User talk:SupaStarGirl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 1.1 Additional tips 2 Deleting articles 3 Deletion of non-notable bios 4 Repeat vandalism problem 5 Proposed deletion 6 Hi there 7 Thanks! 8 WoW Imposter 9 1 of 2 Bösendorfer 10 Bösendorfer continued 11 Incorrect 12 Tyranosaurus 13 Hmm... 14 Nice... 15 Your edit to Hockey 16 Edits to Chad Smith 17 Your user page 18 Award 19 Thanks! 20 RFA 21 Userpage vandalism 22 RfA thanks 23 Manoeuvring 24 Your Recent AfD Nomination 25 Thank you 26 Wow.. 27 Question about your August changes to the Bosendorfer entry 28 More on Bosendorfer 29 More Bosendorfer 30 Bosendorfer agreement! 31 Editor review archived 32 Dude, WTF?

[edit] Welcome!

— Ilyanep (Talk) 15:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting articles

Hi, I noticed you'd put an afd tag on Spiriti, but not created the deletion page or added it to the deletion log (see AfD). However, I think that article could actually be speedy deleted, just put a {{db-bio}} tag on it instead. There are three ways to mark articles for deletion; AfD is the most complicated one, for articles whose deletion is likely to be controversial. Most of the time speedy or proposed deletion (also known as "prodding") are sufficient. --Jamoche 15:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I took your advice. SupaStarGirl 22:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of non-notable bios

When you come across an article like Mathew brindley which only states "Matt is cool" or something along those lines, you can just nominate it for speedy deletion using {{db-bio}}, as these meet speedy criteria A7, unremarkable people or groups. It's much faster than using proposed deletion, as you did. No big deal, it just takes less time to delete that way. BryanG^(talk) 04:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take your advice too! SupaStarGirl 14:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Repeat vandalism problem

I'm leaving this same message on the User Talk pages for "SupaStarGirl", "SDC", and "Mlzg4". In the past several days, all four of us have been involved in reverting apparent vandalism by user "MichaelIsGreat", who has recently posted a large section of identical content on the pages for both Bösendorfer and Player piano. This content appears to be totally and completely in violation of fundamental Wikipedia policies and guidelines - as I understand them. This user has reverted each of our attempts at removing this apparent vandalism, leaving somewhat emotional and personal near-attacks in the associated "edit summaries". I've just been reviewing various Wiki help/guildlines pages which discuss dealing with this sort of thing, and I'm not sure that I care enough about the two pages involved to pursue the rather formal steps required - particularly the ones that involve making direct contact with the user in an attempt to reason with them, something which I suspect will be particularly difficult in this case. For better or worse, Wiki does not appear to be structured in such a way that you can just immediately appeal to some higher authority to take unilateral action on an obvious problem. Anyhow, I have no idea if you will be interested in this, but I'm just kind of throwing it out to everyone currently involved, so that they know what's going on if they're interested, and that the problem may be a bit bigger than it anyone realizes. --Notmicro 08:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion

Hey -- I found a couple of your prods that could have been replaced by speedy deletion; I see others have already showed you the speedy deletion thing, so no need to get into it. I have a different bit of advice. It's important, when you add a PROD tag to an article, that you use an edit summary that mentions this. It's always good to use edit summaries, but it's especially important for proposed deletion: PROD tags are never supposed to be replaced if previously removed, and the only easy way to check that is to look at the edit summaries people leave. Thanks! (And welcome!) Mangojuice^talk 01:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi there

Hi SupaStarGirl, I'm noticing your counter-vandalism work on Hovercraft. But judging from your comments, are you doing it all by hand? If so, I can point you to some tools to make your counter-vandalism much easier. Cheers! -- Netsnipe 15:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Counter-vandalism tools? Count me in! However, I have not really done it by hand, but by looking at Recent Changes. SupaStarGirl 15:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit = ) Feel free to add the button to your user page. Three indispensable tools:

• User:Lightdarkness/ARV - adds a report link on a user's talk page so you can instantly add them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and get them blocked by an administrator for repeat offenders.
• User:Lupin/popups.js - hover your mouse over any link to get a popup for actions such as instant reverting and contrib/diff-checking.
• User:Lupin/recent2.js - adds a toolbox link to a live auto-scrolling feed of recent changes.
• All three of the above run inside your browser, but check out the CVU page for links to external programs like User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof if you want more firepower.

