User talk:Darkwind/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Darkwind. 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 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

I love the idea of bookCrossing too, and thought of BookCrossing a couple boxes of books a few months ago. Then I found someone who redistributes them to needy schools. Both good causes, IMO, promoting literacy in their own way. :-) Koyaanis Qatsi

Sorry to bug you: Message canceled. Emperorbma 08:04 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Good work on Miroku, that makes a lot more sense :) -- sannse 07:18 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm going to go through the rest of the InuYasha character pages to see if they can be improved too... when I get around to it. ;) --Darkwind 19:18 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Thanks again

Thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia on February 21, 2005. Cheers! -- BD2412 ^talk 21:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for welcoming me! Thestormmovie 02:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

can i plead not-guilty?24.139.31.210 06:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome, can you help me if I get stuck? --Kickstartme 08:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice and the welcome. I will try to get less possesive about Sinhala Slang, at the moment I am very skeptic about someone messing with it and making a bad name of it. The funny thing is that, I requestd it to be semi-protected against vandalism and now even I cannot edit it since I am a newcomer. (for few days) This would teach me to let the article go,... and let it grow. Wondering if you can help me to protect the article from any malicious act, for the next three days, till I can edit it again :) Ritigala Jayasena 18:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Another Thanks

I appreciate the welcome! --JLaddJr 03:56, 7 August 2007 (ET)

Request for Some Help

Hey again. I just got finished writing my first page. After writing the page, I realized a mistake that I had made with the title of the page. I gave the article the title "Evangelical christian academy" when it should have been "Evangelical Christian Academy". Since I only recently setup my Wikipedia account I can't change the title. Can you make this change for me? The article is here Thanks! JLaddJr 17:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help again!

Thank you for stepping in!

Obviously you read what is going on so you must agree with me right? This particular editor has made an error. Am I correct? How can the article be rewritten so it's acceptable? Intolerancerecords 08:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't, and seeing what's going on, I have no intention of stepping into the actual article being discussed. All I saw were your comments on your fellow editor's talk page, and I just wanted to remind you to keep a cool head when speaking to those fellow editors. Comments like "are you retarded" add no meaningful content and only serve to make everyone agitated. --Darkwind (talk) 08:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal Attack?

What I wrote did not constitute as a personal attack. Did you read the guidlines? If you did, you'd know that accusing someone without justification of making personal attacks is also considered a form of personal attack. Which pot is calling which kettle black my wiki buddy? Intolerancerecords 08:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

See my reply above. --Darkwind (talk) 08:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Not you

Nah, I didn't mean you, just had a little edit conflict. Will move the post a little bit to avoid future confusion. Bjelleklang - talk Bug Me 08:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey man? I think your wrong man? What is the big deal? Picking up sticks must be fun? Especially in 1976? Love you bye? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.82.192.241 (talk • contribs) 09:41, August 7, 2007 (UTC).

Alright "Noob"????

I do not appreciate the personal bashing. My mom is sick and all I can do is listen to Lynyrd Skynyrd. They help me get through the day. I know how it is to love with my mother. When they finally pass on it is hard. All those lonely nights in the basement have wore on me. Please forgive me. I'm sorry, I don't really know how to use the internets. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.82.192.241 (talk • contribs) 10:09, August 7, 2007 (UTC).

You've left this comment for the wrong user. I didn't say anything about that band on your talk page. The person who did added their comment above mine and didn't sign it. I've fixed that for you. --Darkwind (talk) 18:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry man. I am sad that I hurt you. Love you when your mad. Seth Bullard —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.82.192.241 (talk • contribs) 20:27, August 7, 2007 (CDT).

We want to stay within guidelines...

Greetings and thank you for all your efforts!

I've spent quite some time looking thru help files that have helped immeasurably.However, I'm not sure how to set up two items:

1.How do you move the table of contents box to a different area of the page? I don't see it in the html...

2.How do I properly set up a categories box at the bottom of the article? I listed categories that are appropriate but I notice that all pages have a standard blue box at the bottom with categories inside...

Thanks again Hillsboroughartscouncil 19:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you think so far?

Does it conform to Wikipedia style? Do you have any suggestions? What is the best way to get other editors involved? --Kickstartme 22:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Just as a note, this guy was a sock of Grumpyrob; he wasn't allowed to use his version of the article on Plastic pressure pipe systems, so he recreated the same article under the Industrial title instead. MSJapan 16:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response!

We greatly appreciate your help... In regards to the notability issue we've added legal info about the Non-profit organization, town and state agency endorsements, a list of references to online published materials. I trust this will be more than sufficent... if not let us know...

Oh ... one more technical question... I'm having a problem inserting the 'nofollow' tag for external links... could you copy me a sample?

Thanks again for your help... you folks are great! Hillsboroughartscouncil 22:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Not worthy of Wikipedia

Thank you once again... In regards to the Notability issue:

It appears that you placed the notability banner on the page... 19:57, 7 August 2007 (hist) (diff) m Hillsborough Arts Council (added notability tag)

You also moved the page to another area that can’t be found… 19:58, 7 August 2007 (hist) (diff) m Hillsborough Arts Council (moved Hillsborough arts council to Hillsborough Arts Council:

We have now edited the page extensively adding numerous links and references to deal with the Notability issue.

However you state “I'm not going to make any kind of final judgment call as to whether what you've included is completely sufficient I don't think I really have the experience in that depth of Wikipedia policy.”

I'm a bit mystified that you felt qualified to

Tag the page as having a Notability issue,
Move the page
Add a Wikipedia articles with topics of unclear importance tag to the categories

... but you now state that you don't have the experience to judge it...

interesting...

Well… I gave it my best…

Respectfully Hillsboroughartscouncil 01:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate the kindness

I appreciate both the civility and your kindness in explaining these nuances.

I really was mystified and was trying not to sound confrontational.

I wouldn't feel comfortable removing the template as the edits are mine. I'm not a member of the Hillsborough Arts Council but I volunteered some time to help them with website and other issues... hence my idea to put some info up on Wikipedia.

I guess I'll just wait and see what happens, or ask if anyone else feels qualified to edit the site and remove the notability banner.

Once again thanks so much for the clarification respectfully Hillsboroughartscouncil 01:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Gatenmaru; Goryomaru; Aomori Prefecture; Hachiemon; WcDonald's; American Public Transportation Association; Dakki; Italian Futurism (cinema); Neyagawa, Osaka; Higurashi Shrine; Grandpa (InuYasha); Akademio de Esperanto; List of InuYasha voice actors; Universal Flowering; Spats; Trading post; Dearest; Motu proprio; Kirby Morrow

Cleanup: Shippo; Tessaiga; Interstate 635 (Kansas-Missouri)
Merge: Research Council; Presidential directive; Grand Valley State University
Add Sources: Kagura (InuYasha); Naraku; Koga (InuYasha)
Wikify: Crafts Council; Lithia, Florida; Woodruff Arts Center
Expand: Masashi Tashiro; Keeper of the Seven Keys Part 2; Terms of Service

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Please leave me alone

I'm sick and tired of being banned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.120.34 (talk • contribs) 07:57, August 11, 2007 (CDT)

My note to you didn't say anything about being banned. It just said "please don't hold extended discourse in an edit summary." Based on your IP's warning history, though, I'm not inclined to be particularly sympathetic. --Darkwind (talk) 19:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

How about no?

Okay? Soon, I'll get a modem that changes my IP every time I log in. I'm sick of the "you have new messages" thing that won't go away. I'm not vandalizing your page. I'm eventually going to be banned again so I'm trying to fix wrong info on some pages. My anger comes from Jonny2x4 who keeps editing stuff with speculation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.94.120.34 (talk • contribs) between 14:49 and 14:58 in several edits, August 11, 2007 (CDT).

