User talk:Lid/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Why he's harrassing User:Mr.Z-man

I honestly have no bloody clue. Maybe. Mr. Z blocked one of his socks before the Terrific Three Admins could get to him? SirFozzie 04:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I just thought of a possible reason. Remember Tom Zenk's WCW "identity"? probably looking for a wrestling fan admin to abuse. It's at least a guess. SirFozzie 04:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:JBL.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:JBL.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] COOKED B

erm yeah COOKED BREAKFAST BAND article. they sold out an arena in norway. they were also featured on the tv show: Lock up your sons which aired on channel 4 and teachers TV.

Why do they KEEP DELETING MAN? wheres the love?

[edit] Colt Cabana

lol, you're joking? He actually has a move called butt-butt?? Can't be right, surely?!?! Govvy 14:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I remember Iceman King Parsons in World Class Championship Wrestling using the Butt-Butt myself! Of course, all that means is.. I'm old (grins) SirFozzie 18:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You

It looks like my Request for Admin has closed successfully at (58/8/2). Your support is a thing I'm very grateful for. I consider it my duty to try to live up to the trust that you and others have shown in me SirFozzie 18:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template

Your opinion here would be appreciated. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Done

The article is Thomas Couch. Don't readd all that info in until sourced, k? SirFozzie 17:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CM Punk Image

The promotion was Midwest Championship Wrestling. At the time, they also joined up with NWA Midwest, so it might have also been known as NWA Midwest Championship Wrestling. I didn't mention it as the promotions weren't really that notable.

Also, I took the photo my self. Mshake3 01:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Judge for yourself. I have no frickin idea who he faced that night. I'll look for some results. Also, it was at the College of Lake County Gymynaism. Mshake3 01:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[1] Danny Dominion. From what I understand at the time, there was some kind of legit heat between the two. I'll look for proof. Mshake3 01:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well there ya go. And for what it's worth, I have a photo of Chris Chetti with the ECW FTW Heavyweight Championship from the same show. Notable perhaps? Mshake3 01:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling#A great moment for WP:PW - CM Punk now Feature Article!!!

Sorry I didn't put your name down - I didn't know you that much. I've added you now! :) Davnel03 11:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Professional_wrestling_aerial_techniques, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

[edit] cm punk and FAs

I appreciate your feedback, and I'm sure you thought that CM Punk is a well-written article in its own right. If you look through the Wikiproject prowrestling talk page, I wrote a response to a formatting issue, where I really took CM punk apart. The page is well-referenced, but far from well-written. The info on the page is mostly irrelevant and loaded with info that needs to be expanded or dumped into a trivia section.

As for writing articles to make them informative, not interesting, I don't agree for a moment. Small, unimportant topics could be made interesting and informative if necessary perspective is kept. No one wants to read details on what day, place, and payperview name in the article; to keep perspective, like in an encyclopedia, it is very important to keep it like a story, told with facts--what we've got there are facts, ordered chronologically without transitions.

The only reason CM Punk is a FA is because the WikiProject spent tons of time researching online to validate all the facts on his career. Then, they worked to create a densely referenced article with all the facts condensed as much as possible. When the grammar and copyediting looked ok, the article was nominated and reached FA. No one could find a problem because everyone was interested in validating facts, disregarding the fact that someone might read it and have no clue what was going on.

Oh, and my mistake on the Montreal Article. I was sure that it appeared on Today's FA at some time. I guess I was mistaken.--Screwball23 talk 02:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Here, I have a link to the spot where I really wrote what I thought about a paragraph of CM Punk. Look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling‎ near the bottom for autoformatting.

[edit] Oi

I didnt steal the Candice Picture from heroes wikia.

[edit] Regarding spoilers

That discussion at WPT:PW was not about omitting spoilers; it was about what counts as a reliable source for said spoilers. In the very discussions you cited it was decided that only spoilers that have a reliable source can be inserted, so we were actually enforcing the decision. Please do not stir things up that have such strong emotion tied to them, as I more than anyone else do not want that dispute started up again. I'm sorry, as I know that you didn't mean to do anything bad, and you didn't do anything wrong, but your comment really flustered me. The Hybrid 21:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar

Hello,

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 21:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear Lid, if you send me an email, I'll share some additional evidence with you. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apologises

[2] I've struck out the comment and apologied for a very unnecessary comment on my behalf. Sorry. Davnel03 17:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin?

