyrighted (especially if it's the truth!!!!!!)got it!!!!!!!

Unfortunately, content that cannot be licensed under the GFDL is not compatible with the mission of Wikipedia. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St. Paul flag and fair use

Good sir, why do you believe the representation of St. Paul's city flag violates fair use?[1] ~ UBeR 05:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

The uploader believed that it was copyrighted (see the image page), and I have no reason to believe otherwise. Since it is not under a free license it cannot be used on user pages, see the fair use policy. Thanks. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Rizvi, was neither helpful nor constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Godlord2 21:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It looks like an accident. ~ UBeR 22:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carioca RFA

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (31/4/1), so I am now an administrator. If you have any comments or concerns on my actions as an administrator, please let me know. Thank you! --Carioca 20:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't replace non-free images with example.jpg

I use to check the pages which contain example.jpg, as these pages either contain editing experiments done by the editing toolbar by accident or as simple vandalism, or might also be added by accident. However lately it became custom to replace non-free images with example.jpg, which makes it impossible to find the real pages which need to be checked. Please use either example.png if it's a simple testing image, or Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, or simply remove the image. andy 16:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

It came to my attention that my Oppose comment on your RfA was rather unfair, and I apologise for accusing you of authoritarianism. I've asked an optional question on your RfA, and may reconsider my oppose once I read your answer. The RfA will almost certainly pass anyway, but I'd prefer to be able to support you (since you're an excellent candidate generally). WaltonAssistance! 19:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your question, I have answered on the RfA. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 26 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Plan for Greater Baghdad, 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.

--Aksi_great (talk) 09:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Updated DYK query On May 29, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Report of 1800, 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.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You're an admin!

It is my pleasure to inform you that you are now an admin. Congratulations. You can feel free to do everything you're supposed to do and nothing you're not supposed to do. If you haven't already, now is the time look through the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Best wishes and good luck, -- Cecropia 18:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Cecropia, I will try not to break anything. Christopher Parham (talk) 18:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations. --Guinnog 19:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome. Glad to fix the error that you have made. Congratulations on being an admin. NHRHS2010 Talk 19:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, mate :) Have a great time! PeaceNT 04:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:
  1. Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
  2. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
  3. Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
  4. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
  5. Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
  6. and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.
KillerChihuahua?!?
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.

[edit] how u see article?????

????

I deleted the article and saw it then. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] deleted page

i understand u deleted a page created by me I agree that it doesn't comply with the policy of the site. It is actually an attempt to collaboratively compose a letter. I found wiki a good tool for that. Can you suggest some other place where i can post it for such purpose.

Either a social networking site like myspace.com or facebook.com might be appropriate. You could also use a free web hosting site like geocities.com. Best of luck with your endeavors. Regards, Christopher Parham (talk) 15:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


Why did you delete Giant Bolivian Chickens? They are real and people need to know the truth. They KILL people. Everybody goes, "why do latinos hate bolivian villagers", it's because they talk aout 8ft tall chickens that eat dogs and kill kids. This is a lesson in the mastership of bolivian legend, part of the underground cults of the Washington DC area. -ZoSoCreedy

If you have reliable sources to back up your claims you can present them here or take the issue to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Otherwise it is likely to remain deleted. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Hi Christopher, the footnotes would have to be added to the article, not to some other article, regardless of summary style. See WP:V. Each article has to be self-contained in terms of references, and that particularly applies to BLPs. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bitter Jester

Hello I don't know where to go for help on this. I hope to have these pages deleted as there are total vandalism and are hurting people

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bitter_Jester&oldid=127568361


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bitter_Jester&direction=next&oldid=129679823


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bitter_Jester&direction=next&oldid=129680051


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bitter_Jester&direction=next&oldid=131507135


they have already been revised but are popping up through google. Please please help.

Hi. I am a bit confused about what you mean here; since all those revisions are old, nobody coming to Wikipedia from Google will see them. Usually old revisions containing vandalism would not be deleted without a compelling reason (for instance if they contained libelous material or violated privacy). Please clarify how these old revisions are damaging your interests so that Wikipedia can address your problems. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

If you type in Hunting for seinfelds in google, the old version of the Bitter Jester article pops up as a preview and it says "It's now called "Hunting for Seinfelds" and is supposed to go on tour this summer. Many of the people interviewed in this movie have disavowed their footage ...". these two projects are different, and anyone looking into hunting for seinfelds will think otherwise before they read the article. Since they are shopping hunting for seinfelds it would be detrimental to their chances of getting a distribution deal.

thank you very much for your help.