I know you're not vandalizing my page, I'm just moving the discussion to the bottom so it stays in chronological order. Why worry about randomizing your IP, unless you want to feel anonymous? If you really don't want to be tracked, that's fine, but as Wikipedians, we as a community will continue to self-"police" activity by all our users and guests. Just try to keep civility in mind while editing, and you'll be fine. If you're having problems with a particular editor, discuss it on their talk page (in a civil manner) or on the talk page of the article in question. Wikipedia operates by consensus, and if you have a discussion on the article talk page, others interested in that article will generally chime in with their opinions, and that way a consensus can be reached.

The fact that your new messages banner won't go away is because of a known bug with messages left for IP addresses and the MediaWiki software. That's another reason to register for an account, the problem doesn't seem to happen if you're logged in. --Darkwind (talk) 20:22, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

195.137.122.76

Hello! My apologies for the 'incident' - computer problems at the time. Will not happen again! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.137.122.76 (talk • contribs) 21:18, August 13, 2007 (CDT).

That's fine, things happen from time to time. --Darkwind (talk) 02:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

How was my edit vandalism? It was a valid edit to the Space Jam page about a notable spin-off that did not have its own page. I believe that qualifies as "Trivia" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.108.123.19 (talk • contribs) 21:42, August 13, 2007 (CDT).

You're right. I apologize, but I added the warning to your page in error. I meant to send the vandalism warning to another user who'd added some inappropriate content to Space Jam, but I clicked on the wrong talk page link from the article's history. I'll remove the warning from your talk page. --Darkwind (talk) 02:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.108.123.19 (talk • contribs) 16:14, August 16, 2007 (CDT).

eyeblink conditioning

thanks for your suggestions re: eyeblink conditioning entry, and for informing me about the wikipedia writing etiquette. I'll continue to work to make this page great. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dentate (talk • contribs) 20:49, August 14, 2007 (CDT).

You're quite welcome. Don't forget to sign your talk comments by using ~~~~ at the end. :) --Darkwind (talk) 02:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Got itDentate 03:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy tags

Hi. Please don't stick speedy tags on articles like Adékamni Olufadé (now redirected to another article by me, by the way) - it said he appeared in the 2006 World Cup!!! And I believe that what the other articles need is some cleanup, not deletion. Punkmorten 08:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Audrey Smith deletion contested

Creator has expressed his anger at me for CSD of Audrey Smith. Could you talk to him, my conversation is going nowhere. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see discussion on creator's User_talk:Eckre and my User_talk:Dlohcierekim Talk pages. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll have a look at the discussion. --Darkwind (talk) 19:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

the whole User talk:Eckre affair

Thanks for clarifying that whole hornet's nest. I had been told that Mayors were now notable. I just feel bad that the editor had so much enthusiasm and so little understanding. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 22:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) --Darkwind (talk) 01:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

My Autobiography

So, apparently you banned my autobiography titled "Kareem Sandy" and rudely suggested that I get a MySpace account if I wish to talk about myself. So may I ask why there are biographies on other people, and why mine didn't fit your "regulations"? In addition, I'd also like to know why articles describing various sexual positions can be found on Wikipedia, but an article about a person who wishes to contribute to the Wiki organization cannot be published. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KareemSandy (talk • contribs) in two edits at 08:19 and 09:19, August 18, 2007 (CDT).

Let me clarify a couple of things for you. I didn't "ban" anything. I did suggest that the article be deleted. Please see WP:CSD#A7 -- your article didn't assert why the subject (in this case, yourself) was notable. The general notability guidelines are at WP:NOTE, and the guidelines specific to biographies are at WP:BIO. I suggest you review those guidelines. I think after you do, you'll understand why a biography of yourself doesn't qualify for inclusion here at Wikipedia. Biographies of other people should meet the guidelines I linked. If they don't, feel free to use the deletion policies, as I did, to suggest those pages be removed.

Even if you do meet those notability guidelines (though the original article had no content indicating such), there's still a conflict of interest with you creating your own biography article. In fact, there's a whole guideline page saying you shouldn't write an autobiographical article. If you are notable enough for a main namespace article, someone else will eventually notice you and create the article, citing secondary sources to verify the statements made and your notability.

The fact remains that if you want to talk about yourself in general, there are plenty of web pages for you to do so, such as the originally suggested MySpace. If you want to talk about yourself in connection with your contributions here at Wikipedia, use your user page, don't create a main namespace article about yourself. That is the consensus of the Wikipedia community as a whole, as verified by the policy and guideline pages I've linked.

Also, sign your posts, please. Thank you. --Darkwind (talk) 1:50 pm, 18 August 2007, Saturday (7 years, 11 months, 1 day ago) (UTC−7)

Boston Musica Viva

I'm plenty annoyed to have had this stub so summarily removed. I've done enough "random page" hits to know that any rock 'n' roll band with one fan has its album track list articled, and Musica Viva has commisioned and performed music by John Cage and talents of equal reputation. If this is the kind of thing that routinely goes on I predict that Wikipedia will crash due to its own editing policies or cause its contributors to create a bigger, better online encyclopedia elsewhere.--F.N. Wombat 06:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Italic text

The fact remains that there are specific notability guidelines set out that a musical group generally has to meet in order to have an article here at Wikipedia. If an article about the group doesn't assert that the group meets the notability criteria, it can be deleted at any time per the speedy deletion policy.

If you don't like Wikipedia policies and guidelines, then participate in the discussion of a proposal to change the policy; or you can always choose not to participate in Wikipedia at all. If you're just upset because the policy doesn't seem to be "enforced" fairly or equally, then by all means tag the other articles you mention that meet the speedy deletion criteria so they'll be removed as well. *shrug* --Darkwind (talk) 09:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

stubs tag

Thanks for the info about tagging things as a stub. I'm still not certain about all the formatting/coding and shortcuts, and apprectiated the headsup. Cheers Jon Hobynx 09:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. If you have any questions about a particular topic, don't hesitate to ask me here, or ask at the help desk. :) --Darkwind (talk) 09:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

problem

do you have a problem with that bitch Defjamrules 02:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? --Darkwind (talk) 05:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Aindrias Ó Caoimh

A tag has been placed on Aindrias Ó Caoimh, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Darkwind (talk) 08:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I noticed this article removal and wondered if this was the Irish Attorney General. I would have though him a notable Irish person. ww2censor 17:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

This guy was/is an Irish High Court Judge and is currently a judge of the European Court of Justice, or is listed on the wikipedia ECJ page as a member.Rigger30 15:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, I probably tagged the wrong article. I typically work with multiple tabs open, and probably wasn't paying attention to whether I was on the right article. Being on the ECJ or on the Irish High Court would certainly be notability. --Darkwind (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Main Page Deletion

Once again, it's Kareem Sandy. Seeing as my beautifully written autobiography was hastily deleted, I'd assume that User:Defjamrules will have his deleted also?

Kareem Sandy, August 22, 2007, 7:40 pm, et cetera...... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KareemSandy (talk • contribs) 23:40, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

I haven't seen any such autobiography. Not in article space, anyway. If you have, and you think it doesn't meet WP:BIO, then by all means tag it for deletion. If you're talking about his user page, that's subject to a different set of rules. The page you wrote which was tagged for deletion was in the main article space, not a user page.

