User talk:TheDJ/Archive 3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| ← Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 → |
 |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
| Awarded for your diligence at WP:TV, upon your exit. Hope to see you back soon. Wikipedical 00:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC) |
Television program
Television program says you are working on a rewrite. It is coming up on the list of oldest unreferenced articles [1] It needs help pretty soon if you still care. Jeepday (talk) 01:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- I understand would you put a {{db-author}} on Talk:Television program/rewrite for general house keeping? You are the only one who has touched it, I will do something with Television program. Jeepday (talk) 01:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
RfA for Gracenotes
I thought a reply would work better here, given the rather uncivil reply from Gurch. I'm new at reviewing these RfA's, mainly because I thought only Admins voted on Admins, but I'm not using that as an excuse. I should have stated my viewpoint more clearly. I decided that commenting on applicants who have 75-0 votes is just piling on. What am I going to say after that many votes? The contentious ones need more reasoned and thoughtful analysis. I was ready to skip over Gracenotes, when I saw a few negatives, so I read them. I then went to look at her (?) edits on mainspace using Kate's Tool, review what links may have been posted in the comments, and come to a decision. Do I spend hours at this due-diligence? No, I don't have the time. I spend enough time to get an overview of the person's personality, their body of work, and what I think they might do as an admin. A couple of people who are opposed are people I trust a lot--the issue with the web links is troubling. That's all it is, but it's enough given her short time on board, etc. to put it to oppose. I'm not going to live or die with it. Orangemarlin 23:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
{{TelevisionWikiProject}}
I've looked at your code and I can't make head or tails of it. For some reason it inappropriately adds articles to Category:-Class television articles, which shouldn't even exist. Can you fix it? -N 10:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you! I was trying to clear out old cfds and now we can close that one! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nardman1 (talk • contribs)
WP:TV list class
Hey, sorry for my ignorance on class vs. type in this case, another WikiProject I am more actively involved in puts "list" under "class." Anyway, sorry again for the extra work I created for you, and thanks for the fix. TAnthony 15:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Harry Potter Wiki TfD nomination
I speedy closed the nomination. There was enough evidence that it was not a good faith nom and that edit warring was taking place that it didn't seem to be in the best interest to let the nom continue. Thanks for the heads up. RyanGerbil10(Don't ask 'bout Camden) 02:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand
Yes, I'm a friend of User:Q Original in RL, but I'm not him. I don't understand you, mister. (If I am User:Q Original you are probably User:Matthew:p) LexingtonDark 04:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Matthew
I also don't understand your friendship for User:Matthew. I was anonymous user long time and I remember User:Matthew (also known under another pseudonyms or maybe as another sockpuppets?) as active but very provocative and unpolite user. He was blocked many times and he was main "veteran" of edit conflicts. My friend User:Q Original is not ideal, but User:Matthew really broke many of Wikipedia rules. Sorry for that long speech, but I also think that [[[User:Matthew]] can be blocked permanently.LexingtonDark 04:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Matthew is arguably a very annoying and stupid user at times, but that is not relevant. In this particular case he happened to be right. Q original was clearly wrong and he refused to take multiple peoples advice and then started trolling on people's talk pages, started revert warring etc. Q might not like this, but it is not HIS article and not HIS images. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 04:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
If you don't know: my friend Q is young and probably quite eccentric but renown biologist and starting sci-fi writer in our country. He's a very kind and intelligent person, but also sometimes very nervous person. Today he was drunk and he does very stupid things. But I very like this man. Don't block him please. He is really proud to be a Wikipedian. I and many of our friends knows and loves Wikipedia (and another Wiki's) thanks to Q.LexingtonDark 05:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edit to AACS encryption key controversy (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 21:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
re: astronaut photos
Image:Armstrong 16mm.jpg. I must have assumed it was a screen cap from Apollo 13 (film). It's back. Enjoy. —freak(talk) 02:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
D'oh, wrong deletion summary. I meant to say "no source". Try to find a url where it came from or it will likely get tagged again by orphanbot. —freak(talk) 02:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/video/apollo/apollo11/mpg/apollo11_onbclip10.mpg
- http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11.cntngncy.mov
Your recent edit to Bambi (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 16:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
vandalism
Learn the facts first before acting my friend. Smatprt vandalises all the Shakespeare articles. (Suckpipette 14:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC))
Suckpipette has not checked his own facts. Making mass deletions without any discussion has always been vandalism - no matter what beliefs one holds. Thanks for your revert, but Suckpipette reverted right away and left some sort of declaration of war on the article's talk page. Smatprt 15:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Now it appears that User:Felsommerfeld is attempting the identical mass edits that Suckpipette made. Maybe the Shakespeare Authorship page should be locked for a while. Also, it seems that 3 or 4 "new users" all started edits on the same day. Smatprt 14:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- I resent the association with a sockpuppet. This is an attempt to stir up trouble for me because Smatprt and me are fighting over consensus on the Shakespeare Authorship page. As you might be aware, Smatprt has caused much furore in his attempts to promote the Earl of Oxford in the main Shakespeare article. (Felsommerfeld 16:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC))
- I don't care guys. Please follow the steps of dispute resolution. I just reported Suckpipette for what it obviously was, I have no opinion about either of you --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 17:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
It is not anti-israeli "inspired"
I've also added North Korea's nuclear program in current events. Am I hateful towards Koreans too now?--Fâtimâh bint Fulâni 23:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