Speaking of new admins, had you considered getting a few new functions on your toolbar? Tim Vickers 18:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I would be delighted to nominate you. Would you like to try? Tim Vickers 23:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm writing your recommendation at the moment. Are you a he or a she? :) Tim Vickers 23:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

In your last reply you probably don't mean that you spend time "adding spelling errors"! :) Tim Vickers 22:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Well we've just got our first oppose at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gimmetrow, so nothing close to perfect! Tim Vickers 04:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration case

I have filed an arbitration case to get Eyrian emergency-desysopped per this CheckUser. Since you are the one who filed the case, I have listed you as an involved party. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me)(public computer) 12:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colt Cobana

His ring name was the same though. "Boom Boom" and "Classic" are both nicknames, which don't go in the ringname section. TJ Spyke 04:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The Jericho one is wrong, but I can't fix it (the article if fully protected). "Y2J" and "Lionheart" were nicknames, not ring names. Same thing applies with Cabana, his ring name was and is "Colt Cabana" and those other two are just nicknames. TJ Spyke 05:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Austin's ringname basically has become Stone Cold Steve Austin, as he is always called that and has been for a few years. The same can't be said for The Rock or Colt Cobana. TJ Spyke 05:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Chris Jericho is usually just called Chris Jericho, The Rock is usually just called The Rock, Austin is almost rarely ever called anything but Stone Cold Steve Austin. I do agree with Stone Cold should be considered a nickname (and wouldn't mind seing the article moved to Steve Austin (wrestler)), I don't think that nicknames should be included in the ring name section. TJ Spyke 05:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I haven't said anything about a rule. It's just that the ring name section should be for ring names and not nicknames, which I think is pretty understandable. Many wrestlers pages have a section for nicknames (grouped with their titles/managers/entrance music area), so they should not clutter up the section that is just for their ringnames. "Boom Boomb" and "Classic" have never been part of Cobana's ring name. TJ Spyke 06:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons stuff

Yeah I am a bit irritated that has not been picked up by someone. I try again today if I get time! Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: John Morrison

While everyone who knows about Jim Morrison and The Doors, knows that what you say about the similarities is absolutely true, the threshold for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. The CM Punk#Gimmick section is very well sourced. And, while I agree with you completely about it being a blatant similarity; without any third party sources to back it up, any reference to it in the article would be considered original research. This is probably why it's been left out of the article at this point. Bmg916^Speak 14:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh. Okay, then. lol. Hopefully another interview will pop up soon. Bmg916^Speak 15:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About that Kansai Goma guy

I guess you could be right, although some other user kept on asking me about what underwear I wore and whether I thought I was a bogan etc. right after I asked "Kansai Goma" why he vandalised the user page. That other user said he was doing an assignment... I really don't know. --wj32 ^t/c 09:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Teddy Khan deletion

I noticed that you tagged this article for deletion. Another article, John Deadly is also written about a non-notable backyard "wrestler". I'm not sure of the process to get an article deleted, so I was hoping you could tag the second article for deletion as well. Thanks. GaryColemanFan 02:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eyrian

Hello,

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 20:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

The WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter Issue I - November 11, 2007

Project News Montreal Screwjob was featured on the Main Page as "Today's featured article" on November 9, 2007. December to Dismember (2006) and Shelton Benjamin have been elevated to Featured article status. Their respective nomination pages can see viewed here and here. Bobby Eaton is currently a Featured Article candidate. It's nomination page can be found here. Images of Beth Phoenix and the Crippler Crossface are currently Featured picture candidates. Their respective nomination pages can be found here and here. IWGP World Heavyweight Championship and NWA World Women's Championship are currently Featured list candidates. Their respective nomination pages can be found here and here. Al Costello, In Your House 1: Premiere and One Night Stand (2005) have been elevated to Good article status. Cyber Sunday (2007), Melina Perez, One Night Stand (2006) and Randy Orton are currently Good article candidates.

Current Events Solofa Fatu (known as Junior Fatu, and previously as Rikishi) was released from Total Nonstop Action Wrestling on October 25, 2007 over a financial dispute, ending his short lived return to television. John Layfield's wife takes serious heat over Citigroup financial advice on November 1, 2007. Brooke Adams (known simply as Brooke) was released from World Wrestling Entertainment on November 1, 2007. Lilian Ellison (known as The Fabulous Moolah) passed away November 2, 2007 at age 84. Chris Mordetsky and Harry Smith (known as Chris Masters and D.H. Smith, respectively) were suspended from World Wrestling Entertainment as of November 2, 2007 for Wellness Policy violations. Mordetsky was released from his contract six says later.

