User talk:Phoenix-wiki
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
||
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
[edit] Request for help
Request for help - changes sought to be made by me on some history pages - seeking review through third party for deletion of inaccurate information given
Hello Sir, this is N.Srinivasan (Srirangam99 (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)) I noticed that on the page on Western Chalukyan (or Later Chalukyan King) Tailapa-II there is some inaccurate information regarding his victory over a Chola King Raja Raja I in 992 AD, which I feel has not been supported with evidence. On the other hand I have visited authentic sites like www.whatsindia.com/inscriptions and its related links regarding Tailapa-II, Raja Raja Chola I and other Chola and Chalukya Kings and have thus far not found any evidence of Tailapa-II's victory over Raja Raja Chola I. In fact (in addition), Wikipedia's own history page on Raja Raja I says that after taking over as King in 985 AD Raja Raja I did not undertake any military expedition/conquest until the 8th year of his reign which corresponds to the year 993. Further it is from the next 2-4 years 993 that Raja Raja I was busy with the conquest of Sri Lanka, Pandya Kingdom and the Chera kingdom and he spent the further subsequent time in consolidation of his conquest by appointing subordinates loyal to the Chola Kingdom. That would take it up to AD 997 up to which Raja Raja I was busy with his military conquests. This we have to match with the information about Tailapa-II being succeeded by his son Satyashraya in AD 994 itself while (according to available evidence) Raja Raja I was busy conquering the three Kingdoms mentioned above. What I mean to say and prove by this is that there was no occasion for Raja Raja I and Tailapa-II to cross swords against each other. So neither got defeated by the other. In addition I have also attached in support of my contention in the discussion page on Tailapa-II, more evidence fromt he website www.visitchitradurga.com which mentions about Chalukya revival and inscriptions from the period of Tailapa-II, his son Satyashraya and their successors. In fact Tailapa-II's inscriptions are up to the year 994, with one significant inscriptions corresponding (roughly) to December 994 AD and Sir, you may kindly note that none of these inscriptions ever acknowledge or even (as one would obviously expect a victorious king to do) as to proudly proclaim his victory over their worst enemies the Cholas and that too proclaim victory over a very strong Chola King, Raja Raja I.
I request your guidance and support for placing my submissions for third party review and a decision made on deletion of the inaccurate lines on the page on Tailapa-II. For further information, you may see the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tailapa_II/Comments
In anticipation of your guidance and appropriate action for a third party review, I remain Sir. Pls. do not hesitate to get in touch with on my talk page or through email (my email i.d.: srirangam99@gmail.com).
Thank you very much.
Srirangam99 (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia Signpost tutorial series
Hi Phoenix-wiki,
Thanks for offering to write articles for the Wikipedia Signpost. Just letting you know that we have run out of tutorials to use in the Signpost! If you have time, it would be great if you could make a start with some of the topics that you have claimed, but not yet finished. Thanks! enochlau (talk) 23:35, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikibooks
Hi Phoenix-wiki. I am a Wikibooks user, and I've recently restarted your WikiProject:History over there. I was wondering if you would be interested in returning and/or recommending users who might be interested in helping out. Thanks, Νεοπτόλεμος ( talk | email | contribs ) 19:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RFA thanks
Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence § t/e 17:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] User talk:Turdman the Plumber.
That would have been a good name for WP:UAA. :) · AndonicO Engage. 18:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 15 | 7 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 16 | 14 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] June is Wikipedia Image Cleanup Month
Hi. I saw you were working on a tutorial for the signpost related to images, and thought you might also like to help with a project I'm trying to run. The goal is to get all images cleaned up in June, and education of all users about images. I'd love any and all help. Here is the location to start reading at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Image Monitoring Group#Wikipedia Image Cleanup Month (June). Thanks. MECU≈talk 12:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Request for Copy editing
Currently, an article I have helped on (Aang) is at FAC. It has received two opposes with the suggestion of getting a copyeditor. This article has been tagged for a while to receive copyediting and since you are on the list of copyeditors, i was wondering if you would be willing to copyedit it? The Placebo Effect (talk) How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review. 20:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Use of {{verylong}}
Ad hominem isn't at all overly long, so there's no need to use this template. If you meant the lead, use {{Intro-toolong}}. Richard001 (talk) 22:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah well I meant the lead but didn't know that other template existed, so thanks for the pointer :-)--Phoenix-wiki 10:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Your help is really needed for the article on Stephanie Adams.
There seems to be a lot of animosity and bitterness by users (particularly Hoary, Wandering Canadian and Sean Martin) who have been maliciously editing the article on Stephanie Adams, even on the discussion page. Can you please step in and stop these people from making personal attacks against the subject matter? This woman obviously does not know anyone of them personally and her article should no longer be edited by people who clearly have some sort of gripe against her. If they do not like her, then perhaps they should write about someone else. Really. 71.167.226.96 (talk) 09:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- When considering this request from 71.167.226.96 please be aware that she has referred to other editors as "sicko", "retard", "idiot", "flunky" and peppers her contributions with "You took your hand off your little thing between your legs long enough to type" and other such comments. (Her contribution to Talk:Stephanie Adams at [1].) So, yes, there does seem to be mlicious editing and personal attacks from people who have some sort of gripe. But let's be clear on who is actually the source. -- Sean Martin (talk) 18:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
First of all, I am a "he", not a "she". Second, I never left comments like that and am starting to wonder if you are mentally all there. Sean Martin, stop obsessing over Stephanie Adams (as well as me, because you have followed all of my comments on other pages) and stop leaving personal attacks about her on her discussion page just because she sued your friend and beat him. Miss Adams does not know you and will never want to know you. End of story. 71.167.226.96 (talk) 23:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- "I never left comments like that" Just follow the link I provided. If not you then someone coming thru the exact same IP address and clearly you should look much closer to home when admonishing folks to stop personal attacks. (Any confusion, if it exists, could be easily alleviated if you got a named Wiki account. Avoiding anonymity would also help credibility.) "stop leaving personal attacks about her on her discussion page" Please provide even one example. "she sued your friend and beat him" You can keep saying that, but it will remain untrue. She has threatened and harassed, but not sued any friends of mine. Assuming her suit against James Poling is what you are referring to, again, I've never met him, never spoken to him, do not know him personally, am not friends with him.