It is YOU who is being childish.--Fâtimâh bint Fulâni 00:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Note that Fâtimâh bint Fulâni (talk · contribs · block log) was found out to be a banned sock puppet of kirbytime. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 02:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Press TV
Hi, Continuing the conversation with him is unnecessary. I'm filing a 3RR report in a second. He was warned and he rv'd 4 times anyway. Perspicacite 00:28, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Last edit (removing "war with Iran) was good, but please revert his edits to Press TV. He's already voided his chance to self-revert his 3RR violation so no harm done. Perspicacite 01:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
wikEdDiff Safari fix
I have added your proposed wikEdDiff Safari fix, please could you check if it works now. Thanks, Cacycle 22:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Category watchlist script
I've been trying to make a more compatible version, taking your suggestions and some of your code into account. Could you take a look at User:Ais523/catwatchdev.js? In the end, I used synchronous AJAX to load the list of watchlisted categories, because the fix you proposed for Safari broke the script in Firefox, and at least with synchronous AJAX it's guaranteed that the variable is set at the right moment. The new version also detects an enhanced-recent-changes condition (although can't do anything about it but display an error for the time being) and tries all 4 possible date preferences. Thanks! --ais523 15:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Misterdiscreet
Since this started in an AfD and is seeming rather complicated, I suggest that should go to AN/I. Daniel Case 05:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Alberto Contador
I reverted your last edit to Alberto Contador because the only evidence out there is based on rumour. The opinion of a couple of people isn't notable enough to allege doping - if there were ever serious allegations that would be another thing, but "he must be doping as he kept up with Rasmussen" isn't really enough, IMO. What was there came across as POV. --Mike 12:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
2007 Tour de France
You are correct in that Rasmussen was fired for lying about his whereabouts, as opposed to being fired for missing the drug tests, thanks for catching that! Just FYI - I slightly modified your edit, as you can see here [2]. Since Rasmussen is currently claiming that he was in Mexico, it shouldn't be stated as fact that he was lying. Cogswobbletalk 22:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
English sources are preferred
Please read WP:V#Sources_in_languages_other_than_English: "English-language sources should be used in preference to foreign-language sources, assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality" However, there's nothing wrong with having multiple sources, so there's no need to remove the German source that was originally cited and that you restored, but for the English Wikipedia, the English source is preferred.%
Nonsense of TsUP
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on TsUP, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because TsUP provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting TsUP, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot 21:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: STS-122 Images
Sure thing, no problem - apologies for not doing so already; given the number of people nagging me to upload to commons, I really should be doing it by now... :-) Colds7ream 16:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Personality Rights
Thank you for your commentary (on my user talk page)!. Thanks also for pointing me in the right direction, in coming to terms with a cross-cultural concept, in law?, unfamiliar to myself all the way over her in Oz!
I believe it is commendable that within Wikipedia there may be people looking out for the rights of celebrities and other individuals .. and it seems equally commendable that articles and disclaimer provisions are in place to forewarn Wikipedia users of the potential risk of misappropriatings aspects of celebrities and other's personas (particularly images?!) for commercial purposes ... I find this commendable for much the same reasons I sought on that page to see users forewarned of similar (perhaps more internationally prevalent?!) risks associated with misappropriating the pre-exisitng 'persona's' and/or identity markers plus creations of long standing (many thousands of years), legally unincorporated groups of people .. see indigenous intellectual property
While finding the motive and effort to advise and forewarn users of the possibility and risk of misappropriating aspects of celebrity and other people's personas for commercial purposes .. I hope you agree with my comments here suggesting the personality rights article may need to be fixed a little & upgraded? Bruceanthro (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:BernardAndrewHarris.jpg
It appears you misnamed the image on Commons, changing to an inaccurate middle name. I'm removing the tag to allow for this to be corrected. Lara❤Love 15:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up. I'll fix that later today. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
A special barnstar for you
 |
The Socratic Barnstar | |
| I, Ursasapien, hereby award you the Socratic Barnstar for your exquisitely eloquent statement at The Episodes and characters arbitration. Your argument encapsulated the conflict and made a persuasive case for a sound solution. Thank you. Ursasapien (talk) 06:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC) |
- BTW, I would like to turn your statement into an essay. Any objections? Ursasapien (talk) 11:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Basically, I plan to quote you and give the context in which you made the statement. The only changes to your words I will make will be markup (wiki-linking, italicizing, and bolding), capitalization, and punctuation. I want to add an introduction and my own conclusion.
- Again, I think you captured the issue, an important issue for the growth of the encyclopedia. Thanks again and cheers on some great writing. Ursasapien (talk) 12:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your smile!
Hi - thanks for your smile on my talk page! I totally lucked out with my username. I didn't get it right away though - when I registered, that name was already taken. But even though another Linda registered, she never used the account. She registered it so long ago that the logs didn't even show the date she signed up! I found a procedure page and after they tried to contact her and she didn't reply, the administrator changed my account name to this one. I sure am glad the other Linda didn't do any editing! --Linda (talk) 09:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
International Centers of Commerce
Hey,
I noticed that you had voted for the deletion of the International Centers of Commerce template because you felt it was an advertisement. I just want to let you know that I have changed the text so that the template does not appear like an advertisement, but rather an informational template to tell people about the top 10 centers of financial flow. The template now does not show "Mastercard Worldwide" on it, but rather says source. I hope you will change your mind and your vote on the Templates for deletion: International Centers of Commerce