Incidentally, to properly format your signature so SineBot doesn't come along and tag it anyway (like it did above), just use ~~~~ where you want your signature to go. --Darkwind (talk) 23:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for taking the time to mediate the issue. THF 00:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. I'll be keeping an eye on the WQA page for responses in case some further assistance is needed. --Darkwind (talk) 00:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Wandu Mountain City

I will finish filling in the evidence in a few days. It is quite a workload to look at those history records, to write properly extracted paragraphs down, to translate the ancient records into modern timing system and to translate everything into proper English. FYI, I was trying to be cool, but whenever there is an argument with the user Cydevil38 who caused all these troubles, he will throw out some google search links and then disappears into the dark, until he suddenly appears in an article and does the same thing again. He has repetitively done this kind of things for several times. See Image talk:Goguryeo-Relations-inEnglish.jpg for an identical example, i.e., he inserts some spurious contents or puts some spurious labels, then disappears. In the talk page, he may quote some spurious wikipolicies (referred by name, but never by original wikipolicy contents, of any wikipolicy). When technical contents are concerned, he is a one-liner, which saves his own efforts, but easily reverts proper contents. I have monitored his contributions for a long time. This guy's major efforts are spent in every editing war involved with Korea (e.g., Liancourt Rocks, Sea of Japan, Goguryeo, Manchuria). There are negligible wiki contributions from this guy. Besides, all reliable sources (i.e., canonical history records) I put in the talk pages so far cannot enter the related articles' main contents because he can easily delete my editing every time, just like what happened in Goguryeo and Wandu Mountain City.--Jiejunkong 04:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

A fix: Liancourt Rocks and Sea of Japan should be removed from the above list because I remember that User:Lions3639 and User:Davidpdx participated in the related editing wars. And Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Lions3639 once confirmed that User:Lions3639 and User:Davidpdx are sockpuppets of Cydevil38. But I forgot that the confirmation was cancelled when I wrote down the above paragraph.--Jiejunkong 07:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

POV fork of Hwando (fortress) from Wandu Mountain City

The article Hwando (fortress) created by User:Cydevil38 today could be a POV fork of Wandu Mountain City. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hwando_(fortress).--Jiejunkong 05:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

My "third opinion" request on Gothiscandza

You were right, there was no discussion on Talk:Gothiscandza#Madison Grant's map. My opponent limits himself to being rather incoherent in the edit summeries. What is the appropriate course of action in such a case? /Pieter Kuiper 18:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, 3o is primarily intended for helping users who are already engaged in discussion with each other come to a happy ending via an outside neutral opinion. We can't help if there's no interaction at all. You may need to open an RFC/U, especially if the other user is engaged in disruptive editing on other articles as well; or you could request page protection for Gothiscandza if he's exceeded the 3RR rule. Actually, if he's over the 3RR limit, you can report him to WP:AN/3RR. Hope that helps. --Darkwind (talk) 21:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Third Opinion Clarification

Hi. Thanks so much for the clarification and direction. While I have used WP for a while, in many respects I am a newbie and appreciate the feedback. Thanks again. --Igoldste 20:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad I could be of help. --Darkwind (talk) 21:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

M.U.L.E.

Thank you for your third opinion [1]. Please review my response when you have a free moment. Blackbeard2k7 22:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

BLACKBEARD2K7 is propagating links to his personal website/forum (now indirectly) where he is offering for download illegally pirated copyrighted software. I have deleted the offending link from the M.U.L.E. page. This is a very serious attempt by BLACKBEARD2K7 to spam his illegal software.

Hungrywolf 05:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Dlabtot accused of being a sock

User:Dlabtot arrived on a page where I take an interest and made several edits "of which I probably approve".

Unfortunately, for reasons you may be aware of, I'm hyper-attuned to the possibility of socks at the moment. Checking this new Users contributions, they looked highly suspicious. Supposedly, the edit summary "No, the UN does not describe claims of a massacre as 'baseless', in fact the word baseless does not appear in the report." comes from an editor on his 10th edit on the first day he's registered (or possibly 2nd day depending on time zones).

I was concerned that this was a genuine editor come back as a sock-puppet instead of waiting for a block to expire. (Alternatively, it might be an existing POV editor creating some cunning two-faced sock, though that wasn't very likely).

Anyway, I didn't think an immediate investigation and block was needed, I'd just warn them that the behaviour was very suspicious. Receiving only bluster in response (very unlike a new editor) I pressed the point, though still politely with reason given.

I may have been doing the wrong thing, perhaps trying to help an abuser of the system to slip under the radar? But it's absurd to suggest it was a PA. Newbys are frequently posted far more aggressive and unfriendly baffling accusations of WP:OR, WP:POV etc etc. than what I'd done.

I have a question for you - there is an editor who goes round making a real nuisance of himself with garbled warnings on people's UserPages, he's been sanctioned for it before. Have you got a suggestion by which I can do a "whack-a-mole" on him? PalestineRemembered 07:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

"Part 2" - I've looked at your alternate solution of using SSP established process. But I don't think it's useable in this case. I've no idea who the "sock-master" might be and it doesn't matter, I'm not calling for an investigation, I'm not seeking preventative action against culprits. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with an experienced user coming back under a different name. However, the behaviour in this case was suspicious, and passing editors who notice it are entitled (I'd have supposed) to politely query what's going on. I should have had an explanation (perhaps previous name too close to real name, harrassment etc).

On this users 3rd day of posting they edited 24 times. The day afterwards (when I'd pointed out how suspicious the pattern was), there were two edits, then a break of a day, then 2 more edits. I think I scored a goal, without involving anyone else. The user has taken to heart what I said and behaviour to policy has been improved. Of course, it's always possible I hit on a real abuser, who will learn lessons from this occasion and return with more cunning. But I've succeeded in putting them to a lot of trouble, while avoiding it for us. I think you should applaud my action! PalestineRemembered 11:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

M.U.L.E. External Links is a attempt to Spam illegal sofware downloads

This is complain for Wikipage on M.U.L.E. [[2]]

BLACKBEARD2K7 is linking to his personal Website. M.U.L.E. Software Download When that was deleted by the Admins, he is now (indirectly) linking to it via another personal Website.

(1) BLACKBEARD2K7 is offering, on the above Website, for download a pirated / modified / hacked version of the game M.U.L.E. without the permission of the original authors or publishers ATARI. This is a serious violation of copyright material.

(2) It is in violation of WP:EL as it is SPAM and he is trying to propagate his own web-site Forum here.

(3) Wikipedia is NOT a collection of links.

(4) Also, using common sense, no link on Wikipedia should point to the download of any executable software from a very unreliable source (as above). Such software may contain trojans and keyloggers which steal your personal information (including Credit Card Nos & passwords)

This individual persists in reverting the deletions. I have deleted the offending link. Please give your opinion regarding this on the M.U.L.E. discussion page.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hungrywolf (talk • contribs) 12:04, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Darkwind, what is wrong with you? Why dont you visit the site yourself and see for yourself. What is for offer on that site is a Windows software. M.U.L.E. was never released in Windows. Also, distributing copyright software on your personal website? Where is this allowed in?? Hungrywolf 12:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Just because it's available as a "ROM" for a Windows emulator does not automatically mean that the person downloading it is violating copyright. If I bought the original Atari version of M.U.L.E., then I'm well within my fair use rights to download a Windows emulation in order to continue using the software I paid for. Now, since I don't own M.U.L.E., I'm not going to be downloading said software. Also, I have YET to see any backup for your continual allegations that Blackbeard operates that site. Just LET IT GO, dude. --Darkwind (talk) 12:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Darkwind, when years of personal data gets screwed up on your PC because of this, you end up getting angry. Yes, it was stupid of me to download it anyway, but that doesn't make things happier for me. Plus, please check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Blackbeard2k7 to check what your Admin has said about this. You have reverted the link after his strict warning about it. Unfortunate, that just because you made an initial 3rd party choice, you are now wanting to stick to it no matter what the implications may be to other Wikipedia users. Hungrywolf 12:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL. I don't particularly appreciate being accused of bias, and if you'll recall, my *initial* choice was in YOUR favor. I changed my mind after additional evidence was presented to me. I'm more than willing to change my mind again IF YOU PRESENT EVIDENCE. Your constant repetition of your allegations (as well as admin shopping) does not constitute proof. All that you're doing (and forgive me in advance for coming too close to WP:NPA) is coming across like a blowhard with a grudge and an axe to grind. Wikipedia isn't the place to grind axes or prove a point. If you truly feel that X person was responsible for Y loss to your personal data etc., then file a tort, or report the person to the piracy investigators in your state or the FBI, or do something that MEANS something. Don't just get into an edit war on a wiki and then resort to a lot of bluster when it doesn't go the way you want. --Darkwind (talk) 13:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I have been wasting my time here. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. What evidence do you want??? Will a recorded conversation with a wire-tap do good?? Do what you want, let another 20 people get their PC's ruined and probably their personal data stolen. Goodbye and Goodluck with your Admin work here. Hungrywolf 13:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) Lawl. I'm not an admin, I'm just a fellow editor who values the 3o system and provides said third-opinions from time to time. The problem is that in this case, that system failed miserably to resolve this dispute, and I kept an eye on it to keep it from going to wikiquette alerts (where I also participate) or even to AN/I. As I've said, just let it go, the way I intend to, and move on. --Darkwind (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

