User talk:Gh87

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Gh87, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Alhutch 16:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Pop template deletions

Hi Gh87,

I am a little puzzled by your nominations of Template:popmusic and Template:pop on Templates for Deletion. Perhaps if you could provide some further details on why you nominated the templates for deletion we could provide you with some further guidance on the issue.

Cedars 01:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. --Rory096 08:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Love and Marriage (comic strip)

It looks like Love and Marriage (comic strip) has come up for deletion via WP:PROD. If you wish to contest it, you may. All you have to do is remove the tag. However, if you do, likely the comic will move to the formal WP:AFD process, which is a more formal deletion procedure. The reason it's up for deletion is the article doesn't appear to meet the criteria described in our web site inclusion guidelines (see WP:WEB). To be honest, the article probably won't survive here, which is why I've made a copy of it on Comixpedia, an encyclopedia that is very similar to Wikipedia, except it is dedicated to online comics. You may see the article on Comixpedia here. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 19:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Love and Marriage (comic strip) AfD discussion

I see that you left a message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. If you want to argue your case, it is better to do so at where the AfD is taking place, here:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love and Marriage (comic strip). --Ezeu 01:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Listing {{Latter-day Saints}} for deletion

Hi - the template {{Latter-day Saints}} appears to duplicate the purpose and functionality of {{LDS}} - I am going to ask that it, {{Latter-day Saints}}, be deleted - but wanted to notify all the contributors in case they object. Trödel 14:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

re marking for merge - "Doh!!!!" Trödel 21:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
On the listing for deletion, I didn't realize that you hadn't also listed the proposed deletion on the WP:TFD page - so I went ahead and did that today. You may want to participate in the deletion discussion. I also merged all the links from {{Latter-day Saints}} into {{LDS}}. --Trödel 19:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
FYI - I redirected it per your request - just waiting for an admin to delete it now --Trödel 20:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diane Glancy

Hi, you left a wikify tag on the Diane Glancy article - could you please drop a few hints on the talk page as to where it needs wikification? Thanks, Vizjim 18:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Balance Game '06

I guess I forgot to take out the merge tag when I moved the page. Thanks! -TPIRFanSteve 12:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cleanup tag

You put a cleanup tag on Alejandro Agresti yesterday. But you didn't put a note on the talk page saying what, exactly, you thought needed work. Would you mind taking a few minutes to do so now?

The way I see it, when people express their concern by putting a tag on an article, as you did, but then don't put a note on the talk page, explaining their concern, they leave the rest of us guessing when their concern is satisfied.

The cleanup tag tells readers to look to the talk for a discussion about why the tag was applied. Thanks a bunch~ -plange 21:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese Rock

Whether Chinese Rock should become a disambiguation page or not is the kind of thing you should discuss before doing. Given that the genre should be Chinese rock anyway, it's not clear that a disambiguation page is even needed. Nareek 02:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

A dab page probably isn't needed, but i've made it a dabbed dab page. Tuf-Kat 03:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re:Lake House vandalism

Good job in reverting! I have no idea why this Amit Walia thing is done -- one time someone even created a duplicate of the director's article and called it Amit Walia. Anyway, for that type of vandalism, if you catch it again, would be {{subst:test2}} and then signing it. For info on what other templates are available, including a milder one if you're not sure it's vandalism, see WP:VANDALISM Cheers! plange 15:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese Rocks/rocks

I feel like the disambiguation page is a solution in search of a problem. It seems very unlikely to me that people looking for "Chinese scholar's stones" are going to be typing in "Chinese rocks", so that seems like a bit of unnecessary assistance. For people looking for "Chinese Rock" under "Chinese rock", or "Chinese rock" under "Chinese Rock", we can have (and I think did have) a "see also" at the top of each article directing readers to the other one. I don't see the gain for the reader in the disambiguation page.

Whether I'm right or wrong, this is the kind of discussion you should have *before* you make a major change. Nareek 12:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DP

The DP article is not the place to list every person whose first name starts with D and last name starts with P. If they aren't known as "DP", they shouldn't be listed. Similarly, the data processing article never mentions the acronym, so it shouldn't be dabbed. -- JHunterJ 19:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Midnight Syndicate

I did not do any work to this article or request a protection of it. You must have the wrong person. --Kf4bdy talk contribs 19:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for taking note of this issue. I'm not exactly sure what you meant on my talk page. Did you do something to the article, or did I not follow the proper instructions for requesting page protection? (I notice that NOW people are signing in, but doing the same thing as the unsigned vandals before). Am I just suppossed to keep reverting the vandalism, editing new, or leave it be and let an admin look at it? Again, thanks. You're the only person so far to answer me. Oroboros 1 02:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah-ha. I think I understand what you mean... about requesting a protection of a particular date, right? I did not know that. I have edited my request and hope that the admin may recognize the problem for what it is. Makes me want to re-read 1984 :) Thanks again. Oroboros 1 03:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Done. Thanks. Oroboros 1 03:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Participants in WWII

You're absolutely right of course, thanks for pointing out that one... :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 18:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wheel of Fortune daytime page

Would you like to wikify the page that you tagged? I'm relatively new here and I'm not sure exactly how to format it correctly. Thanks! JTRH 15:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:requests for page protection

Hey :-) Thanks for the information. I left it empty since I wasn't sure, what I should ask for exactly. I on the one hand was of the opinion, that it was not so serious for a full protection, on the other hand the users involved are registered, a semi-protection therefore would be ineffective - so I thought that what is adequate shall decide an admin. Another user has enlarged my application in the meantime, it therefore should be all right now. Thanks again. Phoe 14:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't even realize I forgot. Kingjeff 05:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charging me for nonsense

