User talk:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Userboxes

Alright, there you go Le Grand, I added the two userboxes on the bottom of your list of userboxes. (care to sign my GuestBook, in my signature)--TrUcO9311 ^TaLk / _SiGn 21:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Sure, I would be happy to. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Navajo rug

Hi there, I've been raising this up from a three paragraph stub and it's looking pretty good so far. Would you like to help bring it up to GA? Cheers and best wishes, Durova^Charge! 21:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll check it out. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! You're a trooper. :) Durova^Charge! 21:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. It does look pretty good already. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Ye Art Cordially Invited to the Annex

Hello, My good Fellow, listen and I shalt telleth Ye a Tale of a Wiki that well comes All Manner of Articles relating to Fiction. What is This wonderful Place of Fantasy, You ask? It is the Annex, Haven to All fiction-related Refugee Articles from Wikipedia.

Before nominating or proposing a fiction-related Article for Deletion, It is My sincerest Hope that Ye import It to the Annex. Why do This, You wonder? Individuals have dedicated an enormous Amount of Time to writing These Articles, and ’twould be a Pity for the Information to Vanish unto the Oblivion where only Administrators could see Them.

Here is a Step-by-Step Process of how to Bringeth Articles into the Annex:

1. Ye shall need at least three Browser Tabs or Windows open. For the first Tab or Window, go to Special:Export. For the second, go here. (If Ye have not an Account at Wikia, then create One.) Do whatever Ye want for the third.
2. Next, open the Program known as Notepad. If Ye haveth It not, then open WordPad. Go to “Save as,” and for “Encoding,” select either “Unicode” or “UTF-8.” For “Save as type,” select “All Files.” For “File name,” input “export.xml” and save It. Leave the Window open.
3. Next, go to the Special:Export Window at Wikipedia, and un-check the two small Boxes near the “Export” Button. Input the Name of the Wikipedia Article which Ye wish to import to the Annex into the large Field, and click “Export.”
4. Right-click on the Page full of Code which appears, and clicketh on “View Source” or “View Page Source” or any Option with similar Wording. A new Notepad Window called “index[1]” or Something similar should appear. Press Ctrl+A to highlight All the Text then Ctrl+C to copy It. Close yon “index[1]” Window, and go to the Notepad “export.xml” Window. Press Ctrl+V to pasteth the Text There, and then save It by pressing Ctrl+S.
5. Now go to the Special:Import Window over at the Annex. Clicketh on “Browse…” and select the “export.xml” File. At last, click on “Upload file,” and Thou art done, My Friend! However, if It says 100 Revisions be imported, Ye be not quite finished just yet. Go back to Wikipedia’s Special:Export, and leave only the “Include only the current revision, not the full history” Box checked. Export That, copy the Page Source, close the “index[1]” Window, and go to the “export.xml” Window. Press Ctrl+A to highlight the Code all ready There, press “backspace” to erase It, and press Ctrl+V to pasteth the new Code There. Press Ctrl+S to save It, then upload once more to the Annex. Paste {{Wikipedia|{{PAGENAME}}}} at the Bottom of the imported Article at the Annex, and Ye art now finally done! Keepeth the “export.xml” File for future Use.

Thank Ye for using the Annex, My Friend — the Annex Hath Spoken 03:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the note! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a million

Thanks a million for signing my autograph book. What's up, G! Tech43 (talk) 06:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome and happy editing! :) Sincerley, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Hey can you help me create a userbox loosely based on one of yours? Tech43 (talk) 06:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome to use any userbox from my userpage. I unfortunately did not create those though and honestly do not yet know how to do so. If you go to Wikipedia:Userboxes, we have some more skilled technical editors who could probably help you with userbox creation. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Textile Arts newsletter

Happy New Year! WikiProject Textile Arts is starting 2008 by initiating a project newsletter. The project had 7 new articles at Template:Did you know in December and we hope to see more of you in 2008. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 20:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you as well! I hope my edits thus far to textile related articles have been helpful. With that project, the welcoming committee, the kindness campaign, the video game project, and the rescue project, I sure have my work cut out! Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

They've been very helpful, thank you. One of the things I hope we do in 2008 is get every top-priority article to B-class or better. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 01:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I am happy to read that and hope we can encourage others to focus more on improving articles as well. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Mystery editor!