[edit] Congratulations

You have been promoted to Administrator. In the words of The Wizard of Oz, "by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Universitatus Committeeatum e plurbis unum, I hereby confer upon you the honorary degree of ThD...that's Dr. of Thinkology!" Kingturtle 04:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! Hope you find the tools useful, if you need any advice please don't hesitate to drop me a note on my talk page. Tim Vickers 23:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Some do, but I didn't myself. Personally I think this is unnecessary, but it seems to be becoming traditional! Tim Vickers 18:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madinalake25

How about an indef block? Seems a clear case of bad faith vandalism only account. Regards, PeaceNT 14:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Righto, hope you keep an eye on that vandal. Congrats on your recent promotion, btw. Regards, PeaceNT 14:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, looks like one of my first blocks was an indef, I'm probably too evil an admin (-.-) PeaceNT 14:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

For Barbie-Q: Why not? It is widely studied as a short story in many literature programs across the world. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Literature2007 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Hey, just saw you've joined the realm of us mop-holders.. great job, and mop wisely.. ;) SirFozzie 15:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Could I ask you please, why you deleted my article about Xeoss search?

Do you think companies like Google or Ask or Live can place articles about their search and new companies can't? Should Xeoss guys pay to Wiki to have article here? I was always thinking Wiki's free sourse,I guess I was wrong? There wasn't even one link to Xeoss.. Why don't you try to delete Google or Yahoo? They've got a lot of links and don't really care about Wiki policy? I bet you just can't, though it's a lot of fun get out all new articles you can find, isn't it?

--Arthurbreezing 15:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derry, County Sligo

Would you review that AfD and see if you agree with it, please? I notice that you mistook my deletion tagging on Derry, County Sligo for a G4 (recreation of deleted material). Actually I closed the AfD as delete. Usually what happens in such cases is that an admin reviews the close and deletes or (in principle at least, if I got it wrong) reverts. --Tony Sidaway 08:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, I hate split discussions... You appear to have mistaken my intent on commenting on Tony's talk. I'm not even remotely barracking for the article to have been kept. I'm simply attempting to get Tony to follow the same conventions as bind everyone else.

• There's overwhelming consensus that non adminstrators do not do as Tony has done in this case and close deletes, due to the additional possibility of confusion or mistakes. As clearly evidenced by the comments above.
• It's deeply disingenuous for Tony to say "Usually what happens in such cases..." when the most recent discussions show no support for non-ambigious-keep closes.

So just to re-iterate: No complaint on your deletion, just concerned about the process around it.
CygnetSaIad 00:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh if there really were "overwhelming consensus" that non-admins can't close deletions, then no admins would execute my deletion closes. The same criteria as bind everybody else also apply to me, however I won't go even further than that by asking admins who agree with my closes to avoid performing deletions that they obviously agree with. In Lid's case I noticed that he'd mistaken my tagging of the article as a "delete recreation" and conscientiously came back and asked him to reconsider. Usually I get somebody to review and then revert or execute my closes shortly after I close, but in this case nobody was available at the time. In future I'll be very careful to label my deletion closes so that the reviewing admin will know what he's being asked to do. --Tony Sidaway 21:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Replied on User talk:Tony Sidaway. - CygnetSaIad (talk) 23:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Talk Page

Wikipedia policy states that I can remove user's comments from my talk page, do not revert my removal of your warnings on my talk page again, kthnx. Murrawhip 09:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Murrawhip is right on this issue. See Wikipedia:User page#Removal of comments, warnings. The thinking on this is that restoring such warnings generates needless friction, and if somebody has removed a warning it can be safely assumed that he's aware of it. --Tony Sidaway 16:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page deletion

Why on earth did you delete my page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmysmithateyourcake (talk • contribs) 13:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC) It hadn't been 10 hours at all it was more like 7. I had to go to work and was going to write when I got back. What was the problem with the page anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmysmithateyourcake (talk • contribs) 12:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

and what if the group have an album available in stores and on itunes to buy, then do they meet the requirements? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmysmithateyourcake (talk • contribs) 19:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Favor

Hi Lid, you might have noticed that your nomination was one of several others I made over that last week, this was partly spurred by the threat that IPs might be allowed to create pages, but also had a more general objective. The reason for this effort was that I have been a little disturbed by a growing attitude that admins are more than just editors with a few more buttons on their toolbars and are instead "senior editors" with greater authority. I decided that the best way of dealing with this idea was to greatly expand the pool of admins to include a wider diversity of the pool of editors.