First, Darkwind, I want to express my appreciation for your truthful and neutral points of view, and I appreciate the fact that finally someone has recognized the ridiculousness of Hungrywolfs behavior. I know you wish you were done with this, but please clarify your statement on the MULE discussion page, where you state that it was okay to change the reference to gamespy. Maybe at the time you did not realize the ramification of this. Now that the reference is pointing to a mule article on gamespy, it does not support the comment I added about the ability to play online. I went through the trouble of proving everything that was my responsibility, and so I feel the original referenced citation should remain. However, I do not want to continue edit warring. I know for a FACT, that if I revert his change, he will revert it again.Blackbeard2k7 23:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

3o thanks for Hardee's article comments

Hi Darkwind, a belated thanks for commenting on my recent 3o. Your comments about the sourcing were helpful...even if published verbatim (which this one wasn't), press releases undergo the same editorial oversight and editing and any other copy. Thanks again. Flowanda | Talk 02:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Darkwind (talk) 02:36, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Problems with edits? - third opinion

Thanks for the help! Your response is well-written, neutral, and includes a great deal of explanation. It's much appreciated as a response to the situation and an example of how to handle such minor disputes. Thanks again! --Ronz 03:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Unsigned

Sorry about that i will stop doing it. I think im just excited that the Cubs are in first. if this considered me writing one this will be my last one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.121.110 (talk) 03:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

I apologize for the cross-posts. I already posted this on the alto discussion page.

This user,"209.62.172.83" keeps on adding, "Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montana" on the crossover alto section. Can you please tell this person to stop posting it? I had to delete it twice.

Thanks.

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme 03:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)ineversigninsodonotmessageme

I'm not sure why you're asking me to get involved, I'm not an admin or anyone of any special importance. I do respond to WQAs and third opinion requests, but you'd have to post on those pages asking for intervention. Short of that, you yourself can leave a message on that anonymous user's talk page asking them not to introduce factual errors to articles... a good pre-written message for that would be at {{uw-error1}}, and you can add it to their page by using {{uw-error1|alto}}~~~~. --Darkwind (talk) 04:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Ohhh, I'm sorry, lol. I thought you were in charge of the alto section. Do you know who is so I can send my message to them? And, I tried to talk to that user on their talk page, but I don't think the user got it set up yet. Thank you for your help :) Ineversigninsodonotmessageme 23:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)ineversigninsodonotmessageme

Now I'm really confused... I've never edited the article alto... but anyway, there's not an assigned "in charge" person for any particular article. The closest we have to that is the particular WikiProjects that cover particular topics, but nobody owns any articles, the WikiProjects just take particular care to make sure that the articles in their subject matter are of high quality. At any rate, in cases like this, if the person continues to add factual errors to the article, report them to AIV so they can be blocked if necessary. --Darkwind (talk) 23:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Ohhhh, sorry about that (again), lol. I'm kinda new. I thought everyone was in charge of all the pages on here.

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme 03:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)ineversigninsodonotmessageme

Reply

Thank you for your post on my talk page—a nice, polished text that would have done its job well. However, I withdrew the comment, so what you're saying is quite irrelevant. And this does nothing to address the extreme behaviour of Radio. If you had read the whole of the discourse, you'd have realised that it did indeed involve this person's behaviour (this ad hominem thing), far beyond an issue of encyclopedic content. Tony 12:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not you withdrew it later is more-or-less irrelevant on a wiki that keeps such things available in publicly viewable history. You cannot truly retract a statement once it's been submitted to Wikipedia, because it's there in black and white, or black and green as the case may be, for anyone to see. That's why I wanted to remind you to avoid such arguments in the first place; or at the very least take it off the article/project talk page and on to the user's talk page when the discussion ventures beyond "article" content. --Darkwind (talk) 13:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Editing the Purpose of a Page

Please don't alter the offically stated purpose of a Wikipedia page without discussion, as you did to the Wikiquette_alerts page. How do you know the proper purpose of the page, such that you can change what is stated at the top of the page? You should also look at the first sentence on the page, which states: "Wikiquette alerts are an informal streamlined way to request perspective and help with difficult communications with other editors." Nowhere (before you changed it) did the page suggest that its exclusive purpose is reporting breaches of civility. Please restore the page to its original state. Bsharvy 11:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I know what the proper purpose of the page is, based on the consensus of the behavior of the active editors who have been volunteering at the page for the past two months along with me. You, sir, are the one who came in and told us we, the volunteers, were doing it wrong. Where do you get the right to say that? From your discussion on WP:WQA, it's obvious that you feel you get that right from the instructional text at the top of the page. I changed the instructional text to clarify what we as volunteers are now doing at WQA, to prevent misunderstandings like yours. It's a volunteer-run project, and any of the active volunteers have the right to modify the instructional text regarding the project. Also, this is a wiki, if you feel that my change was inappropriate, YOU restore it. --Darkwind (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, what I did is also a perfect example of the WP:BRD cycle. I made a bold change, you disagreed, we discuss. That's how a wiki works. --Darkwind (talk) 18:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I get the right to say you are doing it wrong from the right to say what I think. However, you misunderstood the purpose of referencing the informational text at the top of the page. It didn't describe what you did, it described what I did. I took your advice and reverted your unilateral change. Bsharvy 19:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Does that mean I get the right to tell you to bugger off from the right to say what I think? No, that would be called a personal attack, and is prohibited by policy. In the same way, charging into a WikiProject or other volunteer-run process like WQA like a bull in a china shop and telling the 3 most active volunteers who've posted in response your alert that they're doing it all wrong, if not an attack, is definitely starting to seem WP:POINTy, most specifically the WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT section. It now seems that you are disrupting WP:WQA for the purpose of proving yourself "right", and I don't particularly think that's a very nice thing to do. Yes, I know, WP:POINT mentions unilateral action - but I'm not changing the policy, I'd changed informational text to explain the de facto operation of WQA as it stands today. --Darkwind (talk) 20:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, you use the word "unilateral" like it's a bad thing. You didn't actually read the page I linked to you on the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, did you? If you had, you wouldn't still be calling my actions "unilateral". --Darkwind (talk) 20:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Saying somebody is mistaken is not the same as telling someone to "bugger off." Bsharvy 21:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The fact that you are the ONLY one out of the several people involved in the discussion who thinks we are mistaken should be a clue, no? See WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT from above. --Darkwind (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Saying several people are mistaken is not the same as telling someone to "bugger off." Nobody disagreed with me but you, after I pointed out the stated purpose of the page. So, you changed what it said. Bsharvy 05:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Warning: Assume Good Faith

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Wikiquette_alerts. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Bsharvy 21:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

ROFL. --Darkwind (talk) 21:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Or, a more appropriate response:

