User talk:Gtrmp/2006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Reversion at Zora 2 List of anti-heroes 3 Naming conventions for television shows (again) 4 Tomas Wanderer 5 from the perfect article 6 Hey 7 Half-baked move sans disambiguation; what was the point? 8 And on a completely different note 9 Category:Cricket subcategories nominated for deletion 10 Agnostic atheism 11 Category deletion 12 Franchise categories 13 Hangings 14 Deleting the Nitcentral article 15 Lymphoma Category 16 Featured articles on deletion review 17 Your opinion, please 18 It's a mystery 19 Alleged Cult CfD 20 Categorising species "by geography" 21 Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Summoner 22 Funnyman 23 Orphan powerd death machine 24 "List of" moves 25 Category:Superpowers

[edit] Reversion at Zora

Why did you revert my change at Zora? To tell the truth, I thought about deleting that note instead of moving it. Zora means dawn in a South Slavic language, and Hausos is the goddess of dawn in a PIE religion -- That doesn't seem like a strong connection to me at all. I decided to move it to the bottom because it is not uncommon for an article to have such links at the bottom if it is highly unlikely that the user would go to the page for that reason (due perhaps, to a weak connection such as this). Having a link for a foreign-language word seems odd to me anyways - the dab page for pan says nothing about the Spanish word for bread, and rightfully so. --Pagrashtak 23:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough; I was under the (incorrect) impression that the link was in fact directly relevant for Hausos, but after looking it up in print sources, there doesn't seem to be any reason for linking from Zora to Hausos. I'll remove the link. -Sean Curtin 20:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of anti-heroes

I just want to inform you that the article List of anti-heroes was deleted today after being listed on VfD. I am not sure if you knew it was listed or not, or if you care or not. I felt, since you had participated as a contributor on the article that you should know. If you want to know more about the status of the now deleted article, I have made a post in Wikipedia:Deletion review. If you don't want to know more, please disregard this message. sincerely, Kingturtle 21:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions for television shows (again)

I saw that you were active in the first vote for naming conventions of television program(mes). Well it has raised it's ugly head again and I would appreciate any comments you have to make about my new proposal for naming television shows. Please leave comments here. Thanks! --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 21:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tomas Wanderer

Is this article worth keeping on its own? I don't know enough about Warhammer to make an informed decision. Joyous | Talk 02:01, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

No idea, I don't play Warhammer. -Sean Curtin 01:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks anyway, I'll give a try somewhere else. Cheers! Joyous | Talk 01:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] from the perfect article

Read this Wikipedia words:

• ...is nearly self-contained; includes and explains all essential terminology required in the article, such that someone could completely understand the subject without having to read many other articles.
• ...branches out; contains wikilinks and sources to other articles and outside materials that may add new meaning or background to the subject or give relevant, connected information, so readers may easily understand where they should go for more background or information.
• ...acknowledges and explores all aspects of the subject; covers every encyclopedic angle of the subject.
• ...is an appropriate length; article size is long enough to provide sufficient information, depth, and analysis on its subject, without including unnecessary detail or information that would be better suited for a child article ("subarticle")... (AND THAT'S WHAT THIS ARTICLE DOES!!!!!!! - T)
• ...reflects expert knowledge; fact-based and rooted in sound scholarly and logical principles.
• ...is well-documented; reputable sources are cited, especially those which are the most accessible and up-to-date. (in this case the ones with the producers word - T)
• ...includes informative, relevant images, each with an explanatory caption (...) to add to a reader's interest or understanding of the text(...)
• ...is engaging; uses varied sentence lengths and patterns; language is descriptive and colorful while still maintaining encyclopedic tone.

(from wikipedia:the perfect article) ... Just trying to make you change your mind about my bat-embargo page. Throw me a word if you want. Greetings--T for Trouble-maker 05:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Just thought you might be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Hogwarts (2nd nomination) because you participated in the first vote. Savidan 21:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Half-baked move sans disambiguation; what was the point?

Regarding your move of Asteroids to Asteroids (game). What was the point of this?

I'm well aware that some people think that the "naked" Asteroids article shouldn't assume that the game is the default; actually, I have some sympathy with this viewpoint.

What struck me as pointless was that you moved the article to the game version and then made Asteroids a redirect to the game article. How exactly does this make things any better?!

All it does is introduce a redirect and move (more complexity to track) without fundamentally altering anything.

If you'd done this whole-heartedly, and made Asteroids a disambiguation page, and updated the disambig line at the start of Asteroid to point to the disambig page, I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

Fourohfour 09:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

(Following reply cut-and-pasted from my talk page) Fourohfour 15:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

When I moved Asteroids to Asteroids (game), I did correct the redirect to point to asteroid. User:Larsinio inexplicably reverted the redirect to point to the game. -Sean Curtin 07:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly enough about the title itself to discuss this further, but since you seem keen to have "asteroids" redirect to the "asteroid" article, we now have a problem:-

Larsinio's change wasn't entirely inexplicable; it meant that all the existing links for the game went where they intended to go. When doing page moves like this, it's good form to change the existing links (using "what links here").

