This page 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. |
Hey, just wanted to stop by and say congrats that the WikiProject Family Guy got its 9th GA, they're coming in quickly, so watch out :). I'm almost finished the project revamp (for a quick look, see here), that will be ready in a week or so. Cheers, Qst 21:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Edgarde, do you mind having a look at the following article.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_children_angeles_philippines I started and seeing if you can tidy it up a bit, as well as give me some advice and guidence on some mistakes I may have made and suggestions on how to improve it and make it more encyclopedic, kindest regards Susanbryce ( talk) 18:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. When merging articles on Wikipedia, please remember to include in the edit summary a direct link to the merged article. This is necessary to indicate authorship history in accordance with the requirements of GFDL. Your link to the AfD discussion is helpful, but not sufficient for this purpose. You can see Help:Merge if you'd like more information or contact me at my talk page. Thanks. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm some guy. Okay not just any guy: a guy in Xiph, the makers of Vorbis, Ogg, etc. Anyway, just noticed you uploaded our logo here and that's a big no no for us. You used the rationale of our Wiki license (CC BY 3.0) but that doesn't apply to the logo. Listen, I'm not here to badmout you, but I don't have time to solve this, get with the mods, ask for deletion, proper reason, etc. I would appreciate if you would help me out. I understand you are using the logo for advocating the use of Vorbis and that's awesome; we really need people to help us promoting our formats, but try to avoid to use the Xiph own logo as that is trademarked. We have a free-logo, though, that you can use for this purpose: it's the one we use for Spread Open Media and it's released on the Public Domain. You can find it on Wikimeda Commons under the Category Spread Open Media. I personally like this blue version, which I'm not sure I ever got to upload to Commons. If you care about this issue, reply on my user page or e-mail me, whatever you prefer.-- Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves talk / contribs (join WP:PT) 04:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice. I'm still getting to grips with citation and did worry about whether people would be able to find the relevant bits. I'll try to take on board what you're saying.
I believe the external links I added did conform to policy. They mostly refer to the new issue of International Socialism, which has just become available online. They each add substantially to the relevant article (I think), but if you disagree I'd be more than happy to look at the cases you think are dubious and remove if necessary.
I've tried to use citation where I think there is a particular relevant point in the journal article, but in some cases the articles I've referred to contain a whole analysis of the topic of the wikipedia page and deserve to be external links (eg neoliberalism, happiness, Imagined Communities).
Piquant ( talk) 13:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey edg.! I do know a guy working on a Fam Guy script: ME!!! That's right, I'm working on a Family Guy script, I run a Family Guy society, I watch it every night, and yes, I have no life! And I would love to talk to you about it, but I don't have an e-mail adress. But how about we talk about it on the Family Guy Wikia? How about that? Type to ya' later!-- BrianGriffin-FG ( talk) 19:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Scratch that. I decided to get into the 21st Century and I got e-mail. So you can e-mail me here. Can't wait to hear from you! With all due respect, BrianGriffin-FG ( talk) 21:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
You still alive ed? I haven't heard from you in a while. Just checkin'. -- BrianGriffin-FG ( talk) 01:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, ed, I think I shold tell you that the Whoes Turn segment I sent you wasn't exactly the best one. They've gotten better, but that one was my first one. Just saying. With all due respect, BrianGriffin-FG ( talk) 16:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I know how you feel man, due to the fact that I was on vacation I couldn't voice my opinions on Peter's other father. Only if everyone could vote before time runs out. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 22:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I saw your support for my statement. I would like to propose this as an objective standard:
Can you think of any specific additional criteria? Kww ( talk) 17:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that cleanup. I am going to try and work on some Family Guy pages soon enough, will you be able to help me with the Chris Griffin and Carter Pewterschmidt articles - ensuring they keep within the manual of style?? Thanks, -- Solumeiras talk 18:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Done; it's been removed from the primary discussion page. Once I have the time later today I'll probably make a statement - going to need to dig up a report of such a purge for it though.