Unfortunately, that is a problem with Google, not Wikipedia. If you actually click on the result, you are taken to the current Wikipedia version, but Google still has the old version on their servers. Soon enough (hopefully within a couple days) Google will update their version and this problem will go away. Unfortunately, to my knowledge there is no way to force Google to update, though you could contact them directly: this is their main contact page. Long story short: nothing I can do will correct this problem, it is a Google issue. I will however keep an eye on the article and delete any further vandalism of this nature as swiftly as possible. I am sorry that I was not able to be more helpful. Christopher Parham (talk) 22:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usage of {Unreferenced} tag

Dear Christopher: Can you help in one of your areas of expertise, citations of sources? I am having a disagreement with User:Berig over Volsung. The two of us seem be speaking different languages, although both of them are English. The following is the entire discussion, which I have pasted together from both of our Talk pages. You may also want to look at both of our edit commants here. Please let me know if I am in the wrong on this. Should you choose to reply, I'll watch for it on your Talk page. Thanks. Finell (Talk) 08:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[To User:Finell:] Please note that primary sources are perfectly acceptable sources on WP and your insistance of adding {{unreferenced}} to an article which cites its sources is quite surprising. If you are unfamiliar with the subject matter and find it unbelievable, you would do much better reading up on the matter. Here you have the following sources to the subject matter with *published* English translations, including commentaries:

You would do much better adding these external links to the article than to engage in an edit war insisting on pretending that the article does not cite its sources.--Berig 17:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Berig: I have no interest in edit warring with you or anyone else; you began by reverting me. Nor did I ever claim to be an expert in Norse mythology. Nor do I have any problem in citing primary sources. The problem is that Volsung cites no sources at all, neither primary nor secondary. Where in Volsung do you see citations to the primary literature? Wikilinking to other articles, if that is what you are referring to, does not constitute citation of sources (see WP:CITE). Since you have the primary sources at hand and know the literature, why don't you simply create a Sources section in Volsung and add the citations, and then we can all be happy and be in compliance with WP policy; I am not going to add the sources that you listed because I have not read them and therefore cannot vouch for them. If I am missing something something here, please tell me what it is. Thanks. Finell (Talk) 04:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
You say that I began by reverting you, whereas the hisory says that the first revert was yours. If you are unable to spot four (4) sources in the first two paragraphs, and the table {{volsung}} on the right side of the table which mentions four sources, there is nothing I can do.--Berig 04:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Dear Berig: I really do hate to belabor this, but (1) this edit of yours reverted this edit of mine; that was the first revert. (2) Wikilinks to other WP articles, whether in the body of the article or in a table, are not citations of sources. If you read WP:CITE, you will not see a single instance were linking a WP article suffices as a source citation. I am really sorry that I have not been able to persuade you of this. Finell (Talk) 08:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
You have to understand that it says nowhere on WP:CITE that naming the primary sources is not citing. If this question is so important to you, why do you insist on plastering tags, instead of adapting the sourcing to *your own* preferences?--Berig 08:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
From what I understand the actual content of the article is not controversial? If not it seems trivial to add some additional content that will take care of this issue. I put the links listed above as an external links section. Berig, it might be helpful to readers to identify a preferred translation of each text (presumably there are many translations, some better than others) under a "References" section. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Finell (Talk) 20:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Referencing/Citing sources—which system query

Thanks—GRM 15:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, could you point me to what you are asking about? I'm a bit confused. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
[2] GRM 15:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, okay, I just misunderstood that completely. You're very welcome! Good luck working on your article. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I want to provide you with what you want, but

THere is a problem. Power Instinct is very... very... DIFFICULT... to find that kind of stuff for.

There are no forums dedicated to it.

...no websites dedicated to it....

...no nothing.

Which is my trouble, here... now, I'm not saying it's a lie. And I understand Wikipedia's policies on needing citations and references and all that mumbojumbo. But it's the truth, I swear. And as such, I know you Wikipedia people will remove that kind of crap just because I can't provide the stuff you want.

