User talk:The Storm Surfer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] FNORD

Hi! This is Icarus!, being non-Wiki (I'm not logged in...), saying thanx for the work on the Discordianism page! Keep it up!24.176.20.60 17:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Icarus! I'm glad to hear some of my work is appreciated! The Storm Surfer 18:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UMassWiki

Hello, I see you've made some edits to the University of Massachusetts Amherst article. Did you know there's an entire wiki devoted to UMass at umasswiki.com? Please stop by and make some edits or add articles! We've been around over a year and are serving up to 90,000 pages a month, but we could really use more good editors. :) --Neurophyre^(talk) 09:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kill Christ

I proded this as unsourced and unverified, but you removed the prod. Care to say why you object to its deletion? I proded it as unverified - if you can verify it. please do.--Doc^g 18:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

You are utterly missing the point of prod. Prod is designed to avoid having unnecessary afds. If someone actually believes that the article can be verified and thus should be kept then they remove the prod tag and we go to afd. If no-one believes that, then we go to afd. If people remove prod tags simply because "someone might want to keep this" then prod is useless and afd gets full of debates many of which will be unanimous votes to delete.--Doc^g 18:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pidgin (software)

I replied on the article talkspace. I think you misunderstood what I was saying (note: saying, not suggesting). // 3R1C 15:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DRV & process is not important

You probably want to read WP:IAR to understand why many admins do not respect process as much as you would like. It won't take you very long. Process is less important than building an encyclopedia. --Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've read it (again), thank you. But process is important for building an encyclopedia, and it seems like lately people have been acting like WP:IAR is all there is to Wikipedia, and there won't be anything resembling an encyclopedia if that ever becomes the case. — The Storm Surfer 18:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suicide

I have tried to strike a compromise in the suicide userbox issue by creating this userbox. I also have informed User:Cyde and sought his approval, but he has not messaged back yet. How would you feel about it? In my opinion, deletion of the userbox is a textbook example of admins' war on teenagers. Being suicidal is just a personal identity, just like a person is a Democrat/Republican/libertarian/aspie/goth, etc. Wooyi^{Talk to me?} 02:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I think your text could be improved and shortened, and I also feel that perhaps you should decide whether you are creating a userbox that says "This user is interested in X," or "This user has experienced X." Both I think are useful in their own ways, but the first is less controversial. In relation to your analogy (which I don't think is completely accurate) it would be like saying "This user is a Democrat" or "This user is interested in the Democratic party." Well, a Republican might be very interested in the Democratic party.

As for the deletion being an example of an administrators' war on teenagers, I'd advise you against framing it that way. I don't know if administrators are waging a war on teenagers, but I think that sadly, whether or not it is true, saying that will cause a lot of people not to take you seriously. I think if this deletion is a textbook example of anything it's Cyde's war on userboxes.

It might also be worth mentioning that I am no longer a teenager, and it is definitely worth mentioning that as the chart (reproduced below) shows, teenagers do not have a monopoly on being suicidal. — The Storm Surfer 13:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AIC

My article, Article in Construction has been renamed, and my history says that you changed it, it also says something else about you. Please explain to me about this, the history doesn't say hardly anything.

I renamed the page you created because pages without a prefix (prefixes include "Talk:", "User:", "Wikipedia:", and others) before the name are supposed to be encyclopedia articles, but the page you created was clearly intended to be used by Wikipedia editors in the creation and maintenance of our encyclopedia. Pages that are used to work on the encyclopedia that are not articles typically reside in the Wikipedia namespace (meaning their names start with "Wikipedia:").

I also removed the Wikipedia:Proposed deletion (you'll notice that page is in the Wikipedia namespace) tag because that tag is intended for deleting articles when no one objects, but by your asking for help I could tell you objected. You or any other user had the right to remove the tag.

By the way, clicking on the "(last)" link in the history listing will show the changes between versions, if you didn't know. — The Storm Surfer 13:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank You! :D

[edit] Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Selfworm/Userboxes/NotCatholic_(2nd_nomination)

As you are an editor involved with the the previous discussion, I am notifying you that I have relisted it for mfd. Thank you. --Flamgirlant 12:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EndUN Userbox

Hi, you recently participated in the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DieWeisseRose/Userboxes/EndUN discussion. I have reluctantly submitted the closing statement by User:Tony Sidaway for deletion review. Please consider taking a look at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_1#User:DieWeisseRose.2FUserboxes.2FEndUN. Thanks. --DieWeisseRose 02:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Azmsdm