I am a user on Wikipedia, but who? Figure it out. (Hint: SIGN IT!). 98.161.53.217 (talk) 01:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess someone with a guestbook? Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

1 more hint: depression. 98.161.53.217 (talk) 02:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Technogreek43? Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Bingo! What's up! How do you like my vandal-reverting skills? 98.161.53.217 (talk) 02:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I urge you to log in under your regular account and edit that way, as others will frown upon a user also using an IP to edit in addition to a main account. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I have no plans, to ever be Technogreek43 again. In fact, after tonight, I may never edit wikipedia again. 02:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.161.53.217 (talk)

Well, if you do consider to stick around or come back, a fun way to help is with this project. Saving articles is incredibly rewarding. Also, I believe you can change your username (there is a board somewhere for that) if you are concerned about your current username in a manner that would not result in the usual sockpuppetry accusations some throw about. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

happy Mango season

'TIS MANGO SEASON....
Have a shlice of mango cheek...well, I am up to my armpits in the things. Yuletide means lots and lots of mangos, as well as turkey and ham and ice-cream and pressies. Were on special so I bought 3 crates for AU$20 and now I have both crispers in the refrigerator full and even with everyone eating two of the ##$@& things every mealtime... I am a bit mangoed out so I thought I'd spread the goodwill around....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and same to you! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Note about Wikipedia:Give an article a chance

It's not a policy or guideline, so using it as a keep reason isn't helpful. From that page itself: It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it. Use an actual reason to keep things, instead of constantly using an essay that isn't a requirement to follow. As I know you will probably ignore this, I will be mentioning this in every AFD that has the essay used for keep. Also, the same exact thing applies for the "Don't destroy" essay that you also use for a keep reason. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah well Rob neither was Eyrian's old essay on pop culture. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Thanks for the welcome. I'm actually a member of almost a few years now, just forgot to log in :) 69.119.13.218 (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Happy New Year! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin noticeboard

There's thread discussion "In popular culture" sections in articles there. Interested to take a look? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 04:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll look if I have some time. Thanks! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not exactly the most active person...

..over at WP:ICU, but just wanted to say welcome on behalf of them! :) Best regards, Rudget. 16:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

(Belated) Happy New Year! spam

Here's hoping the new year brings you nothing but the best ;) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Same to you! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 15:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Happy Armenian Merry Christmas :) VartanM (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! The same to you!  :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Caution

As you may know, sockpuppetry is considered a very serious breach of conduct for an editor and can lead to sanction and blocks. As a result, linking to a sockpuppetry page as you did in this edit [1] requires diligence on your part that the accusation was serious and in good faith. As it stands, if you had visited the suspected sockpuppet page you linked to, you would have seen that it has been courtesy blanked. Further investigation on your part would then have allowed you to determine that the accusation was completely frivolous and without merit; you seem to have done neither. Providing a link to a spurious accusation of sockpuppetry is slanderous, nasty, ad hominem, personal attack. I assume you are simply ignorant of the facts here and suggest that you remove this part of your comment. Eusebeus (talk) 19:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear Eusebeus, I only linked to it to indicate that there have been a history of accusations against that user. I make no judgment or analysis on their merits and the two links I provided can be used to determine whether these accusations and the current ones are legitimate or illegitimate. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Ça ne marche pas, Citrouille. Il faut que tu en fasses mieux que ça car accuser ne monte a rien, et en ce cas était entièrement frivole. Franchement, il m'étonne que tu t'engages de cette façon. J'attendais mieux. Eusebeus (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear Eusebeus, I am not accusing him of anything, just linking to an earlier discussion, which if it was frivolous could even work in his favor by suggesting that not all accusations against him are valid. It is reasonable for admins to understand the totality of that situation. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't a really great idea, GRC. Wait till its proven. DGG (talk) 03:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I do appreciate the feedback. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Otters in popular culture

I'd love to create such a page, but I don't think I can find any reliable sources regarding otters in popular culture. Sure, they exist (in the form of PB&J Otter, Otter Pops, Emmet Otter's Jug Band, etc.), but to just give a list would be synthesis. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 03:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