Good hunting! = P Netsnipe 15:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

One more thing, here's a list of warnings: Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace you can slap on the User Talk pages of vandals. 3-4 warnings on their talk page in a single day is enough ground for more admins to block them.

Still doing vandalism reverts by hand I see. Need any help? Netsnipe 11:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I actually have tried out one of the tools. It's cool! SupaStarGirl 15:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage (and for updating the vandalism count)! Fabricationary 05:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WoW Imposter

As far as anyone knows, WoW has quit. Since then many imposters try to carry on the vandalism that WoW did --Porqin

Thanks, I didn't know that he (purportedly) quit. However, the word is spelled "I-M-P-O-S-T-O-R". SupaStarGirl 14:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1 of 2 Bösendorfer

Hello. I wanted to provide you with verification of my Bösendorfer add regarding that there are only 2 in the world. The Townsend Center for the Performing Arts owns 2 290SE models, which are special edition production models. the Bösendorfer in Orlando is only 1 of 2 ever made and does not have a model #.

• [1] USA Today article citing 1 of 2 in the world.

• [2]Aol City Guide quoting value and rarity.

• [3] Starwood Hotels news release mentioning piano and rarity.

• [4] 7/1/06 St. Petersburg Times article mentioning rarity.

• [5] Epinions rating on Bösendorfer model 214 that mentions 1 of 2 rare Bösendorfers in Orlando.

Thanks, Redlark 13:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bösendorfer continued

I think that the fact that there are only 2 rare Bösendorfers in the world (whatever their correct model #, style etc.) and that the value of 1 of them is estimated at over $250k and is located in a hotel (when such rarities usually are in a museum) should deserve some mention in the article. I'm going to put it under additional info or trivia?. The point is is that it is meaningfull information on the subject.

Redlark 14:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect

You are incorrect about U2 used in the singular case. Please refer to U2's dicussion page, where it was debated and resolved (to use U2 as a plural subject, as it is done in the UK and Ireland, where the band is from).

Thank you --William 00:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tyranosaurus

Hey, just a quick note to say that adding the {{sprotected}} tag doesn't semi-protect a page itself. Protection can only be applied by administrators and needs to be requested on WP:RFPP. -- Steel 12:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hmm...

Regarding the edit summary this reversion: try to remain calm when dealing with vandals. By showing frustration, you're giving them exactly the attention they want. Your best bet is just to roll them back with a standard message until they get bored of trying to rattle you. Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 20:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Keep up the good work. :) – ClockworkSoul 13:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nice...

Nice speed on the vandalism reverts... I came here to say the same thing as ClockworkSoul above, so I'll just say that I edited both of the 2 articles that you created. Small wiki-world. :-) Irongargoyle 20:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Hockey

Hi, thank you for reverting vandalism in Wikipedia. However, can you explain this edit? [6] Thanks, Accurizer 23:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Disregard, I see what happened. A bot reverted the edit a moment before you, and your revert erroneously restored the vandalism. Sorry for the confusion. Regards, Accurizer 23:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits to Chad Smith

Chad's middle name is actually Gaylord, it is verifiable in the IMDB ^[1] and has been previously referenced in the article many times. I respectfully request that people stop removing the fact from the article. Chad Smith is a very common name. As such the inclusion of his middle name helps to differentiate him from other people of the same name. Some people are actually named Gaylord....deal with it. --Mattarata 20:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your user page

I noticed all of the vandalism on your user page. You could request semi-protection so that anons cannot edit it. See WP:RFP. Hope this helps. Keep your head up, this too shall pass. Regards, Accurizer 19:38, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Only forty? It felt like more, trying to help you clean up that mess! Wildthing61476 20:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Boy, somebody really, really hates you. Guess you shouldn't have tried to defend Simple Plan ;-) Fan-1967 21:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Not that I don't have a sense of humor, but that was a different vandal. SupaStarGirl 22:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Award

[edit] Thanks!

