User talk:Monotonehell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice If you leave a message for me: I will respond here.

If I leave a message for you: Respond on your talk page. I will add you to my watchlist.

[edit] Old talk archived

here

Contents


[edit] Why did you delete "unhelpful comments" on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch?

You deleted two comments in your edit of 10:35, 6 May 2007. While these comments may not have been helpful, they didn't do any harm except to the author's reputation. If someone wants to put embarrass himself in a talk page, it's not up to you or me to cover their tracks for them. Please consider restoring the edit. Dfpc 01:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I restored both comments (one was mine). Monotonehell also semi-apologized in my talk page, questioning my use of WP:CENSOR. I do not want a storm in a tea cup so I responded:
"I am glad you see how you over-reacted. It doesn't explain my apparent over reaction. Even?"
--Cerejota 02:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning messages

I'm not entirely sure what point there is leaving messages fourteen hours after it's been discussed on the talk page and whatever "edit warring" there was has stopped... Shimgray | talk | 19:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, it was sorted out well before you left your messages. Thanks anyways gaillimhConas tá tú? 23:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
The lead point was "In the future..." as admins you should know better. Having bits pop in and out of existence on the main page is not a good look. --Monotonehell 04:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Initials

That was random >:) Simply south 19:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 UEFA qualifier fan attack

Hi, I removed the merger tag. Please see the article's talk. Bondkaka 15:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AoC

Cheers, mate.

I remain convinced this is the best alternative. Sure I live not only in Latin America but in Central America (Honduras) but I do believe this is for the best of the encyclopedia (if I could have modified the map I would have but I have limited image skills, see [1], SqueakBox 22:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disneyland

Thanks for your clean-up and edits recently on Disneyland. :) Tiggerjay 16:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The trivia section in Fifth dimension

Thanks for getting rid of the silly Trivia section in Fifth dimension. The stuff that was there was essentially completely irrelevant to the article itself. Good riddance, I say!—Tetracube 03:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ages of consent, different legal frameworks

Please read my comments in the Talk Page of Ages of consent in Latin America. This concept of an "unfettered" age of consent may be good in anglophone countries, but may become distorted in other legal frameworks, replacing the rule with the exceptions. Please read and reflect about this.Paulo Andrade 01:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GoatTracker - a unique character

While checking back to the article I'd worked on, I spotted that someone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/83.65.239.251) had wound BACK my last edit, resulting in text I had already corrected. Resulting changes from you (re-removal of links) - I apologise for this, but here's the newer version. Now the only problem I see about the article is, it's looking too sparse even with the changes you suggested (which I've included, again). I can't stuff a lot more content into there without seemingly crossing one line or another for suitability, so what do you suggest? I'm not the original GoatTracker author, and I don't know who 83.65.239.251 or why s/he likes my crappier writing so much. Anyhow, cheers.

Brickviking 08:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk main page now

Please don't remove the troll's comments, just answer his question. It'll save a lot of conspiracy theories on his behalf. --Monotonehell

I have answered. On his talk page. (as did you) And I answered it on the main page talk, first, but someone else removed it, so I was just following suit. Gscshoyru 13:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Could you update the Age of Consent map? It´s 15 for Argentina, wich is listed as "unknown". Thanks. --Damifb 14:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi the map's based on the verified information on the region specific pages. Argentina does have an entry but it is one of the jurisdictions that is "unclear or unverified", I don't know where you get the age of 15 from, that's none of the three ages listed in the discussion. --Monotonehell 14:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't see any discussion regarding Argentina... The Spanish Wiki says it's 13, see http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edad_de_consentimiento

--Damifb 15:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

It's on one of the subpages listed there Ages_of_consent_in_Latin_America#Argentina The youngest AOC is 13 but there's Espurto laws to 18 and further complexities that can't be accurately pictured on a map.--Monotonehell 15:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ages of consent pages

It's easier to have the discussion in one place.

