| Revision as of 07:38, 13 November 2006 editPgk (talk | contribs)20,534 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:00, 13 November 2006 edit undoFethers (talk | contribs)1,620 edits CommentNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| : OK, I'll leave things in place for a while yet, just in case you change your mind. Though a couple of points you seem to have taken a reasonably agressive stance in defending the article, it shouldn't as too much of a suprise when others then agressively defend their viewpoint. People make genuine mistakes, if a server wasn't available for some reason (even be it a problem with their own ISP) they may draw the wrong conclusion, jumping up and down about it is unlikely to help, politely asking them to check again as it works fine for you is likely to get a better response. I understand your reasoning for posting the article, but really wikipedia doesn't work like that, a network of 150 people is not likely to be seen as of general interest to wikipedia's readership, certain .wikipedia channels regularly attract many more than that, let alone the whole network. Some of this comes back to what I said above, ] and if it comes across as that being the only value the article adds then you aren't likely to get much support There are millions of websites, blogs, forums etc. the regular users of which are often convinced provides a service unique in some manner, but generally only appealing to a certain "market" doesn't actually make it unique enough to be of general interest in it's existance. --] 07:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC) | : OK, I'll leave things in place for a while yet, just in case you change your mind. Though a couple of points you seem to have taken a reasonably agressive stance in defending the article, it shouldn't as too much of a suprise when others then agressively defend their viewpoint. People make genuine mistakes, if a server wasn't available for some reason (even be it a problem with their own ISP) they may draw the wrong conclusion, jumping up and down about it is unlikely to help, politely asking them to check again as it works fine for you is likely to get a better response. I understand your reasoning for posting the article, but really wikipedia doesn't work like that, a network of 150 people is not likely to be seen as of general interest to wikipedia's readership, certain .wikipedia channels regularly attract many more than that, let alone the whole network. Some of this comes back to what I said above, ] and if it comes across as that being the only value the article adds then you aren't likely to get much support There are millions of websites, blogs, forums etc. the regular users of which are often convinced provides a service unique in some manner, but generally only appealing to a certain "market" doesn't actually make it unique enough to be of general interest in it's existance. --] 07:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ==From Pgk's talk page, because it's not appropriate there== | |||
| ::Sigh, I was connected to the server the whole time, I could provide logs of server uptime if requested. If this isn’t enough or if I am not a reliable enough resource then I could have the server admins provide this information. But why? The article is going to get deleted anyway. | |||
| ::You seem to have a problem reading what others say fethers. Let me explain so you understand, ill make it really easy for you. | |||
| :: I said "then he lies about topics and server status". Which was in response to you saying "and overall the server itself is down and there's some notice that they're going down "and we're not getting sued, we just can't talk about it." | |||
| ::Firstly if the server is down how can you read a notice from a down server? I think you are quoting the channel topic from searchirc. The notice in question was never what you said it was when you quoted it verbatim, lie right there. It was never even a server notice, it was a channel topic (which you couldn’t see if you where not connected) so you copied it from a website. | |||
| ::Your entire statement is either a lie, or you are so new to IRC you are incapable of telling the difference between a channel topic and a server notice, which would explain your connectivity problems. You say you tried to connect via a java client, then when that failed you tried again from home with another java client I assume. It is clear you lack knowledge of irc. I would bet money you didn’t try to connect at all or if you did you didn’t try with the right port or server address. Even if you did try to connect (but how can I believe you, when you tell such obvious lies) just because you cannot connect with a java client, doesn’t mean the server is down. | |||
| ::My reference to you lying is clear, you lied about a server notice that you quoted when it was never a server notice it was a topic in one channel, hardly representative of a whole server. You also lied about what the notice said. You inferred we cannot talk about why we are not getting sued when you falsely quoted this message as saying “and we're not getting sued, we just can't talk about it” The channel topic never said that, it said “Before you ask, no we are not getting sued or threatened” which means quite a different thing, I am sure you are quite aware of this. | |||
| ::Fethers take a word of advice from someone a lot older than you, don’t call peoples articles crap for any reason, be professional when you criticize articles or other peoples work. The quote from your talk page “Misplaced Pages's not for spamming your crap IRC channel” speaks volumes about your level of professionalism. It wasn’t even an IRC channel, if you read the article you would see that. Also don’t quote channel topics as server notices when they are not and don’t quote something verbatim that isn’t true as if it was. | |||
| ::I suppose I am expecting too much from you. I am expecting you to see things from a more mature vantage point when you are still a very young man who thinks that misrepresenting the truth is ok, it isn't. I suppose to be old and wise you must first be young and foolish? ] 17:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ph-woar. Way to assume that because I call a spade a spade I must be young. I'd figure I'm older than you are, but you're too busy going off about your IRC server that you feel is ''so'' valuable to the whole world. The world is ], if you'd like to unplug from IRC long enough to go and attend a UFC match or 10. As to my r337 IRC skilz, I assure you I've been much more busy moderating servers on Undernet and even being a Misplaced Pages admin for a while (ooh, '''SHUDDER'''!). Most of the reason I've gone and called your crap article crap is because it is, and it was. It was no more than you admitted: a 150-person server (not a "network" because that, again, implies multiple servers). You had no references, and you admit that you put it up there 'to let people know about it," which is advertising, which, according to the rules around here, is wrong. | |||
| :::By the by, the java clients I used were both the ones on SearchIRC, which you purport to be the be all and end all of your statistics and verification for your guys-mounting-and-punching-other-guys chat server. My own personalized, scripted copy of mIRC couldn't find your server on the default ports given on SearchIRC. You might want to get around to updating that. | |||