Hi Storm Surfer, User:Azmsdm's page contains text from an Indonesian martial arts series Bu Kek Siansu by Kho Ping Hoo. I think the text itself might be directly copy-pasted from here: [1]. I'm not sure what he was trying to do with it. I hope that helps! Arsonal 15:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rosemary Gladstar

I rewrote the newbies Rosemary Gladstar stub so it doesn't have copywrite issues and told her she could expand it as she likes. Could you move it from the Temp page? Also gave her some pointers on how to avoid the problem. She apparently doesn't know where to write notes saying she is in process. KSVaughan2 19:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MOSDASH redirect

We're getting rid of that page. Tony 06:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

A good decision, I think. It had a lot of detail for no good reason. The section on the main page is much better. I certainly hope we'll be keeping the redirect though; it's linked to from many places and is a good way to link to the relevant section. — The Storm Surfer 17:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Offensive image

Could you tell me why you think Replace this image female.svg is offensive? Dismas|^(talk) 20:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

See Image talk:Replace this image1.svg#Non-gender-specific — The Storm Surfer 20:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. Personally, I really dislike the gender neutral one as it looks like a space alien to me... but I guess it works.... Dismas|^(talk) 20:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I'd rather not have the replace this image images at all. While it may attract new editors who may not have known that Wikipedia is editable, it is clear to anyone who does know that Wikipedia is editable that there is no image and one should be added. The problem is that almost no one has the resources to provide the image within the copyright policy. These images would also of course look very silly in any completed reference work. — The Storm Surfer 20:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I noticed you deleted the inane discussion regarding celebrity edits in the Pump. Thank you.

The Rhymesmith 01:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It was a somewhat bold move, but it became clear to me that it was merely disruptive. I'm glad to be receiving positive messages about it instead of negative messages :) — The Storm Surfer 02:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Coins scan 2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Coins scan 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Coins scan1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Coins scan1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

[edit] Olympic Table Information

The information you deleted from the Olympic article was entirely correct, ableit unreferenced. The figure of 50,000 horsepower comes from various sources, but Olympic's Chief Engineer confirmed (in 1911) that the engines could produce 59,000 horsepower at full speed. As revolutions increase, so does the power developed. Although a little known fact, it is entirely accurate and factual. In terms of Olympic's full speed, she regularly recorded speeds of between 23 and 24 knots in service. Once, prior to 1915, she averaged 24.2 knots over a 24 hour period according to the White Star Line's Harold Sanderson. See Mark Chirnside, 'The Olympic Class Ships' (page 72 for the 59,000 figure) and 'RMS Olympic' (both books Tempus Publishing, 2004). http://www.markchirnside.co.uk

[edit] Hi!

LGagnon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for the smile. I actually went to a different UMass than Amherst (woe is me), but thanks for noticing anyways. :) And thanks for the compliments. -- LGagnon 04:10, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Hah, I wasn't going to rub that part in ;p — The Storm Surfer 04:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Psuedoreligionist Wikipedians

As you are already aware, Category:Psuedoreligionist Wikipedians and its subcategories, including Category:Discordian Wikipedians, Category:Flying Spaghetti Monsterist Wikipedians, Category:SubGenius Wikipedians, and others, have been deleted. That deletion is now up for review. If you have anything you'd like to say on the subject, now is the time. If you know of any other editors who might have something to say on the subject, pass the word. If, on the other hand, you are not interested in the slightest, feel free to delete this. — Bigwyrm _{watch me}^{wake me} 09:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Image:ITunes Originals - Death Cab for Cutie.jpg

The image had no source given; prior to its tagging by BetacommandBot, the only contents of the description page were the image licensing tag. (ESkog)^(Talk) 03:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DRV comment

Good point, a post to ^demon would have resolved the issue much quicker. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 02:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, although I wonder why ^demon did not speedy close the DRV himself. Two admins making me shrug in one day ;) — The Storm Surfer 17:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MOS

Wrong section yes; thx for pointing it out. Tony 12:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wells' book

I presume you meant David Wells Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers? Your local library might have the 1987 edition. You can get the 1997 edition from Amazon.com, and maybe there will be a 2007 edition. I don't recommend trying to read that book in one shot, but for looking up a particular number and reading just that one section it's quite excellent. Anton Mravcek 23:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your message

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be more wary in the future. When you make hundreds of reverts, you're bound to click a few incorrect buttons :) Spellcast 20:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Fr-euro-cent.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Fr-euro-cent.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Handbra

An article on which you previously commented has been proposed for deletion again, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Handbra (second nomination). You may wish to comment.DGG (talk) 04:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Organisms that are dangerous to humans

An article that you have been involved in editing, Organisms that are dangerous to humans, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organisms that are dangerous to humans. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 17:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)