[edit] Give Peace a Chance

I agree with you that an offhand reference to a song in a Simpson's episode is not notable. But the use of any song in the soundtrack of a major motion picture is, I believe, worth noting in an article about that song. Renaming a trivia section doesn't fix it, but removing it outright doesn't fix it either. WP:TRIVIA says that the elements should be moved to the article. Until someone has time and energy to do that, leaving them in the list is better than trashing them. Capmango 00:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hrmz well I guess we disagree on what constitutes notability then but not how to handle trivia sections. I always deal with trivia sections in one of two ways. If I don't have time to deal with it properly I put a trivia template on the section and come back later. If I do have the time I integrate any misplaced facts into the appropriate places in the article. Or if a useful list or lists can be made of related categorised items I create such lists (if they are LARGE then I consider forking a list article. With the trivia that remains, I look at it and decide whether it is pertinent or not. This I admit is largely subjective, but I declare all derivative works to be not notable. Instead any works that derive from other works should link BACKWARD to their source. Unless there's some verifiable impact that the derivative has had on society. For example, in the past almost ALL articles had a "In the Simpsons..." reference because the Simpsons have referenced near everything. There's been a concerted effort to remove all such references, they prove nothing.
In order to show that a particular work has had impact on society and culture we need a source that says so. Otherwise we border on original research or synthesis.
I left the items I considered notable. Are there any particular items that I removed that you consider worthy of salvage? --Monotonehell 07:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, to me common sense says that if a notable film includes a notable song, then that fact is worth noting on the song's article (and vice versa). Or at the very least, if the movie is mentioned in the song's article, the mention shouldn't be removed. As an example, the article for the song Kokomo mentions that it is featured in the movie Cocktail, even though all you hear is a 5-second clip of the song in the background (and the article does not reference an external source to back up the fact that the song is in the movie -- don't you think doing that would be overkill?). The song Give Peace a Chance plays a much more prominent role in the movie Trial of Billy Jack. I'll copy this to the article talk page in case others want to weigh in. Capmango 14:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
As I get more time I'll be improving the article, I tend to only get 10 minutes here and there. I've just spent a few minutes de-dot pointing a section. That gave me the opportunity to insert a couple of the more notable movies as examples in context. --Monotonehell 23:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joy!

Marlith T/C 04:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations, you are now an administrator

I'm happy to inform you that, due to your successful request for adminship, you have now been promoted to an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or stop by the administrators' noticeboard. Congrats! Andre (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Likewise. I look forward to seeing your edits to Main Page components :) GracenotesT § 17:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers you two! --Monotonehell 08:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
I keep our dialogue on the state of the Ages of consent in North America on my talk page as an example of how editors with sincere differences can build consensus through discussion. In a world beset by intemperance and incivility, I appreciate your efforts to engage in discussion. Congratulations on your new mop & bucket and I look forward to your continued contributions. If I recall correctly, I still owe you a cider. As an aside, the Justin Berry article is again a trouble spot, if you'd like to muddy your boots. Deletions, permanent deletions, IfD nominations, and now an RfC. We're trying to hit every possible forum simultaneously, I think. --Ssbohio 09:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Age of consent pages discussion header

I am having a couple of problems with the header that I hope you can clear up. The header says "For an example of a properly formatted article see the Ages of consent in Australia and Oceania." I feel this link should go to a dated version of the article, as it otherwise assumes that the article will remain "properly formatted" (and experience (ugh!) says otherwise). Similarly, the header states that it is based on "consensus*" leading to "* (The original age of consent formatting discussions began [[here]])" linking to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Age_of_consent#The_Age_of_Consent_Clean_up. Currently, that leads to the top of the talk page. Presumably the consensus is archived, but I couldn't find it. Mdbrownmsw 17:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#leaving shortly after promotion

They're talking about you! –Pomte 23:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Shame on them. Hope to see you around. And I hope you like [my edit summary. Prodego talk 03:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:AOCWorldMap.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:AOCWorldMap.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Guest9999 (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Archive box

I am attempting to make a new archive box, in which there is no width parameter, and the only page still using the width parameter is one of your's. Is there any way possible to remove the width parameter from this box? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, MrKIA11 (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Resolution near (?) on how to entitle Tony Sandel's lists of books portraying sexual attraction to children

Please visit Talk:List_of_works_portraying_adult_attraction_to_young_males#Requested_move. Tony has accepted a proposal for a new title that may put to rest objections dating back to late 2006. Your input in the next few days would be appreciated. You participated in earlier discussions of this question and related questions about that work. SocJan (talk) 23:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)