Sorry it took so long....but thanks for the barnstar! Let me know if it starts up again. Rx StrangeLove 03:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

My userpage is semiprotected now. SupaStarGirl 21:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFA

I've posted at the RFA - but quite apart from anything else if you really don't think you'll get the tools then surely that's wasting everyone else's space and time at RFA, no? Moreschi 20:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I have posted my opinion to your RfA page above. I really think that you should withdraw with no loss of face and listen to the advice that has been offered to you. Regards, (aeropagitica) 20:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userpage vandalism

I've removed an sprotecet4d page from your userpage, as it is not protected currently. I've also pruned your page hisotry of some edit summary vandalism that was in there. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Thank you for the Support I'd like to express my huge thanks to you, SupaStarGirl, for your support in my recent RfA, which closed with 100% support at 71/0/1. Needless to say, I am very suprised at the huge levels of support I've seen on my RfA, and at the fact that I only had give three answers, unlike many other nominees who have had many, many more questions! I'll be careful with my use of the tools, and invite you to tell me off if I do something wrong! Thanks, Martinp23 14:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Manoeuvring

A quick note regarding an edit of yours I reverted, namely your edit changing "manoeuvring" to "maneuvering" in football (soccer). The article uses British/Commonwealth English, and as such manouvering is the correct spelling in this case (e.g. Guardian style guide) Oldelpaso 17:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your Recent AfD Nomination

Please don't nominate articles for deletion as a joke. Doing so violates the spirit of WP, and also hurts the encylopedia's credibility (a subject you speak to on your userpage). I would also point out that self proclaimed "anti-vandal warrior"s do not set a good example when they vandalize the AfD page. As you suggest at the bottom of your userpage, please use the sandbox for experiments. Regards, →Bobby← 16:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I can forgive you after seeing your edit summary when making the nomination (I spotted in when doing New Page patrol) and indeed I have seen you before and recognise you as an editor in good standing, but as Bobby said above, the HQ (Humour-tolerance Quotient) around AfD is very low. Better not do it again. :-> Kimchi.sg 14:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm really sorry. I just had to do it once. PLEASE forgive me. I'll never do it again. I promise. SupaStarGirl 14:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

• I actually hadn't noticed your edit summary when I left my original comment. If I had known we were celebrating November Fools I probably wouldn't have said anything (especially considering your good contrib history). It's really no big deal, and I hope that my haughty reprimand doesn't affect your future edits. →Bobby← 14:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

ps. It was a good joke.

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for the chuckle and support with my RfA. My nomination succeeded and as many vandals have pointed out, I will now really have no life. Thanks again for the support! =) -- Gogo Dodo 06:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow..

I just looked at some of the vandalisms on your user page and it's, well, quite alot. :\ Why do people vandalize your site so much? (I know I did, but that was on a vandalizing-page) --Baldur 01:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question about your August changes to the Bosendorfer entry

Could I ask you to clarify why you deleted the "Characteristics" and "Trivia" sections of the Bosendorfer page please? I wonder if you either a) deleted them by mistake, b) thought the information was wrong, c) thought the information was not useful, or d) something else. I recognize that you had issues with some other contributors to that page around the same time, and wonder if you may have perhaps thrown my contribution out assuming it was related to the other ones (it was not, BTW).

In any event, I have today reinserted those sections, which I continue to believe enhance the utility of that page. If you disagree, perhaps we could discuss rather than delete?

Danfreedman 07:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More on Bosendorfer

Thanks for your kind response on my user page concerning the Bosendorfer changes I made a few months ago, and re-made recently. I understand from your response that your initial objection was based on an interpretation of some of the adjectives I used in an attempt to contrast the sound of a Bosendorfer with that of the much better known Steinway.