Since you have now passed the selection, could you in turn select and nominate some people you trust - I'd suggest aiming for about three over the next month or so. Of those who are selected, could you ask them in turn to select and nominate three candidates. Such a chain of trust should result, over time, in a greatly enlarged pool of admins and thus provide a simple and effective way of spreading the responsibility - perhaps to the point where becoming an admin is seen as normal and expected, rather than a major achievement. I hope you'll be able to help me with this. Thank you. Tim Vickers 20:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

A cabal only exists if it is aware of its existence, if you are concerned about a group-within-a-group I suggest that you don't mention to any of the people you nominate that I proposed this course of action to you. Tim Vickers 23:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, that shows your judgement is sound! :) Tim Vickers 23:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adminship

I should have done this days ago, and I apologize for not doing so. Congratulations on your promotion to administrator! Bmg916^Speak 01:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WWE in Oz

It was a observation in passing in a question. I just haven't noticed events being promoted as heavily on Foxtel as they used to be - purely subjective of course. Thanks for the heads up on this anyway. Albatross2147 02:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I did as you said: I did the search. Not exactly prime time scheduling is it? Seems to be aimed at school kids and insomniacs. I should have been more explicit. They used to advertise pay per view PW events quite a lot and they don't seem to any more. Albatross2147 02:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kaltura

Hi Lid,

Thanks for referring to Kaltura - I'd like to ask for your help and/or advice. Kaltura has created a very cool concept of peer production in rich-media - very similar to what Wikipedia does for text. I would like to get the concept of Kaltura included in Wikipedia as an article, however every time I try my entry gets deleted. What would be the best way to go about getting this published?

Any help or tips that you have would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers, Lisa —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lishkee (talk • contribs) 08:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons!

Ok - I've posted here which I hope will bring some response. I'm afraid I've been a little occupied elsewhere - sorry --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] page deletion

hi can i ask why the ASh End House CHildren Farm page was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lwescott91 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: your apology

It's okay. I know what you were doing. As I said in my answer, I see both sides of the issue so I'm not going to block someone or do something crazy to push a certain viewpoint. Honestly, I'd be offended if someone asked me to block someone just for disagreeing with them. I may be a part of the project, but I'm not going to push agendas that go against Wikipedia polices or guidelines. Nikki311 01:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page Deletion

Can I ask why the Zach Ludens page was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zdludens07 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor?

How can you be an editor when you do not even know how to spell? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zdludens07 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoilers (reply)

I recommend you read WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information and ask that you remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a wrestling website. !! Justa Punk !! 10:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I take it from your reply that you agree now that the information should be withheld until Smackdown airs in the US? !! Justa Punk !! 10:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You have made the most sense, and the most compelling argument regarding this Lid, and I want to thank you. I have been wrong on this in the past as I have mislabeled it vandalism (I am not ashamed to admit what I did was wrong, and it was). I only now reverted it because of WP:RS, and mainly what the consensus was at WP:PW. However your latest comments (to me anyway) at WPT:PW are irrefutable. I now agree with you on this one, and have changed my stance, and admit that now I feel I was wrong. Bmg916^Speak 16:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I started facing the issue actually some weeks ago when the admin Mangojuice (talk · contribs) brought Wikipedia:Spoilers to my attention. I admitted to him I was wrong in calling it vandalism but that I was merely following consensus. From my conversation with him, and now you I have slowly come to realize I was completely wrong. WP:PW should not present itself as a walled garden and it definitely does not trump Wikipedia guidelines. Bmg916^Speak 17:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I for one am very glad you were finally able to express your full thoughts :-). Bmg916^Speak 17:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to admit, I am beginning to agree with your argument. If only it was brought up months ago! Na, you have a very good point. :-) -- Davnel03 (talk) 20:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree actually on the wrestling site thing, they are hardly ever wrong. But sometimes fans call in fake results for whatever reason. To keep everyone happy, I think we should allow the posting of the results after SmackDown! airs wherever first (Australia I guess?). But yes, The Sun is a real dirtsheet, and they aren't reliable for things like the backstage incident after the tapings for instance. Bmg916^Speak 00:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, then once it airs in Australia there's no complaining it's not verifiable and the people continuing to argue about it will no longer have a leg to stand on. Bmg916^Speak 01:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, now I gotcha. Bmg916^Speak 01:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Special:newpages