| :::It was pointed out to you before to attack the article and the argument, not the person. You'll notice that I've never attacked you personally (well...up until about a minute ago with that "unplug yourself from IRC" dig, but I digress). Take a deep breath and step away from your keyboard. Or grapple it into submission. A little Ken-Shamrock-style Pancrase whoop-de-doo with a finger in the ear for good measure, you know? Or something. You get this bent out of shape because of a crappy article (again, THE ARTICLE is crap, not you), you shouldn't be around here anyway. Too sensitive and shit. ] 21:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:00, 13 November 2006
Ufc-pride
It was deleted since it didn't make a claim of notability, nor does it seem to be of any particular significance. Being apparently a single server with a limited number of users. wikipedia is not an internet directory, pointing to other articles you believe are worse is seldom a good argument. I have however restored the article for now and will put it through the full deletion process to get broader input. --pgk 15:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes you are welcome to continue editing the article while the deletion process goes on (except for blanking it or removing the deletion notice) --pgk 15:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I'll leave things in place for a while yet, just in case you change your mind. Though a couple of points you seem to have taken a reasonably agressive stance in defending the article, it shouldn't as too much of a suprise when others then agressively defend their viewpoint. People make genuine mistakes, if a server wasn't available for some reason (even be it a problem with their own ISP) they may draw the wrong conclusion, jumping up and down about it is unlikely to help, politely asking them to check again as it works fine for you is likely to get a better response. I understand your reasoning for posting the article, but really wikipedia doesn't work like that, a network of 150 people is not likely to be seen as of general interest to wikipedia's readership, certain .wikipedia channels regularly attract many more than that, let alone the whole network. Some of this comes back to what I said above, wikipedia is not an internet directory and if it comes across as that being the only value the article adds then you aren't likely to get much support There are millions of websites, blogs, forums etc. the regular users of which are often convinced provides a service unique in some manner, but generally only appealing to a certain "market" doesn't actually make it unique enough to be of general interest in it's existance. --pgk 07:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
From Pgk's talk page, because it's not appropriate there
- Sigh, I was connected to the server the whole time, I could provide logs of server uptime if requested. If this isn’t enough or if I am not a reliable enough resource then I could have the server admins provide this information. But why? The article is going to get deleted anyway.
- You seem to have a problem reading what others say fethers. Let me explain so you understand, ill make it really easy for you.
- I said "then he lies about topics and server status". Which was in response to you saying "and overall the server itself is down and there's some notice that they're going down "and we're not getting sued, we just can't talk about it."
- Firstly if the server is down how can you read a notice from a down server? I think you are quoting the channel topic from searchirc. The notice in question was never what you said it was when you quoted it verbatim, lie right there. It was never even a server notice, it was a channel topic (which you couldn’t see if you where not connected) so you copied it from a website.
- Your entire statement is either a lie, or you are so new to IRC you are incapable of telling the difference between a channel topic and a server notice, which would explain your connectivity problems. You say you tried to connect via a java client, then when that failed you tried again from home with another java client I assume. It is clear you lack knowledge of irc. I would bet money you didn’t try to connect at all or if you did you didn’t try with the right port or server address. Even if you did try to connect (but how can I believe you, when you tell such obvious lies) just because you cannot connect with a java client, doesn’t mean the server is down.
- My reference to you lying is clear, you lied about a server notice that you quoted when it was never a server notice it was a topic in one channel, hardly representative of a whole server. You also lied about what the notice said. You inferred we cannot talk about why we are not getting sued when you falsely quoted this message as saying “and we're not getting sued, we just can't talk about it” The channel topic never said that, it said “Before you ask, no we are not getting sued or threatened” which means quite a different thing, I am sure you are quite aware of this.
- Fethers take a word of advice from someone a lot older than you, don’t call peoples articles crap for any reason, be professional when you criticize articles or other peoples work. The quote from your talk page “Misplaced Pages's not for spamming your crap IRC channel” speaks volumes about your level of professionalism. It wasn’t even an IRC channel, if you read the article you would see that. Also don’t quote channel topics as server notices when they are not and don’t quote something verbatim that isn’t true as if it was.
- I suppose I am expecting too much from you. I am expecting you to see things from a more mature vantage point when you are still a very young man who thinks that misrepresenting the truth is ok, it isn't. I suppose to be old and wise you must first be young and foolish? Brettybabe 17:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ph-woar. Way to assume that because I call a spade a spade I must be young. I'd figure I'm older than you are, but you're too busy going off about your IRC server that you feel is so valuable to the whole world. The world is your thing with pearls in it, if you'd like to unplug from IRC long enough to go and attend a UFC match or 10. As to my r337 IRC skilz, I assure you I've been much more busy moderating servers on Undernet and even being a Misplaced Pages admin for a while (ooh, SHUDDER!). Most of the reason I've gone and called your crap article crap is because it is, and it was. It was no more than you admitted: a 150-person server (not a "network" because that, again, implies multiple servers). You had no references, and you admit that you put it up there 'to let people know about it," which is advertising, which, according to the rules around here, is wrong.
- By the by, the java clients I used were both the ones on SearchIRC, which you purport to be the be all and end all of your statistics and verification for your guys-mounting-and-punching-other-guys chat server. My own personalized, scripted copy of mIRC couldn't find your server on the default ports given on SearchIRC. You might want to get around to updating that.
- It was pointed out to you before to attack the article and the argument, not the person. You'll notice that I've never attacked you personally (well...up until about a minute ago with that "unplug yourself from IRC" dig, but I digress). Take a deep breath and step away from your keyboard. Or grapple it into submission. A little Ken-Shamrock-style Pancrase whoop-de-doo with a finger in the ear for good measure, you know? Or something. You get this bent out of shape because of a crappy article (again, THE ARTICLE is crap, not you), you shouldn't be around here anyway. Too sensitive and shit. Fethers 21:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)