- If you want me to stop posting, stop leaving postings containing falsehoods about me. I will continue to respond to any postings you or anyone makes that do. I'll stop the moment you do. Up to you. -- Sean Martin (talk) 00:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...
Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
-
One Stripe (200 articles) 
Two Stripes (400 articles) 
Three Stripes (600 articles) 
Tireless Contributor Barnstar (1000 articles) 
Chevrons (2000 articles) 
Working Man's Barnstar (3000 articles) 
Barnstar of Diligence (4000 articles) 
Third place overall 
Second place overall 
First place overall
[edit] thank you
 |
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky |
[edit] Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 17 | 21 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] African Pope AfD
Yo Phoenix-wiki, I have responded to your comment on my talkpage. Thanks, Skomorokh 12:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
 Issue XXVI (April 2008) |
|
|
New featured articles:
New featured lists: New featured portals: New A-Class articles: |
|
|
|
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
|
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 18 | 2 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 19 | 9 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RFA comment
You said: If we can get things done extra fast, that's great,t eh quicker the better
Except when you make mistakes. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 20:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fritzpoll
Was there a mistake in the publishing when three comments that were the same were posted to the opposes? Rudget (Help?) 14:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there, PW. I know you mean well, and believe me, I agree with you that Fritzpoll is an excellent candidate for adminship (I did nominate him afterall :-). I'd like to ask the same question as Rudget above though. It seems that you've made the exact same post in three places, which is borderline pointy, and continue to defend your posts, against other editors, including me. What you are doing, while I completely understand that you are trying to be helpful, is actually presenting itself as having the potential to be harmful. It's causing those that are opposed or neutral to "dig their heels in". While the tally is good right now, and Fritzpoll will likely pass (and rightfully IMO), I would ask again politely that you please refrain from "overcontributing" to the oppose/neutral sections. Fritzpoll himself has said that he respects the particular opinion that he hasn't been around long enough, and he isn't fighting the neutrals/opposes for their opinions, but you are. Please stop editing that page, as it is causing more wiki-drama than necessary. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
- Making the exact same same post in three places isn't pointy in the slightest, it's not disrupting wikipedia at all, as all three posts were completely relevant and simply prohibiting making points is absurd because one cannot conduct a reasoned debate without them, or any sort of debate for that matter. They are perfectly entitled to "dig there heels in", and there's no drama over there at all. You are confusing discussion with drama — drama is throwing insults and stuff around, discussion is just that, discussion, which what was going on over there. Discussion is healthy, it improves wikipedia and over there everyone is now giving there opinion in response to my posts, which is a good thing, nobody has been incivil at all. Two people agreed with me.--Phoenix-wiki 21:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- There's no need to get so defensive, PW. I made a kind request. I made no demands. I believed you were being a distraction on that particular RfA, and the "discussion" you were looking for frankly had nothing to do with that candidate and would have been more pertinent on WT:RFA as a "general topic". I'm not arguing with you, I happen to agree with you about those particular opposes and their rationales. It's all a "no matter" now, that RfA is closed. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- Making the exact same same post in three places isn't pointy in the slightest, it's not disrupting wikipedia at all, as all three posts were completely relevant and simply prohibiting making points is absurd because one cannot conduct a reasoned debate without them, or any sort of debate for that matter. They are perfectly entitled to "dig there heels in", and there's no drama over there at all. You are confusing discussion with drama — drama is throwing insults and stuff around, discussion is just that, discussion, which what was going on over there. Discussion is healthy, it improves wikipedia and over there everyone is now giving there opinion in response to my posts, which is a good thing, nobody has been incivil at all. Two people agreed with me.--Phoenix-wiki 21:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Copyeditting help
You are listed as an editer who may be contacted for copyeditting help, so I am leaving this message here to ask if you could copyedit the page Montana class battleship. The article is currently list at Featured Article Candidates, and several people have suggested the article would benifit from a copyedit. Anything you can do to help would be apreciated. Thanks in advance. -- TomStar81 (Talk) 22:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
|
Issue XXVII (May 2008) |
|
|
New featured articles:
New featured lists:
New A-Class articles: |
|
|
|
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
|
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Notability
I don't really want to get drawn into a huge debate about this, so I'm not posting at the thread. However- "There's no speedy deletion criteria for being non-notable, and the usual crap falls under WP:NOT, the rest of the non-notable stuff, why not keep it if it's verified etc?" A7 is a speedy deletion criteria based on notability- there is not one about what Wikipedia is not, and one would not work. Maybe, philosophically, there is no reason not to have articles about rubbish, but it is just not workable in the current climate of Wikipedia. We would be overrun with articles about the crap, and deleting them would be horribly awkward. Understand, I'm not arguing in terms of what is in line with our goals, I'm talking from a purely 'been there, done that' stance, trying to give you an idea of what can and can't work. J Milburn (talk) 22:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- Oh right, kk, I havne't done speedy deletions for months, so forget that criterion.--Phoenix-wiki 22:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 23 | 2 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