So we either have two choices; make asteroids redirect to asteroids (game) again, or someone can fix the links. Since you feel that the former option isn't satisfactory, I'd appreciate it if you could at least at least check the links ("WHAT LINKS HERE"), determine which ones were intended for the game, and alter them to point to Asteroids (game) where appropriate.

Fourohfour 15:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

My (partial) apologies; it looks like you put at least some effort where your mouth was, as I notice you've made a lot (but not all) of these fixes. Fourohfour 16:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] And on a completely different note

I just wanted to thank you for expanding the Timeline of the Marvel Universe article. I was thinking of doing it myself but never found the time. I especially appreciate the confirmation of Star-Lord and Cyberspace 3000 as being part of the Marvel Universe. Wilfredo Martinez 14:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Please see Me... and do pennance (Did you change your name? Veddy interesting link I followed)FrankB 09:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Cricket subcategories nominated for deletion

I have nominated Category:Cricket subcategories for deletion here. This is just a courtesy note because you took part in an earlier inconclusive debate on the same subject, and may wish to comment on this one. If you're not interested, please forgive the intrusion. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Agnostic atheism

As the creator of the agnostic atheism article, I thought you might want to know it is under consideration for deletion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Agnostic_atheism. I noticed you were the creator and although I personally believe it should not be deleted (and the current consensus is keep), I don't know enough to provide useful feedback but perhaps you do. Hope you don't mind this message. Cheers Nil Einne 10:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category deletion

Hi, I note that you created Category:Persian deities a long time ago. It may soon be deleted. You may wish to salvage it, hence this message. ImpuMozhi 20:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Franchise categories

If you ever wish to resubmit those categories for deletion, I will support you. Lady Aleena 09:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hangings

You were perhaps not aware of the established category Category:Executions by hanging. Bhoeble 11:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting the Nitcentral article

Can you chime in with your vote? It's here.

[edit] Lymphoma Category

Hello,

Nice work on the Cancer Death: Lymphoma Category. I suggest adding to the description: This includes both Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. What do you think?

Michael David 14:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured articles on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Featured articles. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review.

I understand that it had been turned into a vandalism-redirect, but its original use before deletion (twice before), was a redirect to Wikipedia:Featured article.

[edit] Your opinion, please

Hi! We welcome your opinion, or participation on Wikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality/WIP-image-guidelines where we are attempting to develop useful guidelines to help solve a variety of problems. Atom 15:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It's a mystery

Just so you know, on Andrew Vachss's own official site, there appears an article with the following title: "Writing the Wrongs: Hard-boiled mystery author Andrew Vachss gets tough".—DCGeist 06:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alleged Cult CfD

To help with reaching consensus on this CfD, I added categories to sort votes into reasons for Keep or Delete. You can confirm that I sorted you into the right group hereAntonrojo 19:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categorising species "by geography"

I'm curious what you mean by that. States and nations are geographic entities, but I take it you mean something other than that. But what do you actually mean? Guettarda 04:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Summoner

As I stated in my note, 'the 20th Year Of Taisho' would be 1931, which would put the game in the 1930s. --HalfShadow 02:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Funnyman

I'm just wondering why you moved Funnyman to Funnyman (comics). The page that Funnyman now directs to doesn't even have the title "Funnyman" anywhere in it.

Wouldn't a disambiguation paragraph at the top of what is now Funnyman (comics) have been a better way to do this? As it stands now anybody lookinf for the comic book would have a harder time than nessessary. Those looking for double act are less likely to try Funnyman first anyway. Stephen Day 16:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

thanks for reconfiguring my MS Accounting page to redirect to the proper one!

[edit] Orphan powerd death machine

In regards to the article Orphan powerd death machine, which you proposed for deletion, I have marked the article for speedy deletion, as I feel that the article meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to proposed deletion. I have left the {{prod}} tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks!

I used {{db-band}}, since the author did not assert notibility. ~ BigrTex 00:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "List of" moves

Hey. Just thought I've give a shout out, ask what was up with you moving articles like List of alternate versions of Robin and List of alternate versions of Batman to simply Alternate versions of Robin and Alternate versions of Batman. Is this after some new naming convention came down? Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 18:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Superpowers

You deleted category superpowers saying it is redundant with superheroes and supervillains. I think you may have overlooked superpower, which is about a term used in political science. Although I support your deletion, as such a category does not need to be created, I just thought you might want to keep that in mind. :) Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 03:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)