User talk:Satori Son/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 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.

01 – 02 – Archive 03 – 04 – 05 – 06 – 07 – 08

Contents

Administrator

Could you please make me Administrator on Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimyu12 (talk • contribs)

Only a Bureaucrat has the ability to promote someone to admin, and that is only done after a community consensus is reached at Requests for Adminship. You should thoroughly read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. I would also highly recommend undergoing an Editor Review before going through the nomination process. Good luck, Satori Son 16:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

My brand-spankin' new mop!

My RfA done
I hope to wield my mop well
(Her name is Vera)

I appreciate
The support you have shown me
(I hope I don't suck)

Anyway, I just
wanted to drop you a line
(damn, haikus are hard)
EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


Satori Son I need your help

Hey Buddy how are you doing? I want to thank you again for all of your help on the David L Cook page. After I took it to an admin I have not had any further problems out of the other editor. Anyway, I need your help here. I have put an article [1] up for deletion because it is just not a notable person and the article is in bad need of fixing POV's. Nor can I find any sources except the subjects web page. I put a tag on the page but I am not sure that I have done it correctly. Could you please look at it and tell me what you think or fix it for me? I would be so greatful. Thank you in advance for your help. Junebug52 4:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you've done everything right with the PROD notice. After five days or so, an admin who's active at the Proposed Deletions page will take a look and decide whether to delete it. If it ends up staying, I'll check back and try to help you out with cleaning it up. It certainly needs lots of work. Good luck,  Satori Son 22:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Fix San Francisco Bicycle Coalition page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Bicycle_Coalition

Satori: Thank you for your welcome message. I'll try to uphold the highest Wikipedia standards. I created (or tried to) this page for the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. As a "placeholder" I copied a basic description from the coalition's "About" page. Can you please review this and make it accessible? Thanks. Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dornbiker (talk • contribs)

Hello. I really have no familiarity with the subject matter, so I'm probably not the best person to rewrite the article. But really all you have to do is use the temporary subpage at Talk:San Francisco Bicycle Coalition/Temp to create a new article from scratch that does not use any copyrighted material from the subject's website. Also, don't forget to cite some third-party references, else the article may still end up being deleted because it doesn't establish sufficient "notability". Please read WP:CORP and WP:VERIFY for more info. Good luck, and please don't hesitate to call on me whenever you have any more questions. -- Satori Son 22:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia: External Links Edits

Hi Satori Son, I wanted to let you know that I reverted your edits on this page because I believe you changed them in good faith believing they were grammatical errors. However, your edits actually changed an important issue that was being discussed on the Wikipedia talk:External links#To promote a site. Effectively your edit limited site promotion to only commercial websites (selling products and services) when in fact this was debated and agreed that site promotion could also include non commercial sites. Calltech 01:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I didn't realize the discussion was getting so heated on this. I have added my two cents at Wikipedia talk:External links#To promote a site. Thanks again, Satori Son 01:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your nice comments on my user page! Calltech 02:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
You're very welcome. Nice to have an ally in the fight against spam. -- Satori Son 02:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Template:Onesource

Hi – thanks for supporting my move request at Template talk:Moresources. I notice you're doing some updating of the templates; I actually changed some of those already. It's cool if you want to keep doing that, but I didn't update all the uses of {{moresources}} to {{onesource}} specifically because some of them looked like they should've been using {{more sources}} instead. Just letting you know that in case you were going to change them all to {{onesource}}. Thanks! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I'll definitely be careful which ones I change. As of yet, I'm only updating the ones on my watchlist: almost all of them are ones where I added {{moresources}} in the first place. I've been a fan of this template for a while, but the name always bothered me. Thanks so much for taking this on; it will be a big improvement. Do you think we should go ahead and update the WP:CTT page? -- Satori Son 17:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm a little hesitant to do that just yet, but as soon as the move's done, or at least when there's an overwhelming consensus established, sure. Thanks again for the help – I was just trying to make sure we didn't start stepping on each other's edits or anything like that. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    • By the way, if you don't mind my asking, am I wrong in putting citation request templates at the top of the article? I notice that quite a few were originally at the bottom, but I've seen both, and, until the series of updates on this template, most of those I'd seen were at the top. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
      • I think there's a fairly serious lack of consensus as to where to put reference cleanup tags. For example, see the discussion at Template talk:Unreferenced#Straw poll on placement. If there is already a section for "References" or "External links", I usually put it under there. But most of the time that's just to avoid irritating the original authors, who, as I'm sure you know, can be very possessive. But I still see them at the top all the time, so it still looks like personal preference at this point. And you have my full support to update the WP:CTT page whenever you think appropriate (it may be a while before we get a good number of opinions on this). Thanks again, Satori Son 17:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Great, thanks for letting me know. I actually put the tags of all the articles I changed in the course of trying to phase out the {{moresources}} tag at the top; hope that won't be a problem. I really appreciate all the help. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support at RFA

I wasn't going to send thank-you cards, but the emotional impact of hitting WP:100 (and doing so unanimously!) changed my mind. So I appreciate your eloquent support and confidence in me at RFA, and hope you'll let me know if I can do anything for you in the future. Cheers! -- nae'blis 23:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I am very sorry.

I did not know. I thought it was a good topic but it is a rumour. Once again sorry.Pendo 4 20:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)Pendo 4. Um if I was not suppose to write my name here then I am sorry again.