On an unrelated note, that lolcats picture on your user page has to be the best one I've seen thus far ;)
~ Floppie( talk • contribs) 18:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Your feedback is welcome at Proposed Objective Criteria for TV Episode Notability. Kww ( talk) 19:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:PinkFloyd-album-saucerfulofsecrets-300.jpg. 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. BJBot ( talk) 20:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:The Wall Live-300.jpg. 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. BJBot ( talk) 21:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't need your warnings, thanks. ViperNerd ( talk) 03:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on University of South Carolina steroid scandal. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. ViperNerd ( talk) 03:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Clemson University football recruiting scandal has been nominated for deletion per WP:AFD. Please participate in the debate here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clemson University football recruiting scandal, if possible.-- Thör hammer 08:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
...I'm wrong. I'll keep that in mind next time. Compwhiz II( Talk)( Contribs) 00:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! :D 86.44.6.14 ( talk) 18:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Evilmonkey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.
Thanks. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 21:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pinkfloyd 50.jpg. 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. BJBot ( talk) 01:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pulse-300.jpg. 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. BJBot ( talk) 01:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | ||
User:Edgarde, I award you this Barnstar a gesture of
appreciation for your help in making me a better Editor on Wikipedia Susanbryce ( talk) 18:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC) |
My work here is due to a combination of mild OCD and a life spent absorbing music through every pore in my body. Thanks for the recognition—I keep planning on leaving but then something else sucks me in. Cheers! Precious Roy ( talk) 21:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
e- rE the triv/guideline discussion, these words- If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all.
I am fairly certain that i saw somewhere a statement to the opposite gist to this one which currently forms part of the text of this guideline (second section). My recollection is a statment to the effect, in fact, from User Jimbo, if memory serves, to the effect --if information does not need to be included then it does not need to be included, or some thing more like that than the "linked words". It was on an early talkpage, or archives. I am thinking Iar:talk, although it is more logical that it be talk:OR, or talk:V or some BLP; it is here my memory fails me . Does any of this seem familiar to you, at all? cheers nbg Newbyguesses - Talk 00:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the first one, still thinking I saw it in an archive of talk:Iar, thanks Newbyguesses - Talk 01:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Removed from WP:V on October 2007. / edg ☺ ☭ 02:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)better to have no information, than to have information like this, with no sources."
You might like this one. Then again you might hate it, but dont blame— Newbyguesses - Talk 00:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
There's an ongoing controversy over whether those additional navboxes at the bottom of Family Guy episode articles are desirable. I think they have all been removed once or twice. Would you care to join the discussion? / edg ☺ ☭ 04:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd be happy to take a look at it. Can you be more specific as to which navboxes you're talking about? Give me an example. - Rjd0060 ( talk) 04:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
The assertions made against Smith are defaming a respected journalist, and began with a concerted blog campaign against him in National Review. Wikipedia is asserting that he has been shamed, which is complete false. He has been vindicated by many sources and the page on Wikipedia is extremely biased against him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CoachBrad08 ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
We were in an AfD dispute last year. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ernie_(Family_Guy)
I noticed that you removed Image:IM IN UR WIKI RVRTING UR EDITS lolcat.jpg "I'm in your wiki reverting your edits", but based on the complaints above, your poor behavior in nominating AfDs has not changed.
As I earlier quoted to you another user who left Wikipedia, liking it to your behavior:
Yes, I sincerely believe your deletion of the Ernie (Family Guy) article was in bad faith. I am glad that you have the moral certainty and superiority, in your infinite wisdom, to decide what is "good" and what is "bad".
I want other editors who come here with grievances about your wikilawyering and manipulation of wikipolicy to push your power trips, to read the above quote, and understand why you probably do it.
In addition, many editors who want to become admins start by putting pages up for deletion. I hope this quote and the way you push your self-righteous power trips is what causes you to lose your admin nomination.
I am not the first nor the last person who will direct their "immense hatred" toward your "aggression and adrenaline" to "hurt someone". Odessaukrain ( talk) 04:35, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the spam links. I am going to sleep now so will probably continue discussion later. Cheers, -- Be happy!! ( talk) 12:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at the user talk of Mslatif and saw your gentle approach to his seven spam links. I couldn't find a "barnstar of patience" so I guess that means I should get off my lazy posterior and design one, but until then I think this should do.