Agreed - I think the main intent is to direct the focus of patrollers to pages that haven't been looked at yet. But I'm seeing patrolled pages that still need attention (references, cleanup, notability tags, etc). I'm not sure what the fix will be - but I do know that I'm rather keen to turn it off and do things the old fashioned way, and I see no means to do that. ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 04:00, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Sir Vandal of Jerkass

Could you protect the page? Corvus cornix (talk) 04:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Corvus cornix (talk) 04:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Janet Bess Schultz

You patrolled this page but considering the contents I deleted the article following a speedy request, am I misinterpreting the function of the patrol button? –– Lid^(Talk) 01:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes obvious speedy delete. It also had the speedy tag when I marked it. Wikipedia:New pages patrol/patrolled pages says you should mark as patrolled "Any page that is tagged for speedy deletion, so people do not waste time reviewing the same page multiple times.". I did not delete it outright because there was a small chance she was actually notable, and leaving it non-deleted for a while would give the creator time to add the missing notability claim. Thue | talk 11:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you delete WP Elements/Templates page?

10secs after I've created it?Nergaal (talk) 12:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vladimir Tereshkin

Why is this deleted? He has 110 wins in 130 fights [3] that's not a false claim.German.Knowitall (talk) 13:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

[4] I hope I didn't make you feel under pressure over the spoiler discussion. I also definitely wouldn't "run to an admin" if I had any problems to do with spoilers. I hope my comments over the past few days do not implify that. Davnel03 20:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Wow

I guess it's hard to tell sarcasm online? But that should have just been obvious. That template will never be deleted, and it just makes WP:PW look bad. We are not a walled garden, and that template is highly useful for television shows in general. I can't believe this... Bmg916^Speak 15:59, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Another user, "Justa punk," posted a comment about your edits at PW at Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents#POV pushing and disruption. Jose João (talk) 22:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to be uncivil or call a person's character into question here (and I noticed during your RfA and through past discussions with you how civil an neutral you are), but that thread at AN/I is POV pushing and disruptive, and quite honestly embarrassing to WP:PW. Bmg916^Speak 01:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I read every word, well played sir, well played. Bmg916^Speak 14:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm done, I'm bowing out, I no longer care. Let me know when the issue is settled, because this is so silly at this point it's just not worth it. I will go with whatever the decided outcome is. Bmg916^Speak 04:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not that I'm exhausted, but I just could go either way at this point to be honest. Both sides make compelling arguments. Bmg916^Speak 13:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re-question

Not really let it slide under AGF, if the editor was to then act in that fashion maybe it could use to show their prior expressed intent. As I read its a response to a question where another editor person indicated they felt like making a point but had decided not to and was just letting off steam. Gnangarra 02:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brock Lesnar

In the lead paragraph can you change this sentence: Lesnar finished his amateur career as a two-time NJCAA [All-American]], two-time Big Ten Champion, and the 2000 NCAA heavyweight champion with a record of 106-5 overall in four years of college. to this: Lesnar finished his amateur career as a two-time NJCAA All-American, two-time NCAA All-American, two-time Big Ten Champion, and the 2000 NCAA heavyweight champion with a record of 106-5 overall in four years of college. Bmg916^Speak 13:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Bmg916^Speak 13:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] D-Generation X

Can you protect the D-Generation X article? There is an edit war going on over whether or not Hornswoggle, Boogeyman, and Khali were actual members of the group. It doesn't look like either side is going to give in. It's been happening since that episode of RAW aired two weeks ago. I'd do it myself (my RfA ends later today) but I've edited the article, so I don't want it to seem like a COI. Thanks. Nikki311 20:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. The user who was edit warring was blocked as a sockpuppet of another blocked user. You might still want to keep an eye on the page, though. Nikki311 21:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bowtie DRV

It can wait until you get back. There's no statute of limitations on DRV. Otto4711 (talk) 01:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cognitive coaching

There is a discussion at DRV Deletion review/Log/2007 December 3 about your deletion of the article. You may wish to comment. DGG (talk) 06:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nigel McGuinness

Lid, I have opened up an ArbCom request regarding Nigel McGuinness and have included you because you have contributed substantially to the debate at hand. It can be found at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Nigel_McGuinness. Reswobslc (talk) 00:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Mollives

Please explain what you were thinking in deleting this page. This is ridiculous. If I get no explanation I will repost the article. Uhd100 (talk) 00:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dj Valium

What is the problem ? why is the articel deleted ? Kind Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waterworld7 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Russell Tierney

you deleted the vanity bio before I could even list the db-bio tag on it....--Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NoIP and No-IP

perhaps these bits of spam need some salt? --Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking! I'll see about what can be done. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey you fucking asshole.