{{templater}} --Darkwind (talk) 04:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Déjà vu! [3] and [4]. Anynobody 07:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I used a "Good Faith" template because you assumed bad faith, not because we disagree. The warning says what I think; it is my comment. If you want to respond to a message from me, respond to it. Bsharvy 09:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to respond to you AT ALL. I didn't feel comfortable putting this on the WQA page, but I sure as hell feel comfortable putting it here. GO AWAY. I don't ever want to hear from you again, and if I ever should run into you again in the course of my editing here at Wikipedia, I will find a different article to edit. --Darkwind (talk) 11:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and the reason for WP:TEMPLAR, and my resultant indignation which expressed itself as humor, is that your choice to use a basic "welcome to wikipedia" template is highly insulting in and of itself. "Welcome to Wikipedia"? "Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing…"? I've been here for four years. That's just rude. --Darkwind (talk) 11:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You have a funny way of showing that you don't want to respond to me. Bsharvy 14:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You Only Move Twice

Thanks for your third opinion. The discussion is still ongoing, and Scorpion continues to reject out of hand the notion that any details could or should be removed from the section in question. I'd appreciate a more specific recommedation regarding what should be included or excluded. Croctotheface 20:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Requesting your help on a couple of Wikiquette alerts

Hey, I seem to be having some trouble with the last couple of alerts I've taken on (I must be losing my touch), and I'd appreciate it if you could have a look at them and inject another voice into the discussions. They are WP:WQA#User:Anyeverybody and WP:WQA#Issues with an admin.

(My apologies if this note is redundant - personally, once I see that another volunteer has taken on a case, I usually stop paying attention to it. Since I assume that everybody else is the same as me, I'm assuming that nobody else is reading those alerts anymore, and that this sort of active solicitation of help is required.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarcasticidealist (talk • contribs) 17:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be happy to take a look. No, I wasn't paying much attention to either of those discussions, so asking me here is perfectly fine (and I'd never object anyway, even if I was already looking at them.) --Darkwind (talk) 18:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

WQA

Hi Darkwind. Just a quick question about your comment in Dlabtot / Bean. Who was the first part (the "...then it is your problem" part) directed to? I wasn't entirely sure. That said, what's the recommended course of action for users making threats on the etiquette board? --Bfigura ^(talk) 06:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The comment was directed at Mr. Bean. I'm afraid the indents didn't make that very clear. As for his veiled threats, in this particular case there's not much we can do, as it was quite vague. The next place to go is probably AN/I for that kind of thing. --Darkwind (talk) 11:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. I've forwarded it to them and marked it as stuck --Bfigura ^(talk) 13:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Get the abuse report off

Don't show what internet service i use ok i use Roadrunner but don't let people know that!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.178.68.210 (talk) 00:05, September 22, 2007

Sorry, but your ISP is public information that anyone can find out by doing a WHOIS search, as long as they know your IP address. If you want to hide your IP address (and thus your ISP), you'll need to create an account and log into it when doing your edits at Wikipedia. --Darkwind (talk) 01:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Shutterbug matter

That Arbcom case is closed and the admins are no longer accepting evidence. See this: [5] It is a Wikiquette matter now.--Fahrenheit451 02:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, since no decision had been issued, I didn't figure it as closed. I did see the comment you linked, but also didn't interpret that as meaning the case was not accepting such evidence. I still don't think anything nearly as informal as WQA will help in this case with a user who's just recently been brought to arbitration, but if you think it'll help, we can leave him a note as per our normal WQA process. --Darkwind (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

request for help

I saw your edit at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts and note that you said you left a message on an anonymous user (User: 69.123.66.156)'s talkpage. I am having difficulties with an anon editer, and have reported my troubles at Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests. Could you tell me how to leave a message on an anonymous user's page? Many thanks BrainyBabe 13:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Every editor, whether a registered username or an anonymous IP, has a talk page. You'd just go to User talk:127.0.0.1 or whatever the IP is, and leave a message just like you did for me. --Darkwind (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks. I have done this, and it worked. BrainyBabe 18:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Good. Glad I could help! --Darkwind (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Third opinion request

Hi, it'd be nice if rather than de-listing a request for procedural reasons, you'd give your opinion on it. Also, if you're removing the request, it'd be nice if rather than a template response (or in addition to it), you'd explain what the problem is, as I still don't know what it is. I don't think the point of WP:3O was to get people to list requests the way someone wants them to but rather so people can get a third opinion. Yonatan ^talk 00:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't give my opinion on the dispute because I'm already partially biased by the way you listed the dispute -- in this case, the template actually lays out exactly what you did wrong. You signed with your username, so I already knew whose side I was "supposed" to be on (not to say that you have a bias by calling for an opinion, but that's still the way it often works out), and you also included a non-neutral comment about the editor you have a dispute with ("not familiar [with en.wp policy]" etc.) The whole point of 3O is for the person who's giving the opinion to be *completely* neutral about the dispute, which includes not knowing which of the two involved editors has requested outside help. --Darkwind (talk) 01:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and I also felt that in this case it wasn't my place to rewrite your description into something neutral for another editor to review, since I felt I didn't clearly understand the subject matter of the dispute (from your description) and didn't want to place the focus of the third opinion on something you weren't actually disputing. --Darkwind (talk) 01:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

WQA Templates

Cool. Thanks for the info. --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Jennifer Garner

Thanks for the help in dealing with the Jennifer Garner article. Given that DCBA-25 and Gidz are both behind the website in question that they kept insisting on readding to the article (despite it not meeting criteria, even though they claim it does) and both are accusing me of "vandalizing" the page, I think that the same person may be behind both those accounts and is purposely readding the link in bad faith just to cause trouble. Anyway, thanks again for the hand. Creativity-II 00:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

F&P

F&P is n fact a company that supplies parts for Honda, So dont delete it - User: Halo 31887 - 12:47 - October 2,2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

SPUIs

I made some improvements to the Single-point urban interchange page as per your suggestions. When you get back, let me know if it addressed your concerns. Thanks! Alataristarion 21:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Commentary on my contribution to 20-20-20 Club

I'm afraid I must disagree with your incorrect characterization of my dispute with TeganX7 (who has since disappeared if I'm not mistaken). I'll quote you: "However, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Talk:20-20-20 Club".

A) I made edits that were repeatedly deleted on mass.

B) My response was to adhere to your 3-revert rule and forward the issue to the community at large.

C) TeganX7's response to the fact I wouldn't go away despite wholesale deletion of my contributions was to both invent a topic and an article for it. This user ruled over the 20-20-20 article which they created like it was their own personal little fiefdom. They did NO editing until forced to stop wholesale deletions.

D) I assumed good faith, I got deleted. I then made my point more forcefully. I got deleted. I then forwarded the issue to the community as there was no other outlet, save for going in circles and having TeganX7 continue their shenanigans (presumably now under another name).

I inherently assume good faith on the behalf of others. I conclude the lack of good faith only when presented with obvious empirical evidence to the contrary. As I have outlined above, I think the complete and utter lack of good faith on behalf of TeganX7 was more than evident. However, a few have taken offense to things I said, and as such, I'm the bad guy. So be it. Doesn't make the facts any different however. You may have a policy of assuming good faith. It is a perfectly good one. Your admonition of me on this issue, since you have quite incorrectly labeled me as someone who didn't assume good faith has the odor of some sort of rabid political-correctness whereby no one can ever get angry, use sarcasm, or even approach the boundary of writing anything that isn't saccharine in it's politeness. Having taken the road of responding to you in this controlled, polite manner is yet another example of assuming good-faith. I could have assumed you didn't like what I wrote, and looked for a means to categorize it as something verboten so you could admonish me. Now if I really were a loose cannon, what do you suppose my response to such a personal attack on my integrity would have been? Far worse than my disdain for TeganX7's unreasoned behaviour, I can assure you. I hope this settles the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.66.156 (talk) 02:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Dolcett

I think that enttry was one of the best internet references written on the author. You should bring it back. This is supposed to be a good reference, and you seemed to keep random things on wikipedia like all the comic book articles. This was deleted for being not worthy. This subject attracts $1,000 of a month online and more on second life... I would like to discuss this further... mosasaurgirl@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.48.81 (talk) 20:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

One of Wikipedia's core policies is verifiability, which means that there need to be reliable sources to verify the information contained in the article. Unfortunately, while there are many sources available to verify information about most comic books and comic authors (hence why they still have articles), nobody was able to locate sources to verify the information in the now-deleted Dolcett article. If you think you can find information about Dolcett that complies with the three primary Wikipedia policies of verifiability, neutral point of view, and no original research, and the reliable sources guideline, then by all means re-create the article and link to the sources that meet the criteria. --Darkwind (talk) 21:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Glad to talk

Ask on my Talk page if you have any questions about my edits which User:Callmebc is complaining about. (SEWilco 03:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC))

You rock!!