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
I, Peter Deer ( talk) 17:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC), have awarded this barnstar to Edgarde for displaying patience, tolerance, and kindness towards other wikipedians. |
I removed that whole section from the FAQ - there was no consensus to add it to the FAQ and I seriously object to the leading tone, poor sentence construction etc. I've told the author to go back to the talkpage and get further input on the matter. -- Fredrick day ( talk) 23:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't see the discussion on Talk:Muhammad/images. I'm new to this discussion so I'm asking here. Free-speech principles aside, would adding a box like this one (fixed per standards, of course) to the top of Muhammad be a terrible idea? It would allow pious types to quickly fix their problem, and it encourages them to register accounts and edit Wikipedia. Per WP:NDT, it does not seem to duplicate the 5 disclaimers. / edg ☺ ☭ 23:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll give it a try... - MasonicDevice ( talk) 21:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind my reverting your comment. It seems like something you would have regretted in an hour or so. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Your last edit to Talk:Muhammad/FAQ (summary "fix anchor links") inserted the text "face melting guitar" at the start of Q7. The rest of the edit seemed OK, so I've deleted just those three words instead of reverting. Ajhodd ( talk) 16:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi WBO. Thanks for you contributions.
Your sig is really loud. Could I suggest you turn it down a little, perhaps unbold, smaller font, or a lighter color? It's not a big deal, not something I usually care about, and if you don't want to change it, not something I'd complain about. But usually by the time I notice something like this, someone else is being really aggravated by it, so maybe you might wanna consider. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
"rewrite please" is a very non-specific suggestion. Can you add specific suggestions or at least identify specific problems on Talk:American settlement in the Philippines? It is a bit much to ask without explanation on Discussion page. The {{ Cleanup-rewrite}} template also accepts a "Reason for rewrite" parameter. / edg ☺ ☭ 02:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Cheers for reverting and reporting User:Larry123456789, much appreciated-- Jac16888 ( talk) 16:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, dude. I hate when people make mistakes like that, especially when its something so identified with pop culture.
Sorry about that, I thought I was removing vandalism, instead I restored it. Thanks for fixing. -- Simon Speed ( talk) 03:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
That other fictional character articles do this is not a reason to do this in Family Guy. Generally the middle names are one-shot gags, so these don't really belong in the lede sections. "Proper" names (such as Megan) only make sense when the character is more formally known by that name, which does not make sense for this show. Lois has never been nee. Pewterschmidt in any real-world sense (including in the show's non-flashback status quo), and expressing this character's name in this fashion is in-universe.
Even if the show is consistent with name details (and the writers could choose to complicate this in any future episode), the characters' names are really those used in their article titles. There is no more proper name for a fictional character. / edg ☺ ☭ 01:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Look, I just thought that as nearly all other fictional characters with middle names and elongated true names are referenced at the beginning that Family Guy should be as well, my point being what seperates Family Guy from every other show? Leo ( talk) 17:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Mate,have been away from Wiki for a while and just checked your message. what makes you think i was trying to promote adult vest.There are numourous references to other websites in the pages that i edited. I also think the reference to Adult vest was fully relevant to the section on ethical investing. Dont understand your rationale for blocking the edit. Gs44631 ( talk) 18:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Edgarde:
Thanks for your note. My most recent post in Talk:Rob Grill I think addresses your question, but I'll expand a bit here.
My concern in this matter is this. If there is going to be a "negative" report in someone's bio, we need to be confident of what we say. This includes not only "is it true?", not only "is it properly documented?, but also "is it important enough to include in this person's bio?"
I was not taking sides with the people who were deleting the sentence, I was not taking sides against your point-of-view (though it might have seemed that way to you.)
I was standing up for what I understand as a basic principle in the BLP policy. If in doubt, leave it out". (till the doubt gets resolved.)
