| Revision as of 07:25, 19 June 2006 editSnugspout (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users790 edits Just a lower threshold← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:50, 19 June 2006 edit undoSnugspout (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users790 edits →Just a lower thresholdNext edit → | ||
| Line 146: | Line 146: | ||
| Thanks for your comments. Actually, when I vote keep on articles, I don't use my knee at all, although I'm sure many people will view me as a jerk. But I do read the article, and I think about it, and I certainly have not voted keep on your peanuts or anyone else's food... that is your example, not one I have ever voted `keep' on. You have employed an irrelevant exaggeration to evade serious discussion. Indeed I would not bother to vote either way should I find your peanuts as an article, I'd move on to something I viewed as more important. I simply have a very different threshold than many (but not all) Wikipedians when I do decide to vote... I don't think the consequences of the vast space available for text articles on modern data servers have fully percolated through everyone's minds yet. ] 07:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC) | Thanks for your comments. Actually, when I vote keep on articles, I don't use my knee at all, although I'm sure many people will view me as a jerk. But I do read the article, and I think about it, and I certainly have not voted keep on your peanuts or anyone else's food... that is your example, not one I have ever voted `keep' on. You have employed an irrelevant exaggeration to evade serious discussion. Indeed I would not bother to vote either way should I find your peanuts as an article, I'd move on to something I viewed as more important. I simply have a very different threshold than many (but not all) Wikipedians when I do decide to vote... I don't think the consequences of the vast space available for text articles on modern data servers have fully percolated through everyone's minds yet. ] 07:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| Thanks for your further comments. I still believe you are employing exaggeration to evade serious discussion; many if not most of the `delete' votes use much shorter phrases then me, and also many of the `delete' votes are riddled with sloppiness and mistakes. The difference between a `delete' and a `keep' is that implementation of the `delete' flushes the information, so actually, a `delete' should be far more carefully reasoned than a `keep'. I'm sure you've noticed that my keep votes are placed on a very small fraction of all the articles up for discussion. But you are of course entitled to your views, and I am entitled to disagree with you. ] 07:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:50, 19 June 2006
- It's clean-up duty, mopping up after the dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that.
 Archives |
|---|
Some ground rules before you leave a message
- I am not an admin. I did not delete your page or article, nor did I block you. I have, at most, suggested or urged deletion of pages or articles, but I have no power or ability to do so on my own. I'm just an editor.
- This also means, of course, I cannot undelete your page/article, nor unblock you.
- If you are here to make an argument dependent on arcane or convoluted interpretations of Misplaced Pages guidelines or rules, note that Misplaced Pages is not game of nomic nor a court of law. Adherence to common sense and rational argument trumps ruleslawyering, as far as I'm concerned. I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt, thankyouverymuch.
- Do not assume I'm stupid, especially when arguing for something obviously untrue. I do not respond well to having my intelligence insulted.
- Don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams. Do I look like Montel Williams? Do I? NO? Then don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams.
- Please extinguish all cigarettes, as this is a No Smoking page.
- Thank you. -- The Management.
NEW! NOT IMPROVED!
A clean slate to work with. Please post any new messages at the bottom.
1 wrong assumption
I'll let you in on a little secret. I, StitchPedia, am the creator of the Madagascar 3 article. However, I did NOT create the Ice Age 3 & Shrek 4 articles. I only edited them. I apologize if this comment insulted you.
Shane Cubis
Unless you have any objections, I'm going to go ahead and remove the db-repost from the talk page, since it isn't reposted content, but rather discussion related to his notability. Might as well let them discuss it. — TheKMan 07:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Stupid and contagious
This page that you prodded had the prod tag removed by the creator. Thought you might want to know in case you wanted to put it up for AfD. Cheers. youngamerican (talk) 12:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Global Reserve Bank
Hi Calton. I took a bit of a numerical gamble to delete it despite lacking strong numerical support, based mainly on your rebuttal. I tend to ignore the numbers a bit if the arguments are rebutted. When are you going to become admin?Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think you should definitely run. You are a good AfD debater, have lots of experience, and there are massive backlogs for things needing to be deleted. I've deleted 800 in two weeks of sysop, and always more help is needed. All the deletion-processors have disappeared.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Warning this Carlton should never be admin, please God help us to stop that!!!--Swedenborg 06:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Paul Walhus
You noted on Paul Walhus's AfD that you know the guy. How do you know him? I (unfortunately) know him, too. --Davidstrauss 06:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Racial Slur
You made an extreme racial slur on this edit comment: I think an apology is in order, this remark was HIGHLY offensive and TOTALLY uncalled for. TruthCrusader 17:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
language in edit summaries
Please refrain from using the term "Buckwheat" in edit summaries as it is considered a racial slur. Tim! 18:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Global Reserve Bank Deleted..
Hi,
Thanks for your support in this voting... somehow it was deleted and I dont understand how it could be with so many Keep votes and so pore arguments for delete?? Do you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Global_Reserve_Bank --Swedenborg 19:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I still have not got one singel clear and good argument why an excisting Non Governmental Organization like GRB should not be an article on Misplaced Pages? This wikislang and arrogant approch that is followed after a article about GRB that was posted by someone, dont know who, for 5 years before deleted with 2 delete votes... its outside my understanding why this is a problem for some influent Wiki users?.... --Swedenborg 19:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
You still did not get it right?