Of course the article Smallhacker is notable. It's about ME, and I'm VERY notable, much more than you and your fucking several failures at life. Now put it back. ImSmallhacker (talk) 05:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ) Patrick Anal Res Ex

Patrick Anal ReS Ex

Give me a chance to add proof of notability I put a hangon on. Relaxant Crap Dike (talk) 11:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relaxant's last one

The last one was Boris Karloff. :P Anyway, thanks for helping out. Cheers :) --slakr^\ talk / 11:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relaxant unblocked himself

How is he able to handle his own unblocking? It's back. The 48 hour block did nothing. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 11:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

lol have you seen his talk page? not much of an appeal...don't you think? hahahah - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 11:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

should I nominate his talk page to the GA review board? hahhahah - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 11:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NewMusicBox

Why do you think that the e-zine NewMusicBox is not notable? I have mentioned in the page that the NewMusicBox has been written up in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1033435349509928673.html?mod=googlewsj
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9807E5DB113BF93AA35753C1A9649C8B63
Not including that it is a world renown new music journal that is referenced by hundreds of composers and musicians.
This e-Zine seems much more notable than 90 percent of the e-zines at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Webzines
Why aren't they "speedily deleted"?
VoxNovus (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Lid, I think I was pointing out that I think that you are being predjudice for deleting an article that is being referenced by two large publications and is a reputable e-zine instead of spending your time deleting an e-zine that is blatant self promotion. In other words, I think you are wrong and picking on a notable entry because it isn't "pop" or "glossy." Please explain why an entry referenced by two major publications for its work in the new music field is not notable. Thanks, VoxNovus (talk) 15:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the Times article is exactly about the accomplishment of NewMusicBox. It refers to them creating an online source of contemporary music as scores and music available for download. At the time an accomplishment to the community. the NewMusicBox had been founded in May 1999, well before the writing of this article. VoxNovus (talk) 16:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of NewMusicBox. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. VoxNovus (talk) 14:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Lid, sorry for the confusion about notability and article's significance (CSD A7: Article does not indicate subject's importance or significance) Still... if you had an issue with the style in which the article was written wouldn't it be better to let me know before deletion? VoxNovus (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Lid! I also should apologize for being so "touchy" VoxNovus (talk) 07:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yes & sorry

I've nudged Bryan - pretty well up on that sort of thing. Apologies I lost sight of it I'm afraid --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Localgod Clothing

You deleted my page without responding to my question. You requested that I explain why my page wasn't blatant advertising on my talk page and I did. That page was VERY time consuming and was in no way advertising for the company. There is not a single link contained within the article that give users the opportunity to purchase the shirts or even a link to find out where the clothing can be purchased. That article was written and posted in the same vain as rvca stussy and volcom...none of which have been deleted. Though those brands may be slightly better known, with over 200 stores worldwide, Localgod Clothing is definitely a company of note. The articles refrenced are completely verifiable and validate that the company has recieved national media coverage and is thus very notable. I request that you put the page back immediately or make a very specific list of changes that need to be made to prevent deletion.
Thanks,--Joshuakopel (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Lines such as "Showcasing Hollywood’s dirty underbelly, Los Angeles landmarks, and prominent American heroes, Localgod has captured the attention of both American and international markets." come across as attempts to sell the clothings style to the reader and the entire "Strength Through Character" section are advertising and not encyclopedic.

Lines such as the one you mentioned above were quotes from cited sources and the "Strength Through Character" section is the company's mission statement. Not to repeat myself, but repeating positive commentary on the label as it was written in a national magazine is in no way advertising the label. 100% of what is written in that article is either objective fact or the opinion of a nationally published cited source. This explanation should clear up any confusion and the article should be reposted barring any further questions from you. --Joshuakopel (talk) 04:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

My last statement warrants a response. Please do so. --Joshuakopel (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! I found it mildly entertaining, so I partially replaced it, but thank your for fighting against vandalism and making Wikipedia a better place. --Qmwne235 23:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dean Sherr

Surely an article published in a newspaper is notable enough for an article? Currently there are plenty of articles on persons much less notable that have no references whatsoever? Deansherr (talk) 06:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)