Best wishes, Wanderer57 ( talk) 03:13, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe the box is needed. The Radio City DVD cannot be included on the Black Sabbath box as it is not Sabbath. I'm working on creating the tour page myself. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 16:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't doing a vote stack. I invited people from different parts of Wikipedia. Look that I have admins and regular editors, metal fans, and people completely indifferent. If I wanted to stack the vote, I would have looked at the list of members at a wikiproject. Your claim seems to be a fast action. Undeath ( talk) 18:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
It's already there. — An gr If you've written a quality article... 20:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Things have been peaceful in this article before the sockpuppet 63-14 Blowout!!! showed up to make trouble. We don't need more edit warring here. Please revert this article to the last version by ClueBot and protect it until this child decides to move on. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.38.31 ( talk) 21:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Article protected. Thanks for your assistance if you were involved. 65.188.38.31 ( talk) 22:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets has instructions for filing sockpuppetry reports. It is important to provide clear, concise evidence of sockpuppetry, using dated diffs of the actions presented as evidence. Concision is important because WP:SSP investigating is constantly backlogged, and hard work for the reviewing administrators. Long or hard-to-follow reports will tend to be set aside in favor of easier work. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey I created the page Clemson Tigers men's basketball and have been the primary editor of the page for many months now. Recently, and coincidentally, since ViperNerd started adding and deleting information to the page, two editors Enjoisktboarding and 74.242.238.54 have joined in to add and delete information for now apparent reason. They are constantly deleting information that is neutral in nature without reason. I feel like this is a Sock Puppet attack similar to those ViperNerd is accused of in different areas.
Also, by taking a quick look at the edit history and talk page of ViperNerd, one gets a good impression he exists on Wikipedia to make Clemson University look bad, and the University of South Carolina look good.
Now I am no Wikipedia admin nor have I ever lodged a complaint or anything. I simply edit and maintain articles that are of interest to me. So I really am at a loss for direction for how to deal with blatant vandalism. The only purpose of this edit war is to frustrate me. Please advise.-- Jober14 ( talk) 18:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Enjoisktboarding ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
74.242.238.73 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
74.242.238.54 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
65.188.38.31 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
ViperNerd (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
74.242.238.54 ( talk · contribs) begins editing 2008-03-20, and after a few token edits (in Jeffrey Dahmer), joined Enjoisktboarding ( talk · contribs) in removing sourced information from Clemson Tigers men's basketball ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Enjoisktboarding ( talk · contribs) is an older account with few edits (some in Jeffrey Dahmer), and appears to be logging out to evade 3RR. The IP address tag-teams with Enjoisktboarding <add diffs here>
Tag-teaming with ViperNerd suggests meatpuppetry. ViperNerd often edits from a geographically distant IP address, and is probably not be the same editor. <add diffs here>
Edgarde, I have added 69.132.84.127 to the list of suspected IPs being used by this sock. User appears to be circumventing policy (48 hour block) by using this IP to make edits while blocked. I think 3RR policy suggests resetting the block clock if policy is being circumvented, so I will take that to WP:ANI. Thanks. -- Thör hammer 03:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for creating the Chicago jazz article. This has lots of potential.
Per MOS:CAP#Section headings, "Chicago Jazz Music" is miscapitalized, and as a historical music article it would be better entitled Music of Chicago. I have detailed the reasons for this suggestion in Talk:Chicago Jazz Music. Would you be okay with this change? / edg ☺ ☭ 18:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for recommending I do a revert immediately, instead of asking for consensus on the article's talk page. I just started editing Wikipedia this week (though I've been a reader here for a long time), and didn't want to make a major boo-boo from the start. I guess it's too early for me to be bold. I'm sure I'll get bolder as time goes by. Thanks again. -- A Knight Who Says Ni ( talk) 17:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to point you to my own draft essay on the topic, after having seen yours: User:Mangojuice/PC. Mango juice talk 19:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
sorry for the confusion, i just meant there were already various episode counts on THAT page, and keeping it at the top is just an unnecessary edit, but there are a few sites that have a total count and i'll get back to you in a bit on those. But when every episode on the page is currently labeled in the season count and total count there is no need for this redundant info. Grande13 ( talk) 22:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I was gonna congratulate you for the cool psychotic art but then I saw your user boxes and it all made sense. :) Thanks for ogging us up. Have all ICP fans seen the Frontline episode ( text summary)? No idea if it represents the Juggalo fairly, but it's the funniest Frontline ever. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
You made my day with that one. thank you. so youre a fan? if you want, we're trying to get a wikiproject going for Psychopathic Records. If youre interested you can find it here. the juggreserection IstKrieg! 14:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thanks dude, any help is appreciated. but if you are gonna help, you should seriously add your name to that list. the more people we get, the faster this thing will take off. the juggreserection IstKrieg! 13:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
This is by way of a heads up. Editors who participated in this fair use discussion have sort of been named as involved parties in this request for arbitration, with the caveat that they "can add themselves as they see fit". I've no idea whether you wish to involve yourself with a case that doesn't look likely to get off the ground, but thought you ought to be informed anyway. -- Bragen 18:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate the criticism of my post to the doors page about the album Full Circle. Could you please explain to me how adding a link to an external site (without changing any wording within the wiki) can be construed as creating a hoax. Especially when the external site is a legal depository of rare music which is what the wikipedia page was referring to.