In the deleting process you wrote: Nope, completely got the point: you're saying something said on a Blogspot blog constitutes some sort of firm evidence that what you claim is true. It isn't the least bit reliable as evidence for anything here, even if the claim were "The sun rises in the east"
Well it was the link from my blog leading to the source and if you would have any slightest knowledge in the subject you would see on that webpage (not the blog) that Global Resource Bank is a NGO with more then 3000 registered users and with registered activites for more then 30 years, that and other evidence of its exicistens should be more then enough for a reason to start buld an article on this NGO.... --Swedenborg 20:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Anti-fanfilm bias?
As regards the proposed deletion of the fanfilm Hidden Frontier, you said: 'Delete A "well-respected and popular fanfilm series" sounds like a contradiction in terms almost. More to the point, how the hell do you measure whether a fanfilm is "well-respected and popular"?'
Your first statement implies that you believe that a fanfilm series cannot possibly be either well-respected, nor popular. I point out that "Grayson", "Batman vs. Predator", and "World's Finest" are all both respected and popular. So is the Star Wars parody "Pink Five".
In answer to your question, if one is unwilling to accept articles by Variety or Columbia University's School of Journalism as indicators of either respect or popularity, then one has to work a little. A relatively easy way is to set up a poll in relatively neutral territory (with respect to the fanfilm under question). A somewhat harder way, but more qualitative, is to do a Google search on the fanfilm in question. There, one notes the number of positive comments vs. negative comments, looks for links pointing to the fanfilm site (or, conversely, to hate sites), read reviews online both good and bad, and using that information, along with the number of hits generated on Google, one can form an opinion as to whether a fan film can be either respected or popular.
One might then share those results with similar researchers to see if there is some sort of concensus between the researchers.
Assuming that your question was not, in fact, rhetorical, that's how I would do it. Your mileage may vary, as the saying goes. JohnWhiting 14:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Re: Dean Lesher and Contra Costa Times
Thanks for your input! I'm still a bit wet behind the ears, and I was wondering about that edit you made to my intro already. I also ran across the edits you made to the CCTimes article, and I have to say, I'm starting to admire you. Anyway, thanks. Luna Santin 09:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Mallory Lewis
I have removed the prod that you put up. I listed MORE than enough proof of her notability (unless you discount being sent by the USO, and the US Airforce on Goodwill visits, or you ignore the big USA Today article). In the future I humbly suggest you do some RESEARCH on the articles you want deleted instead of just firing off your great big gun 'o deletetion. Have a great day! TruthCrusader 06:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Uncivil remarks
If you do NOT stop with the uncivil remarks in response to mine or other editor's comments I will be forced to take this matter to arbitration. TruthCrusader 14:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Cal Dining
Campus-cruft? I wrote a comment on the talk page in response to this comment. Also I was not using the nitpicking of the nomination to defend the article, merely pointing it out. I beleive the article can stand on its own notability, please do go back and take a look before you write it off as "campus cruft." You will find the newest version here. Please note the sources citied, such as the Contra Costa Times, a legitimate news source and an article on wiki that even you have edited. Thanks for listening and I really do appreaciate your comments, as I am a new editor and still figuring out the ropes. Presidank 04:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I am not saying that the article should be kept or deleted because other "unimportant" articles exsist, I am saying please consider those for deletion as well. And did you honestly read the entire article? Presidank 05:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
A new hobby, perhaps?
I can tell you're lonely and need something to do, but maybe you should take up something other than flaming / trolling? You're a grown man, right? Maybe you ought to get a wife you can yell at or something. Or perhaps you can get a dog you can beat up.
Director templates
They were basically speedied (slowly) following ]. (Looks like another has risen from the dead also.) But that was almost a year ago, and the templates have lived undamaged for some months now, so I'm reluctant to speedy them again. That said, the arguments for deletion remain valid: they are categorified and, if the templates were completed, they'd be in the Massive Ungainly Excuse for Content class. So perhaps a new TfD? (And, oh my god, we should forbid the use of black in templates, immediately.) -Splash - tk 12:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Tag
Hi Calton,
Changes have been made in the Biopsychiatry controversy article. Perhaps you may want to remove the OR tag?
—Cesar Tort 05:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Hi again. Further context changes have been done to the article, which doesn’t contain Original Research. It’s time to remove the OR tag. Any objections? —Cesar Tort 01:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Banned from Craigslist
Are you the Chad Alton who keeps getting banned from Craigslist? N. Harmon 22:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Opps, wrong person. Seriously I know someone on a different website whose name is Chad Alton, and he is a pretty cool guy except he keeps getting banned from Craigslist. You're not him. I wonder if he uses Misplaced Pages. Anyway....um...thats my momma! N. Harmon 13:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Just a lower threshold
Thanks for your comments. Actually, when I vote keep on articles, I don't use my knee at all, although I'm sure many people will view me as a jerk. But I do read the article, and I think about it, and I certainly have not voted keep on your peanuts or anyone else's food... that is your example, not one I have ever voted `keep' on. You have employed an irrelevant exaggeration to evade serious discussion. Indeed I would not bother to vote either way should I find your peanuts as an article, I'd move on to something I viewed as more important. I simply have a very different threshold than many (but not all) Wikipedians when I do decide to vote... I don't think the consequences of the vast space available for text articles on modern data servers have fully percolated through everyone's minds yet. snug 07:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your further comments. I still believe you are employing exaggeration to evade serious discussion; many if not most of the `delete' votes use much shorter phrases then me, and also many of the `delete' votes are riddled with sloppiness and mistakes. The difference between a `delete' and a `keep' is that implementation of the `delete' flushes the information, so actually, a `delete' should be far more carefully reasoned than a `keep'. I'm sure you've noticed that my keep votes are placed on a very small fraction of all the articles up for discussion. But you are of course entitled to your views, and I am entitled to disagree with you. snug 07:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)