Thank you so much for getting to the bottom of the AVT malfunctioning. As I said on the talk page, I've never been so happy to see profanity on my screen as just now. Hip hip hooray! And now to revert some vandalism... :) ~Eliz81 ^(C) 03:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) --Darkwind (talk) 03:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Mair.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Mair.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rette tast 23:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

24.22.162.156

Hey... I was just suggesting that that picture shall be changed. It looks a bit halloweenish unless that is the idea that your trying to get acrossed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.162.156 (talk) 07:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. Suggest it on the article's talk page (click "discussion" at the top, when you're looking at the article, then click the + to add a new topic to the discussion), not in the article text itself. --Darkwind (talk) 07:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh... hey

Your not a bot???? Are you a actual person typing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.162.156 (talk) 07:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL, yes, I'm a person. --Darkwind (talk) 10:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Anaerobic digestion edits

Hi Darkwind, thanks for your contributions to the ad article. Currently in the process of improving the article for consideration as A class and eventually FA. I've been reading over it that long that I don't necessarily see wording errors so easily--Alex 10:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Darkwind (talk) 19:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Quit deleting the TRUTH

Irina Voronina is married now and should be noted.

Your attempt at censorship violates wikipedia policy.

I am reporting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.60.118.35 (talk) 16:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Please take a moment to read Wikipedia policy before you try to quote it. Wikipedia's policy on verifiability says that you need to cite a reliable source for the information you add. Your addition mentioned MySpace, but that is not a reliable source. Also, your addition was largely not in compliance with the Manual of Style regarding grammar, layout, etc. --Darkwind (talk) 19:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyrights

if u cant copy & paste how do u get on large articles without spending forever typing them?what if i give credit at the bottom?Andrewmeister2 22:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's exactly what you have to do. Just like a school paper, you have to rewrite material into your own words before it can be added to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is "free content," which means not only do you not have to pay for it, but anyone can take material from Wikipedia and do whatever they want with it (basically). For legal reasons, that means we can't accept contributions under copyright, even if you provide attribution. --Darkwind (talk) 22:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I think this might require a little more explanation... Contributing to Wikipedia isn't about copying and pasting text from other websites to make Wikipedia bigger. It's about writing good articles. Yes, actually writing them, from scratch, using sources, like a term paper or research paper. Copy and paste is almost never appropriate, unless the material is public domain or otherwise freely licensed, and even then you can usually find some way to improve it by rewriting parts.

Please see Wikipedia:Introduction for more information on how to contribute positively to Wikipedia. --Darkwind (talk) 22:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

how do i add links from one wiki page to another?Andrewmeister2 18:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Just put [[ ]] brackets around the name of the page; for example, to link to the article on the Earth, you'd type [[Earth]] which will give you Earth. Other basic wiki-formatting tips can be found by clicking "Editing help" next to the row of buttons under any editing box. --Darkwind (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Twinkle

Hello, I recently put twinkle on my monobook, but I'm slightly confused on the usage. If you can break it down for me, that would be awesome. I already look all over the Twinkle page, but whatever information they provided was a little too confusing. Leonard^Bloom 03:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, it depends on what particular action you're trying to perform as to what it does. For example, when you notice vandalism in the article, assuming it's the most recent edit, when you're looking at the diff, there will be a red "rollback (vandalism)" link at the top of the right column (the one that shows the new text). Just click that red link and that edit goes away, with an automatic edit summary that says something like "Reverted 1 edit by 127.0.0.1 identified as vandalism to last version by GoodEditor, using TW".

At the same time Twinkle is rolling back the page, a popup window will automatically open with the vandal's talk page. In that new window, at the top, you'll notice a new "warn" tab. Click that tab, and a mini-popup opens to ask what kind of warning you want to leave, it defaults to "General note" and "{{uw-vandalism}}", the vandalized article should also be filled in, just click submit and the warning message will appear in a moment, already signed and everything. You can give it a try on my talk page if you want to test it out first (I'll make another edit, you ca roll it back as vandalism and leave me a warning, then you can take it off if you want or I'll get to it later). --Darkwind (talk) 10:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that was it, but I'm really unsure. What is the difference between "Undo" and "Rollback: VANDAL"? this is quite confusing, but thank you very, very much sir. Tips hat ado Leonard^Bloom 00:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard^Bloom (talk • contribs)

(EC) Nope. The (undo) link does not and will not trigger Twinkle, since (undo) is part of Wikipedia's own software. The rollback links are what you need to trigger the automatic warning part of TW; also, the rollback link will remove all of the edits that one editor made in a row... like, if 127.0.0.1 makes three edits to the same article that are all vandalism all in a row (like, he puts "screw you" at the top of the page, edits again and deletes a paragraph, and then edits a third time and puts gibberish at the bottom), when you're looking at the diff, the rollback link that Twinkle provides will remove all three of those edits all at once. Try again, make sure you look at the diff by clicking the "last" part of (cur)(last), and hit the "rollback (VANDAL)" this time. :) --Darkwind (talk) 00:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

When I hit the "Rollback (VANDAL) button, I get this message "Reverting page: couldn't grab element "editform", aborting, this could indicate failed respons from the server". What is it and how do I get it to go away? (Because you can play the flute, can you play "Thick as a Brick?) Leonard^Bloom 01:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That just means this particular time you hit the button, the right page didn't come up. Just a temporary error. Hit back, and try again. :) --Darkwind (talk) 05:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I just tried four or five times, and nothing but the error message came up. What, besides the annoying error message, should be coming up? Leonard^Bloom 14:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard^Bloom (talk • contribs)

(unindent) You should be seeing "Reverting page: data loaded...", which will be followed by a message saying it's loading the talk page of the vandal, and then it'll change to say "Reverting page: completed (page name here)" and "Reverting completed: completed" at the bottom; then after another 5 seconds or so it'll reload the original article so you can see the new version.

The fact that you're constantly getting an error suggests a browser error to me. What web browser do you use? Twinkle doesn't work in Internet Explorer, and may be flaky in other browsers from time to time except Firefox - that's the only browser it's tested and guaranteed to work in all the time. --Darkwind (talk) 18:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, your signature doesn't consist of a link to your user page (it's just your username) which confuses signature bots like SineBot (you'll notice it keeps coming along to "sign" your comments here even though you put the ~~~~). Standard practice is to have your username in your signature be a link to your user page. It's probably because you activated raw signatures by mistake. Check your preferences (the link is at the very top) and uncheck "Raw signature" if it's marked off. See WP:SIG#Internal links for the relevant guideline. --Darkwind (talk) 18:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the sig issue, thanks for alerting me to that, I just thought the link wouldn't appear for me because I'm the user. Strange though, I use firefox/opera (I alternate) and I haven't even bothered to use Opera for twinkle. Only FF has given me the error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard^Bloom (talk • contribs) 22:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with Rahma el-Dennaoui. If you do not believe the article should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. -- WebHamster 00:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Um, I didn't create that article myself. Please look a little more closely at the article's history, and then at the CSD template itself, which says "[if] you intend to fix it, please remove this notice". I intend to fix the article, I removed the notice. --Darkwind (talk) 01:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, WP:TEMPLAR. Thanks. --Darkwind (talk) 01:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Rahma