Thanks, I value your input.
Gk demian ( talk) 21:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)gk_demian
Yeah, that one looked ok, but since it was an anon, I was hesitant to go with it. It was a tough call! =) Dp76764 ( talk) 05:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Edgarde:
I saw your note about deleting the article. Personally I don't have a strong opinion either way on this. The group does have 14 gold awards which I think makes them fairly well known. But rock is out of my field.
I'm disappointed that there was no answer given to our question. I'm going to try again. Likely it was a case of it "falling through the cracks".
Best wishes, Wanderer57 ( talk) 01:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm copying this from the reliable sources board in case you miss it in the sea of recent postings. It a reply to your question:
Wow, this gets more and more interesting. Thanks for filling me in. I've not tried to figure out what's going on in Non-western concepts of male sexuality (tho it's a subject in which I would be interested) and have had no dealings with Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard, but a scan of their current TOC suggests they favor "hard science", so the more concrete User:Masculinity makes the "conspiracy", the more appropriate WP:FT/N seems. If User:Masculinity is not really proposing an explicit conspiracy (like I said, still haven't read the stuff) but merely personalizing the actions of what User:Masculinity considers a pernicious influence of outsiders' perspectives, then a re-write describing that influence (as can be documented) without the ad hominem might be a compromise agreeable to all, at least once User:Masculinity lets go of Masculinity for boys.
My ignorant $0.02.
I'll try and read thru the Non-western concepts article some time in the next day or two. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear Edgarde,
I am writing to apologize for the additions and alterations made to the “Generation Y” article in the past two months. At no time was Peter Sheahan aware of the edits being made on Wikipedia. Any information uploaded to Wikipedia in future will adhere strictly to the Wikipedia guidelines.
Yours sincerely,
Samuel Michael Carter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuel Michael Carter ( talk • contribs) 03:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
"This isn't the place to discuss it, but could Wikiquote use articles on Leftist-Islamist Alliance or Marx-Muhammad pact"
I don't know and I wouldn't create the pages if I were me (and I am) but if the term is specifically used by the authors then it could work and not run into the same problems as we do here with secondary sources--because, you don't need them. I am not exactly sure how Wikiquote judges if pages should be kept or not but it seems reasonable--especially if the pages are deleted here. gren グレン 05:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Good call on removing those "examples", I wasn't sure whether it would be appropriate to do so. Cheers Nestorius ( talk) 16:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for replying to the propostion about Family Guy recurring characters! What characters do you think fits all the guildlines, and should be added?- Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r reply! 23:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello edgarde.
As I mentioned to jossi on my talk page, the first thing I want to do is reach out to you. Despite the fact you firmly believe I am Rodent, I would like an opportunity to prove to you that I am not. This is probably a most difficult and challenging endeavor. But one I do take seriously. I believe there is a lot of work ahead to be done. And while I don't necessarily agree with all the actions you have taken in the past, I do find you to be a knowledgeable and valuable editor. You may find that hard to believe coming from who you think I am. But it is the truth. I take nothing you have said against me personally. If it were me in the opposite position, I probably would have believed and indeed come to the same conclusions you did. Please try to see the opposite though. Please try to believe me when I say I am not him. I certainly cannot and won't deny I share some of his issues and concerns. Where I differ is the methods. So I extend my virtual hand to you. I hope you will take it. I encourage you to monitor my editing closely. I value your input on the issues I have raised. I will probably be raising some others as well. But always in a way the respectful, polite, and appropriate for Wikipedia. HurryTaken ( talk) 02:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
After over a month without any activity, I've moved Talk:Classical music in popular culture to User:Edgarde/Classical music in popular culture. Cheers. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 21:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here 2000 Remastered CD-300.jpg. 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. BJBot ( talk) 11:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
User:Ctjf83 keeps on reverting my edits (of trying to add the LGBT characters category to Stewie's article), accusing me of trying to add lies and inaccuracies to Wikipedia.