I remove IP user's message because someone accused me of nonsense I never commit, like double penetration. And s/he can't prove that I commit any nonsense everywhere in Wikipedia. How does this person know anything about me, anyways? --Gh87 07:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

As it turns out, I get to know what "double penetration" means--either in upper or lower cases for first letter of each word. And this IP user loves to harass me and others, but this person should know s/he would get banned if this IP user makes anymore disruption. Check the history log of my talk page. --Gh87 08:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zh-st and Zh-ts templates

Hi there. Please be more careful with the changes you're making to {{Zh-st}} and {{Zh-ts}}. When using <noinclude> in inline templates, you cannot leave any extra line breaks between the text and the <noinclude>. The same thing goes with making {{tfm}} visible, especially when there is no entry on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion. These templates are used in hundreds if not thousands of articles. Your changes are breaking sentences in half all over the place. Mike Dillon 05:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Showcase Showdown

I closed this article's AfD entry. Please continue with your proposed merge. -bobby 17:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Game in which something is always won

Dude. Any Number. -TPIRFanSteve 18:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Faye Wong discography

Thanks for your help with this. I'll be back with more entries later, unless you want to finish it before me. I was wondering where I might find the Japanese for "Rouge", then I saw that within a few minutes you had put it in for me! I think it was your table style that I copied for the list of cover songs, so I hope you approve. By the way, do you read Chinese or Japanese, or just copy and paste like me? Fayenatic london 22:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted page "My Precious Sunshine"

Hi. A page you created, My Precious Sunshine, has been deleted in accordance with our deletion policy.

Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable notability guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content; it will be deleted again and may be protected from re-creation. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article. If you have any questions, please contact an administrator for assistance. Thank you – Gurch 04:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pontiac Grand AM

Not quite sure what you mean. There's so many different ways to misspell things, I still don't think it's necessary to have a redirect for them, especially when it's a capitalization error. --Sable232 23:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect Archives

I have reverted your edits to Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives & Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/July 2006 and have deleted Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/August 2006. The move to per day pages was designed to 1) make RFD easier so that copy-n-pasting didn't have to occur; and 2) provide easy access to the history so that people can find the actual edits if there is need. Transferring the new format into the old defeats those and results in unneeded duplication. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 01:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Posting to my talk page

Thank you for suggesting that I archive part of my talk page; I've done that. As for my having deliberately deleted a closed debate, I apologize for any confusion, but it was ME who nominated the redirect for deletion in the first place. I then realized it qualified for a speedy delete, so I shouldn't have put it as an RfD, so I reversed myself. So yes, it was deliberate, and I'm sorry it was confusing to you; I was doing redirect cleanup for the first time. John Broughton | Talk 14:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CSD

The "Price is Right" redirects you listed on CSD were not valid candidates for speedy deletion. I've restored the ones that were deleted pending the result on RfD. Philwelch 06:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe that you have a misunderstanding on closing deletion debates. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions. As a non-admin, you may only close deletion debates that are unambiguous keeps (or ones that someone else deleted, but forgot to close the debate). You may not close debates that you initiated or that you participated in. I'm sure your actions were in good faith to finish up what you started, but the deletion policy does not allow it. The policy is designed to ensure adequate community participation in the final decision. Sometimes there will be a lag in closing debates due to admin's available time. When that happens, you simply have to be patient. Let me know if you have any questions. -- JLaTondre 13:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Closing debate

Personally, I wouldn't close it with just two supports for keeping it there. That said, I'm not very experienced with RfD discussions and might be applying AfD standards (where articles routinely attract 5 opinions at least) where they shouldn't be applied. If I were you, though, I'd wait for an admin to happen upon the discussion and see what they do. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

With respect, my response (above) had nothing to do with the actual mechanics of closing the debate. What I was saying (and indeed what I still am saying) is that I'm not convinced that the number of responses so far means that consensus has been established. Yes, you and I are both physically capable of closing the debate - as is anyone else on this site - but that's neither here nor there. I'm not going to close the debate myself, partly since I listed it in the first place and partly because I don't believe that consensus has been established yet. You're welcome to close it, but I again remind you that we're after consensus and we may not have reached it just yet. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect

A redirect that was deleted a while ago has been put up again by the same person. Can you please delete Assburger syndrome again? Simply south 19:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I put it up on RfD again. According to Omnivore Oprah, this wasn't meant as a personal attack or bad faith edit as it is what they heard it being called. See User talk:Omnivore Oprah#Redirects. Simply south 21:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Think Fast

Sigh. You changed this article to link to two other articles which I didn't know existed, without giving any indication to either me or the creators of the other articles that we had duplicated each other. Next time you find a situation like this, let people know, because otherwise we have articles hanging out in space with no connections to other articles. User:Zoe|(talk)

[edit] Template:Area-code-stub

A template you created, Template:Area-code-stub, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 00:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox tv

A template you created, Template:Infobox tv, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 18:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Track listing formatting

Hi there. Note that I've reverted this change, because sub-headings should be used per WP:ALBUM#Track listing. Have a nice day. --PEJL 12:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your merge proposal on More (1956 song)

Why did you flag the article for merge? It seems there are too many young guys who think a song is non-notable just because it was popular before they were born. The song was a top-10 hit in two countries (US and UK) for Como, a top-10 charter in the UK for Jimmy Young; by any standard this is notable enough for its own article. -- BRG 17:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Untitled

I am the real doug spearman - if you have any questions, ask me. Until then, stop editing my bio. I am not HIV postive. --The preceding was unsigned by Dougspearman 10:59, 31 October 2007