If you do ever decide to create such an article and would like help, just let me know. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I noted some more on the otter page. There will be stuff out there/ Think laterally, try cinema bookshops. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

There is this section that could maybe be expanded. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Recent AFD contributions

Firstly, a belated thanks for your Christmas wishes on my talk page. The reason I write here is I have been noting your recent contributions to a lot of article for deletion debates. I watch Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion, and you've been taking a keeping stance on a lot of the debates listing there. Keep in mind that I do not belong to the metaphorical and non-existent "other side" (i.e. deletionist) in this apparent clash, but rather take a case-by-case look at things. You may also remember me from the third opinion I wrote on the "Pumpkin queen" article. Consider this simply a piece of feedback, if nothing else.

A lot of your contributions cite reasons that have not yet been recognised as valid by community consensus. Some recent quotes of reasons you cite for notability are a number of people familiar with the subject, and the number of media it has appeared in. Another argument I noticed in your contributions is the effort put into the article by the creator, including a "do not destroy" essay which is pretty much the same argument. On the first set of arguments, I would like to note that having some kind of absolute standard for notability would be something many, including me, agree with. The main problem with such a standard is that it's arbitrary (how many people?), and that it's not easily verifiable (do people have to know, have heard of, or be interested in the subject?). Because of these problems, closing administrators are not likely to accept the argument. If you have an idea for a solid basis for the argument, take it to Wikipedia talk:Notability and suggest an amendment. That way, it can be "codified" and then used in debates, and closing administrators will be more likely (or even forced) to accept your reasoning. On the second set of arguments, these appear to be problems with the deletion process in-it-self. These concerns could be more accurately voiced on Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy.

This is just a piece of advice to you in the hope your contributions to Wikipedia have more of the effect you intend them to have. What you're doing now is not illegal or wrong, and if you want to, just continue. I considered replying with arguments against many of your contributions to deletion debates, but wrote the above instead, because it will probably have a more of a constructive effect. Finally, I would like to keep discussion here, and not on my talk page, if that's ok. User:Krator (t c) 19:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear Krator, thank you for your thoughtful and constructive feedback. I will think on it at some length before participating in any further discussions. I again appreciate your time in writing the above paragraphs and wish you a pleasant afternoon! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion continued here. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello

O Great King of Pumpkins, I have become familiar with your name from closing many AfDs. I wonder if I may make a very friendly observation. I have found many of your comments useful, and many of them bring up points not considered by others on a particular AfD. However, others seem like they are straining to find a reason to make a Keep !vote. Indeed, I have come to expect that if I see your name in an AfD, it is a Keep comment - even if the reason is a stretch. It would make me, as a closing admin (and I can only assume others) more likely to notice what you have to say if your position was more balanced. That is, if you didn't !vote keep in situations where the only reason was a flimsy one, and if you occassionally !voted delete. I hope you won't take this as a criticism, because I in no way mean it as one. I merely hope that you will hear it as someone who respects what you have to say offering you advice to be more effective -- and if not, that you will ignore it. Pastordavid (talk) 03:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the constructive feedback. I am definitely willing to vote delete on occasion, as I did here, here, here, and here, although I tend to avoid many discussions that are obviously going to be deleted and probably do not need another post in favor of deletion. I focus much more on articles that I believe can be improved. If you notice from my contributions, you will see that in many AfDs I participate in, I also spend a few minutes making improvements to the articles under question, whether it be simple grammar fixes or the addition of references. One thing I do notice is that a number of my most determined critics (not you, obviously) on the reverse side of things practically never vote to keep anything and several editors' overwhelming majority of contributions to Wikipedia are just nominating articles for deletion. Thus, I feel on many occasions as if it is necessary to vote keep more frequently than delete in order to balance out those editors (some have even nominated multiple articles in under a minute using TW) who only attempt to have articles deleted. In any event, I have found rescuing articles, correcting grammar, and welcoming new users far more rewarding of an experience than participating in AfDs and have thus greatly reduced my time in those discussions. I think out of my last 500 edits, maybe only nine were in AfDs. Again, thank you for the kind suggestions and I will give them more thought even after I post this message (I am currently taping Medium for my mother now [it is on a commercial], and so I am slightly distracted). Anyway, have a pleasant night! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