You are a very nice person. You are the people who make This Planet Good.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pendo 4 (talk • contribs)
You can see Tamagotchi Corner shop 2.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pendo 4 (talk • contribs)

supriem david rockefeller

I wanted to inquire about the deletion of Supriem David Rockefeller. I'm doing some due diligence and any info would be helpful, thank you. Contact me kelliitgirl@yahoo.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.168.243.213 (talk) 01:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

<reply sent via email>


removal of personal attacks

I noticed that you reverted my change in the discussion page for CMS comparison. I removed the personal attacks without adjusting the content or intent of the other authors after carefully considering the remove personal attacks guidelines. I have objection to the author attacking me by dismissing my comments based on affiliation. According to the no personal attacks policy, the following example of a personal attack applies: "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme." I would appreciate it if you could revert your revert so that I do not have to go the full arbitration route. --ShanM 02:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I also clearly labeled the removed comments with [personal attack removed] according to the policy. I was not hiding the edit. I am curious to know how you would like me to proceed with getting the personal attacks removed. --ShanM 02:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

First and foremost, I do not believe the comments removed fall under the auspices of WP:NPA. But, even assuming that your edit was a good faith removal of what you believe to be a personal attack, I do not believe it was an egregious enough attack to allow its unilateral removal.
The policy states, "You might also consider removing particularly clear-cut personal attacks as discussed in the essay WP:RPA; however, you should be very careful not to define 'personally attack' too broadly, or to do this too frequently. From an arbitration committee finding-of-fact: 'The remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly.' If you find yourself using this remedy frequently, you should reconsider your definition of 'personal attack.' When in doubt, follow the dispute resolution process instead." The WP:RPA article is not a guideline, just an essay, and as such has no authority. Finally, see Wikipedia talk:Remove personal attacks/Archive for an illustration of how contentious this issue is.
In short, since this is not a "particularly clear cut" case, the appropriate course of action is for you to ask the original poster or posters to remove or edit the comments you find offensive. If they do not wish to do so, then I believe the Wikipedia:Resolving disputes process, or perhaps Wikipedia:Requests for comments, is the best option for you. Respectfully, Satori Son 03:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


I do believe it is clear cut. I only removed the comment that was an attack. The comment was clearly not addressing my content but attacking my person by reason of affiliation. I feel it is very straight forward because it is an exact example given in the no personal attacks policy. The content that I removed was only the personal attack and had absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of the page. I will follow your suggestion and start with that person. Thanks for the suggestion. --ShanM 15:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:UW

Hi,

You have put yourself as interested in helping out at WikiProject on user warnings. We are now at a stage where we are creating the new templates and are wondering if you are still interested? If so please visit the overview page and choose a warning type you wish to work on. There is a base template available here, which you can copy and use to get you started. Have a look through the redirects and see what old templates are affected and incorporate them into the the new system. Anyway, any questions please don't hesitate to give me a shout. Regards Khukri (talk . contribs) 08:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello There

Hello Satori Son, I thought I would write you and let you know that our old friend Wikipediatrix has finally found herself in a lot of hot water on here. It seems just as I thought. She had created herself some sock puppet accounts to strong arm her edits and to uphold her personal views. I had suspected this all along but did not have any way of proving it. I am saddened because even with our disagreements, she was a prudent editor and was a watcher of good wiki. It is sad to loose her to such foolish things. I am also saddened that through her efforts she caused you and I to have a misunderstanding and for you to loose faith in what I was doing as an editor. Those arguements were childish and should have never of happened, but you just could not deal with her. When you did try she turned it around so that it looked like you were attacking her. Again, I am very saddened about this, but I guess she brought it upon herself. Take care and happy holidays! Junebug52 15:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of the sockpuppet use. The situation is more complex than you allude, but she displayed very poor judgment nonetheless, especially considering her prior comment here. Anyway, I have long since moved on from that dispute and am glad to see you have not had any major problems since. And happy holidays to you, as well. -- Satori Son 17:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Blue Dot

Hmm.... We'll want to revisit adding Blue Dot to the List of social networking websites. Perhaps we'll need to get some concensus from others on that. It's definitely worth an article, but doubt that it should be a part of the list.--MonkeyTimeBoy 22:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good; I'll be happy to discuss it at the article talk page, if you'd like. I will say that I've done quite a bit of research on the company lately, and I am firmly convinced that it is just as much a social networking site as most entries on that list. If you get a chance, please watch the video at Herb Weisbaum interviews Blue Dot Connector, Kabir Shahani (KOMO 4 News). Thanks, Satori Son 23:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Whiners

You are such a whiner. Seriously. I added an s to his name and you threaten to block. Well fine. I don't care. I don't want to be on a website full of whining geeks. Atlantan 14:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

You would not have received such a firm warning if you had not vandalized numerous other articles over the last five months[2]. And you previously had received two warnings to stop, which you had removed from your talk page. I am sorry you feel slighted, and I sincerely hope you change your ways and become a valuable contributor to Wikipedia, but your actions to date are unacceptable. -- Satori Son 14:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thanks for watching my talk page. It must have happened shortly after I called it a day and signed off. Did you report it then? I see the user is blocked for a month. The saga continues. JonHarder talk 14:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy to help. And after all that, he contested his block! Unbelievable. -- Satori Son 15:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting that person who blanked my comments on the Talk:Honey, We're Killing the Kids talk page! I wouldn't have caught it myself.--Planetary 00:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. As you can see from two comments above, the vandal who blanked it was none too happy about the final warning I left on his talk page, but he really needs to get his act together. Have a good one, Satori Son 01:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message

Thanks for your message Satori,

This is to clarify that I don't host any of the websites or pages which were mentioned in external links. That's the link http://seccpics.blogspot.com added by me was found on many of the forums talking about Katie Rees, so I added it here for the latest news about Katie Rees. (Reference: Digg has 4-5 popular stories about Katie Rees). So I thought to add it up for others. Sorry, considering it's not appropriate.

Wish you Merry Christmas! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stockmarketindia (talk • contribs) 08:49, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

stockmarketindia 08:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussions are preserved as an archive. Please do not modify them. Further comments or new discussion should be started on the current talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.