First, I would like to state that if my language sounds like an ad, it is an entirely unintended and unfortunate consequence. I am a pianist and a sometime piano historian, and am used to using terms such as the sweetness (versus purity) of an instrument's sound as distinguishing terms. I hope you can take another look at my words with that as a context. What I hope you see is that I describe these two piano sounds with an intention of contrasting them not in terms of goodness or badness, but in terms of how their sound is different.

When I play classical piano (which is not all that often, unfortunately), it is the purity of tone of the Steinway that attracts me to that piano (although there's certainly nothing wrong with a Bosendorfer or for that matter any of a number of other makes of piano in that regard). However, it's when I play jazz (much more often) that the less pure, more sweet sound of the Bosendorfer shows its suitability to the genre.

There aren't very many jazz pianists in the world (compared to the number who play classical), and I've many times come across players who aren't sure why one kind of sound might be suited to one genre, and another kind of sound to another. So, I chose to include a few words describing not only how the sounds are different, but also why this might be important (the inclusion of words describing colored harmonies - I'm not sure if you are a musician, but if so, the notion of colorations would be of interest, as for example described in the bebop article, which I did not author).

Bottom line: Hopefully this additional explanation from me can disambiguate my changes to the Bosendorfer entry, making it clear that at least to the intended audience of piano afficianidos, there's a bit of real content there, not just an ad. For the record, I am not, nor have I ever been, associated with Bosendorfer or the piano industry, except as a pianist. I've been fortunate enough to own both a Steinway 'D' (concert grand) and a Bosendorfer Imperial Grand, and this has left me in a good position to comment on why they're different (not better/worse) from each other. I've also been unfortunate enough to have to help move the Bosendorfer into my house, which is why I'm acutely aware of the weight (commented on in the trivia section).

Phew! Too much explanation, but it is a subject I care about a lot, and I continue to believe the information I added has at least some merit, even though I do see how the adjectives I used could be seen as an ad. Those are, however, fairly standard terms used to describe musical instrument sounds.

I could see how the trivia section might not really be all that important, but it is one item that evokes groans from anyone who's ever tried to move a Bosendorfer (at least an Imperial Grand). But if you really really really still don't like the stuff I added, I'm much more ready to give up the trivia section than the sound-contrasting part.

All the best

Danfreedman 08:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More Bosendorfer

Unfortunately, your latest edit significantly reduces the information content. While I'm sure this was not your intent, it is what you have inadvertantly achieved.

I will have another go at re-wording shortly.

BTW: I think this is a good way to discuss the issue. I don't think you object to characterizing the Bosendorfer sound. I will attempt to put the information content you removed back in, while making it more clear to you that this is not an attempt to advertise Bosendorfer. It never did seem that way to me, but since it did to you, it may to others. So, I will attempt to do a better job.

Danfreedman 20:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bosendorfer agreement!

Thanks for all the work you've done on this page. Good catch on the 97 versus 96 keys. For some reason I had it in my head that it was 8 extra keys to get down to C below bottom A, but it is actually 9 as you stated.

By the way, I presume you are a piano lover if you have taken the time to work this hard on the Bosondorfer page. I had the good fortune to come across one of the very few Stuart and Sons pianos (built in Australia) when I was there in 2005. If you ever find yourself in that part of the world, it's worth trying to arrange to play or hear one. There's one in the Power museum in Sydney, and another in Government house. I've played both of them, and they are absolutely stunning. Not sure any of this is relevant to the general public, but I thought I'd pass it on to you. If you're interested, I can try to describe the sound to you. If not, no problem.

Danfreedman 05:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor review archived

Thanks for having requested an editor review. A month has passed since it has been posted there, and it has been archived. You can find it at Wikipedia:Editor review/SupaStarGirl, where you may read last minute additions. We would really appreciate your help in reviewing a random editor. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 22:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dude, WTF?

SupaStarGirl-- thanks for the (very polite) note, but I haven't been anywhere near the Harry Potter page. Nor am I in need of a sandbox. Nor, sadly, have I contributed much to wikipedia in the last little while. So there is something wrong with the tools you are using to track down vandals. Cheers. Ethan Mitchell (talk) 03:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)