You do well with such welcoming. I actaully have an account, but didn't want to log it. :D --137.165.243.59 (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome and happy editing! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

A Q For You

I appreciate the welcome. I do have a question for you. I was reading the username policies and wasn't quite sure what is meant by "doppelganger accounts". It sounds as though one might be wise to create multiple accounts with similar names (e.g. if my desired username was "Johnny Miracles" then I ought to create "Johnny Miracles" and "JohnnyMiracles" as two separate accounts). Do you know: am I understanding that correctly? No example was given. Thanks! 75.175.165.52 (talk) 06:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello! You may wish to check Doppelgänger as well. Anyway, yes, if you wanted to create other accounts similar to your main account to prevent malicious editors from impersonating you and then immediately redirect these alternate accounts to your main userpage and indicate that you have created these accounts for that purpose alone, you may do so, but the important thing to get from the username policy is that you are only supposed to edit with one account and log into that account as much as possible when editing so as to avoid accusations of using an alternate account as a sockpuppet (which sometimes happens even if you are not engaging in sockpuppetry). Happy editing! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Gracias. 75.175.165.52 (talk) 06:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

De nada. --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget. 16:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you...

...for your support in my recently closed Request for Adminship. I am more than a bit stunned by the outcome, which appears to have finished at 146 supports, no opposes, and one abstention. I am particularly grateful to Keilana and Kingboyk for their recent encouragement, and most specifically to Pastordavid, for having seen fit to nominate me. I also want to make it very clear to everyone that I have no intentions of changing my name again, so the servers should be safe for a while.

In the event you ever believe that I would ever able to assist in the future, I would be honored if you were to contact me regarding the matter. I can't guarantee results, unfortunately, but I will do what I can. Thank you again.

By the way, I know the image isn't necessarily appropriate, but I am rather fond of it, and it at least reflects the degree of honor I feel at the result. And it's hard to go wrong with a Picture of the Year candidate.

Now, off to a few last tasks before starting work in earnest on the various templates I promised I'd work on.

This RfA thanks inspired by Kathryn McDinaha's, in turn inspired by several others after Phaedriels' original. Hoping we can all keep such inspiration of newcomers ongoing, I am, sincerely, John Carter (talk).

John Carter (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome and congratulations!! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC) P.S. I like the painting!

RFA Question

Hi...just curious as to how the 01:09, 8 January 2007 link you posted in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#The Television Episodes Edit Wars relates to the RfA discussion on episodes (the link goes to an ANI about a possible Jimbo impersonator)? I don't think we're supposed to reply to comments there, but wanted to ask in case it was an incorrect link. Collectonian (talk) 21:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear Collectonian, thank you for your question. I did a search on ANI by using phrases like "episodes" or the names of the main participants and one of the main participants in the arbitration case is mentioned somewhere in that thread. If you think it is too tangential, you may remove it. I know that section is "Statement by Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles," but it could be renamed "Chronology of Incidents" or something as I just believe that it is helpful to have the whole history of these debates in part so everyone does not have to repeat themselves and so everyone has a chance to read through the earlier discussions to see why they did not succeed in resolving this matter. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Might be good to note that beside it, but it is interesting to see some of the Chronology. :) Collectonian (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

There has to be even more that could be added to the chronology, but my back is hurting a bit today, so I am having some difficulty concentrating as I "surf the web" and read about Alexander the Great (for an upcoming couple of classes) simultaneously. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 22:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [2]. --Maniwar (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikifying ordinary words and phrases

Hi. I just noticed that you created a wikilink for the word "book" in the intro to the article The God Delusion. After reverting that I was curious and took a quick look at your contributions.

First, my congratulations on your productivity - it's fantastic that some people can contribute so much to Wikipedia. But on looking at a couple of your recent contributions, for example Nørre-Snede municipality, where you wikified "municipality" (despite it being an inexact translation of a Danish word that does have a wikilink), and Sheikhdom, where you wikified "geographical area", I'm wondering if you aren't using your time somewhat unproductively. Surely wikilinks for such ordinary words and phrases are unnecessary, and maybe even slightly irritating? --RenniePet (talk) 23:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)