Hey Darkwind

Thanks for your help on the Rahma article. I'm the one who created it. But I just joined Wiki and have absolutely no idea what I'm doing (as is probably apparent)! Let me know what I can do to stop it being deleted and improve it. Other missing children have Wiki entries, so why not this one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leanne153 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

To answer your question, it's precisely because you're new that the article was marked for deletion so quickly. The article didn't have any Wikipedia formatting like internal links, and you didn't cite any references. The references are the most important part, really, since everything on Wikipedia has to be verifiable. Initially when I saw it, I was going to propose it for deletion as a copyright violation, since it looks like you copied some sentences from the Today Tonight article; but, I realized I couldn't really do that in good conscience, since this little girl deserves an article as much as Madeline McCann, and if I could fix up the article with a few minutes of work, then I should take the time to do it. :) --Darkwind (talk) 02:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Very much appreciated - thank you. Ok so now I just need to figure out how to do the references and links, and make sure I put things in my own words : ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leanne153 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm about to leave you a "welcome" message on your own talk page, and it'll have a BUNCH of links to useful information that will help you learn what's expected in Wikipedia articles. One of those things is "signing" your comments on a talk page like this one, by typing ~~~~ at the end of your comment (it turns into your username and time automatically when you save). --Darkwind (talk) 02:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, just what I need : ) Just one more question, the reason given was that Wikipedia is not a missing Person finder - do I have to give another reason then? Leanne153 02:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

In this case, no; I've already added messages to the article's talk page that explain why that's not a valid reason to delete the article. In general, yes, you'd have to explain why you think the reason given in the pink notice doesn't apply to that article (or what you plan to do to fix it). However, in this case, "Wikipedia is not a missing person finder" is NOT a valid reason to delete ANY article immediately, so an admin will eventually happen along and remove the notice. I'd take it off myself, but I've already removed it twice, and don't want to break the three-revert rule. --Darkwind (talk) 02:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Got it. Glad you were here : ) Leanne153 02:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

On the Graig Weich page, he is the director of the IMDB film, all facts are correct.

Hi Darkwind, you do great work here, but Please Do Not Delete Graig Weich page, he is the director of the IMDB film, all facts are correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdactyl (talk • contribs) 07:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if he directed the film, it matters if he's notable. Please see the message I left on your talk page. --Darkwind (talk) 07:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Again, please take time to read the comments regarding notability which I left on your talk page, as well as the notability policy. --Darkwind (talk) 07:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Darkwind 3

Hello Darkwind, That is wonderful that you made it all connect to the similar post, I have been trying to figure out how to do that for weeks now but coudn't which is the only reason why I made the similar pages, but thank you for correcting my mistake on it.

You're welcome. For your reference, it's just a blank page with "#REDIRECT" followed by a space, then the [[link to the article]] you want to redirect to. However, creating excessive redirects is also frowned upon; it's expected that any redirect would be a plausible search term or typo that someone might enter.

Hello Darkwind, thank you for taking the time to explain, though in this case, do to the fact that Graig Weich is notable in his field of comic books and the like (see Todd McFarlane / Spawn & Image Comics listings). He had the top selling independent comic for the month when it came out and was recently featured on 20/20 ABC News and the Howard Stern show for his work, should I mention this information on the post?

Not only should you mention that, but you MUST cite sources in the article which comply with the reliable sources policy that express Mr. Weich's notability. If you don't do so, it will likely be deleted, as everything on Wikipedia has to be verifiable (our readers have to be able to see where we get our information, and it has to be somewhere reliable -- "Because I say so" doesn't count.)

Also, Though the posts are similar, like with Todd McFarlane, the posts connect with each other, so when people search for information about our posts, they may type in either the name of the character or the studio or the name of the artist etc...

Wikipedia has redirects to account for that situation. What I've done is removed the content you copied and pasted, and redirected those article titles to point to the original article about the film. Multiple copies of one article are strongly discouraged and will typically be removed as I just did.

As mentioned, celebrities have appeared in both the film version and comic book version of his work, Donald Faison from NBCs SCRUBS and Rapper Coolio and Dave Prowse of StarWars Fame. After receiving thousands of emails asking much of the same information about this and asking why they can't find us on your web site, we thought it a good idea to post.

Celebrity participation doesn't make your subject notable. What will express notability is coverage in mainstream media, academic coverage such as textbooks or widely-available papers, etc. (For something like science or medicine, I'd add peer-reviewed journals to the list, but that doesn't quite apply here).

Graig Weich and his studio and characters have been featured in almost every comic book magazine (like Wizard Magazine), All Comic Book web sites (I can forward you a list), and as mentioned, on 20/20 ABC News and Howard Stern's Show just to mention a few, so for an independent like himself to break through, to me, deserves a listing.

A transcript of Howard Stern's broadcast might pass muster as a reliable source, and a transcript of the 20/20 appearance is even more likely to. Please provide links to documentation so we can see it.

Also, Spawn is appearing in a cross over with his new comic books.

Again, for that to have any effect on the Wikipedia community's view, you have to cite a source which says so (a newspaper article that mentions it, perhaps an article (not derived from a press release) in the top-selling comics-related magazine, that sort of thing.

Lastly, I have been trying to go back into the pages to edit them, I just posted but when I do, only the Catogories are listed and not any of the text or info I posted, please let me know why the text i posted has vanished from edit page? thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdactyl (talk • contribs) 07:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason is because when you go back to those articles to edit them, you are redirected to the original Ravedactyl: Project Evolution article from which you made the copies. I suggest you improve that article first, then if it becomes excessively long, we can break out information into sub-articles or articles on Mr. Weich himself, etc. --Darkwind (talk) 08:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

5 Help & Thanks Darkwind 5

Hi again Darkwind, Thank you again for all your help, though it still wont let me edit the text on the main Ravedactyl: Project Evolution link, when I hit Edit on it is says: " ==References== {{reflist}} ". What should I do???

That's because you're clicking edit down in the middle of the page. When you click [edit] next to a section heading, that takes you to a page where you just edit that section. If you click the "edit this page" tab at the top, that allows you to edit the whole article.

I will make sure to do as you said and do more re-writes in the morning then to fix it up better. Here are some links where I got the info I mentioned, after reviewing them, if you find it to be notable, can I re-add his name? Press video clips of him on 20/20 & Howard Stern" www.myspace.com/beyondcomics and check out the press section of his web site that has tons of links mentioning the spawn cameo cross over thing and all, at: www.beyondcomicsinc.com

Unfortunately, neither one of those links qualifies as a "reliable source" according to the reliable sources policy, at least as far as establishing notability as I've been referring to. The reason for that is that they're both "self-published" sources. What you need are links published by multiple, independent, reliable sources. The key that you're missing with these two links is "independent". In order to qualify as "notable", other people have to be talking about you, and not just reprinting or paraphrasing material you gave out in a press release. For example, notability would be asserted by an article in the Arts section of the New York Times, and maybe a segment on the G4 TV network since they cover comics and games, or a page from the New York Film Festival's website showing that the film won the award (which would convey notability for the FILM ONLY, not the comic or the author). Notability for the author would be sources like the Times or a reputable art or film magazine talking about how his work has had an impact on the industry, etc.

You noted that there are pages for other comics, authors, and characters on Wikipedia, and that's true; but those pages should only exist if they also meet these criteria. If there are no sources documenting the notability and impact of these creative works or their authors, those pages technically should be deleted, or at least nominated for deletion and then the community will have a discussion.

I hope this helps and also should I just mentioned that he appeared on those shows or list them as sources or something?