I don't want this to escalate anymore than it already has; what should I do? -- DrBat ( talk) 20:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
So I was wondering if you could join this discussion? TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 14:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I did not see this discussion until it was closed. The cat was removed on what looks to be a 2/3 vote. I agree with your assessment, this is no different from the cats of other pioneers in technology progress. The cat should have been kept and narrowed to the inventors and developers of the technology. With my vote it would have been 2/4 and would not have had "consensus". Would you support me if I restored the category? Also, I only know of perhaps 4 or 5 who qualify for the category (Moog, Carlos, Mauzey, Theremin). Can you help with any others? -- Blainster ( talk) 22:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll be tied up for the next day or two, but appreciate your suggestions. -- Blainster ( talk) 07:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Odd, I must have been looing at an earlier version of the page and edited it by accident. I meant to remove the commentary attached to the link to IslamQA, and put it where it belonged as an external link rather than a "See Also". Looking back on ym edit, this is not what I actually did - I have reverted myself. Sorry for the mistake. I have no strong view on whether IslamQA is promotional, but am happy for it not to be included if there is a view against it. Euryalus ( talk) 10:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style under What should not be included. No FL discographies have B-side lists. I hope this helps you out. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 00:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, ed, you alive dude? I haven't heard from you in a couple months. Just checkin'? With all due respect, BrianGriffin-FG ( talk) 23:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Edgarde, the issue has been raised again about adding awards to the infobox. Your well thought-out ideas got squashed last time and I think there's enough consensus on the issue. Would you like to rejoin the conversation? Here -- FilmFan69 ( talk) 01:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
As you may (or may not) have noticed, I have been doing a lot of work on the article as of late, trying to get it ready for a potential FAC by the end of the month. At this point I need a lot of feedback, so I was wondering if you could take a look at the article and tell me what you think. I was thinking of adding another fair use image to the article (possibly a comparison of Homer's look in the beginning of the Ullman shorts, the end of the Ullman shorts, the beginning of The Simpsons and the most recent episode although the anti-fair use warriors wouldn't like that) so if you have any suggestions for that, I would be glad to hear them. -- Scorpion 0422 18:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I just removed some dead links,you can keep them if you like-- 7amada'sback:) ( talk) 15:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The rapper Z-Ro is from Missouri City, Texas, as he states in his songs. Please do not vandalize the article by changing information which you have no knowledge of. -- 67.80.174.252 ( talk) 03:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
In the RfC on my user conduct, you endorsed the proposed remedies, including C7, which states: Accusations of POV-pushing: If an editor believes that an article is biassed and that the article does not conform to NPOV and tries to change the article to something which in the editor's opinion conforms better to NPOV, or if there is no clear evidence otherwise that would be convincing to a typical outside observer, then others should not refer to the editor using "POV-pusher" or similar terms. Assume good faith..
Unfortunately, you also state that "[...] Blackworm continues to emphasize a counterproductive POV-push [...]." This statement seems to contradict the proposed remedy above. You indeed have stated that there is clear evidence, which seems in keeping with this proposal, however such a statement effectively renders the spirit of the proposal void, as such a statement of "clear evidence" could be made by anyone. I also wish to note WP:POVPUSH, which states that it is always incivil to accuse another editor of POV pushing. I do not accept and will not accept the label of "POV-pusher" while simultaneously being sternly warned against using the label myself, and asked to assume good faith, and I ask in the interest of resolving this dispute that you please refactor your comment so as not to assert that I am POV pushing. As I have said before, criticism of the form "assume good faith, you POV-pusher!" is not fair, nor productive, nor in keeping with WP:AGF. Thanks, Blackworm ( talk) 20:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I think the socks were "too close" to the subject-at-hand to properly step back and apraise the article.. and definitely they did not understand the meanining of COI in their sourcing (chuckle). However, I have given the article a MAJOR overhaul since your comment at the AfD. It was definitely a total pain-in-my-butt to weed out the fluff and find proper sources... but I think the subject might now been seen as having a minor notability... once I pulled that HUGE ego out of the article. I can do no more, and my fingers are tired. I will accept your opinion, as I now have to get to work. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
In case you're still interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hoagie#Merger_proposal BillyTFried ( talk) 21:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:Momentary Lapse US-250.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 20:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)