Which is why I need to make a site for a Power Instinct wiki so I won't have to deal with this stuff... but.......... I don't know where I can get a good domain...... =(

I don't mean to make such a fuss. And I don't mean to be such a jerk. But man, I have had a very difficult time lately, so yes, I am stressed and I'm sorry for how I'm acting, but cut me a little slack and give me a bit of a chance. But that's if you really care enough. =( --Ralf Loire (Annoy) 04:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No shit, Sherlock? :) --Ralf Loire (Annoy) 04:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, you know what?
You and your people can do whatever the fuggin' hell with it. I've copied every single article and picture word for word already, so I'm gonna use that stuff for when I build a wiki for it. I give up. You and your rule jockeys (if I may use the term, however rude it may sound though it's rather accurate) can do whatever ya want with it.
Not like I expect the wiki to be worth mentioning on Wikipedia, but... really. I just don't care anymore. You people just make me hate myself.XD
Not that I'm angry. Just tired. --Ralf Loire (Annoy) 04:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 7 June 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Timeline of the United States Constitution, 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.

--Royalbroil 19:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Report of 1800

Thanks for the help. I added the category, but not the other links. Bearian 22:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for helping out! Christopher Parham (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HELP NEEDED!

Hello, I need help with my user page. Some person added links to other language Wikipedias on my page, and when attempting to remove them, those links do not appear on edit this page. PLease reply. Thanks. -BigBrotherIsWatchingYou, 14 June 2007 11:32

looks to be related to one of your many userboxes, good luck figuring out which one. Christopher Parham (talk) 19:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apology

I want to apologise for the fact that I opposed your RfA. Based on your record as an admin, I think you've proven that my concerns were unjustified. WaltonOne 13:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. In any case I appreciate you having participated in the RfA. Cheers, Christopher Parham (talk) 23:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recipes and Wikibooks

Way, way back on May 27, 2006, you edited Mint Julep, stating "specific recipes belong in the wikibooks entry". I accepted that (although a recipe has snuck back in), and today removed recipes from Mojito, but was reverted. Can you point me to a source explaining where recipes should go? Travisl 06:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

The issue seems to have resolved itself, but the desire to have recipes in the wikibooks cookbook comes mainly from WP:NOT a how-to. Christopher Parham (talk) 23:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List_of_songs_about_masturbation is in it's 5th AfD

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is up for it's fifth AfD. You participated in an earlier one. If you wish to participate again, please go to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_songs_about_masturbation_(5th_nomination) -- Lentower 03:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources#Straw_Poll

This relates to the text on the placement of footnotes which you helped to work out last month; you may wish to comment. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your support at my recent Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Angus Lepper RfA, which failed, with no consensus to promote me. However, I appreciate the concerns raised during the course of the discussion (most notably, a lack of experience, particularly in admin-heavy areas such as XfDs and policy discussions) and will attempt to address these before possibly standing again in several months time. Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 16:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Hi, Christopher Parham, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy UCP 03:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

That's too bad, I'm not entirely convinced that the essay issue was worth opposing over so I am sorry I was the first to bring it up. Best of luck with your next attempt. Christopher Parham (talk) 20:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Allegations of Chinese apartheid AfD

Following your recent participation in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 30#Allegations of American apartheid, you may be interested to know that a related article, Allegations of Chinese apartheid, is currently being discussed on AfD. Comments can be left at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of Chinese apartheid. -- ChrisO 15:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your comment

Thank you for your comment on my RfA, which was successful. LyrlTalk C 01:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Report of 1800

Congratulations on the mainpage FA! Excellent job. Regards, Newyorkbrad 13:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CSD I8

I hope you don't mind, but I quoted your ANI comment in a new thread at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#CSD I8. I agree with what you said there, but wasn't sure if the "CommonsNow" tag and the waiting period mentioned in WP:CSD#I8 addressed your concerns or not. Carcharoth 09:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

They don't help solve the problem, which is that it's more useful to have the images here. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
What about the content fork issues? Maybe you could join in the discussion over there? I think what is needed is for commons to be administrated by admins from all the projects, rather than have its own administrators. It makes no sense to share the pictures, but to have separate bureaucracies. Carcharoth 00:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it would still need a separate bureaucracy to coordinate the actions of admins from many different projects which have different policies and rules -- not just the different language Wikipedias but Wikiquote, Wikinews, etc. which have fundamentally different content goals. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template USstatements

I would welcome your comments at Template talk:USstatements. I think this template is just a bad idea. --JW1805 (Talk) 01:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think much of it but its existence doesn't bother me much. The creator should be aware that the template surviving a TFD doesn't mean any articles are obliged to include it. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Federal Farmer

Updated DYK query On 29 August 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Federal Farmer, 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.

--JayHenry 18:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFA

Thanks for your voice against the opposition. Feel free to actually place your vote.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 00:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)