What you should do is be discussing the impact these creative works and their authors have had on popular culture and the comics and film industries, etc., in an encyclopedic manner. Basically, a dissertation about the works, but also about what difference they make to society. (Theoretically, if they haven't made such a difference yet, then they might not need articles.) Once you've made these assertions in the article like "Weich revolutionized the industry" or whatever, you'd add a reference tag after that statement which will help link to the source which said that. Instructions for that can be found at Wikipedia:Citing sources.

Lastly, Is there any info on how to upload 1 or 2 pictures of the characters mentioned in the page, but so they appear on the far right of the text, looks like there is some invissable table or soemthing there but Im not sure how to recreate it, Im still searching for help on that. Thanks again, You are the best! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdactyl (talk • contribs) 11:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes and no. Images are a very touchy area when it comes to copyright and licensing. Basically, the best way to go about it (and I'm assuming here that you have the power to do so) is to find good images that you want to use, and release those images as public domain or under a Creative Commons license like CC-BY-3.0, or under the GFDL. Then you would upload those images to Wikimedia Commons and then place them in the article (I'll get to that in a minute). Please note that you (or an organization you have decision power for) must own the image and the rights to it in order to release it under a free content license.

The reason the licensing is important is that Wikipedia articles and images are available for further use by downstream users like answers.com, who mirror and/or redisplay our content for their users. In order for them to redisplay the images legally, they have to be under a free-content license. You could technically upload an ordinary copyrighted image to Wikipedia and claim "fair use" for it, but that's such a gray area that the image could be deleted at any time, and it would never appear on Wikipedia mirror sites. It's far better to find a freely licensed image, or release an image of your own work as a free image.

Either way, once you have an image uploaded, it will have a name like Image:Character name.jpg. Just place an image tag in the article with the name of the image, where it should appear and how big, and an optional caption. For example, [[Image:Character name.jpg|thumb|John Smith, a central character in Pocahontas]] will give the image in a flexible thumbnail size, on the right, with the specified caption. You can also do [[Image:Character name.jpg|thumb|left|A caption goes here]] to have the image appear on the left (although convention says solitary images go on the right). You can even do [[Image:Character name.jpg|400px|left]], but that doesn't give you the nice box with the border and space for a caption.

More help with images is available at Help:Images. Also, I get the strong feeling that you represent or work for/with Beyond Comics. Please take a moment to review our conflict of interest policy, and make sure that you follow its suggestions for avoiding such a conflict. --Darkwind (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The sky is blue

I noticed this mailing list post, where you said: "I wouldn't be surprised to see "The sky is blue.{{fact}}" one day". If you do, why not add what User:Dpbsmith said here back in August 2006? For full impact, I'll quote it here. Carcharoth 14:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

A field guide notes that "the blue sky is so commonplace that it is taken for granted"^[1]. One can go on to add: The poet Robert Service says "while the blue sky bends above/You've got nearly all that matters"^[2] Songwriter Irving Berlin wrote of "Blue Skies smiling at me," airmen fly into the wild blue yonder. But the sky is not always blue. In the Bible, Jesus says to the Pharisees "When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red"^[3]. At twilight, salmon reds, oranges, purples, white-yellows, and many shades of blue can be seen^[4]. And songwriter Oscar Hammerstein's famously wrote of "when the sky is a bright canary yellow."^[5]

References

^ Schaefer, Vincent J. (1998). A Field Guide to the Atmosphere. Houghton Mifflin Field Guides. ISBN 0395976316. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) p. 155
^ Service, Robert (1940). Collected Poems of Robert Service. G. P. Putnam's Sons. ISBN 0-399-15015-3., "Comfort," p. 67
^ The Bible, Matthew 16:2 (King James version)
^ Minnaert, M. G. J. (1993) [1974]. Light and Colour in the Outdoors. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-97935-2. p. 295
^ Bauch, Marc. American Musical. Tectum Verlag. ISBN 382888458X. p. 42

Reply

ROFL. That's great, I'll have to remember that in case I ever see such a tag. :) --Darkwind (talk) 18:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Pathological demand avoidance

This just popped up in my New Page Watcher. As I understand it, title should be in all caps & thus it should not have been moved & redirected. Also, if the concept is notable, shouldn't its author also be notable? I'll leave it for now since you are obviously working on it, but I'll keep an eye on it. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 23:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Most article names should not have capitals in the second or subsequent words per WP:CAPS unless it's a proper noun, and the name of a disorder is not a proper noun. Also, most other disorders are not capitalized when spelled out, even when they are often referred to as an acronym, c.f. PAD -> peripheral artery disease, or ED -> erectile dysfunction. If there's a source that says capitalization is strongly preferred etc., then it can be moved back. --Darkwind (talk) 23:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

7 - thanks, helpful, Darkwind

Hi Darkwind, thank you again, this info is very helpful and I will make sure to email them from that web site to make sure there is no license worries about using one of their images but im sure it is open source. I would like to do my own comics one day too, so I thought this a good place to start learning about this uploading stuff, i met them at the comic con and wondered if i could list them on here when I saw their film listed without much details, I asked them if that is cool and they said yes. I guess i didnt have to ask but figured that would be nice. Anyway, the links in the previous post shows the actual tv clip of them on 20/20 abc news, so I figured that is a good place to site, no? I will look around on their press page as it has direct links to actual magazines and web sites that site them directly from other sources etc. Give me some time to work on it, I'll get back to this over the weekend again after work.

I would also like to post some stuff about an international singer who is not known here in the usa, is that ok? my thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdactyl (talk • contribs) 02:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Zuhair Murad

It has come to my attention that you have recently deleted the Zuhair Murad page. No offense, but you probably do not know too much about fashion and/or cannot afford haute couture. If this is the case, I advise you to visit Zuhair Murad's official website and have a look at the celebrity section. Amongst his patrons are Kelly Clarckson, Christina Aguilera, Ivana Trump and many more. Please get your facts straight. If you were aware of fashion in any way shape or form, I would not have to argue his notability with you....please let someone who knows deal with articles in a subject you seem to know nothing about.

--Lashonda 14:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page, and please refrain from personal attacks. --Darkwind (talk) 07:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Aww I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, that wasn't my intention. I don't know what bollywood has to do with it, since the designer is lebanese...but ok. Please do a google search..or whatever it is you do and explain to me how it is "impossible" to verify the notability of a hollywood fashion designer, what makes him any different from Heatherette who have an article on wikipedia...please explain the difference, what makes them notable..and zuhair murad popular..It was my belief that wikipedia was an international encyclopedia which means if someone is notable somewhere in the world, even though in this case he is also notable in the US, than he has the right to be included. Also, I am glad you shared your opinion with me. I will share mine as well; when you refer to wikipedia as "us" it means you are excluding me, although I myself feel as though I am also a part of wikipedia, so when you thank me for my contribution to your encyclopedia...please keep this in mind...

--Lashonda 18:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

BellCanada stuff

Just to let you know about Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Block of 70.52.172.0/22.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Help with abuse report

I notice you have done abuse reports, and I am still fairly new at it. Would you mind taking a look at the most recent contact here and tell me what I should do? Would I call this actioned? Thanks for your help, - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I've thought about it and don't really think there is anything else that can be done. I am going to mark it as actioned for now. Thanks. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Icy_Tower&diff=prev&oldid=178912422

I undid the revision but didn't do anything about it. Since you undid his last revision, I'm pointing it out to you. Cheers. 128.113.139.187 (talk) 12:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[peterson-1] Schaefer, Vincent J. (1998). A Field Guide to the Atmosphere. Houghton Mifflin Field Guides. ISBN 0395976316. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) p. 155

[2] Service, Robert (1940). Collected Poems of Robert Service. G. P. Putnam's Sons. ISBN 0-399-15015-3., "Comfort," p. 67

[3] The Bible, Matthew 16:2 (King James version)

[4] Minnaert, M. G. J. (1993) [1974]. Light and Colour in the Outdoors. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-97935-2. p. 295

[5] Bauch, Marc. American Musical. Tectum Verlag. ISBN 382888458X. p. 42

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]