Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:03, 31 December 2007

Welcome to Judgesurreal777's talk page. Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header==. If you're new to Misplaced Pages, please see Welcome to Misplaced Pages and frequently asked questions. Click here to leave me a message Talk page guidelines Please respect Etiquette, assume good faith and be nice.

Archives Archive 01 (February 2006-July 2006) Archive 02 (July 2006 - December 2006) Archive 03 (January 2007 - May 2007) Archive 04 {June 2007 - October 2007)

Notability of Gyro Gearloose

I'd like to ask you to post an explanation for your decision to add a notability tag to Gyro Gearloose on its talk page. As indicated by the Duck Tales table, Gyro is a main character in the said series (and by far not only in that branch of the whole Duckburg franchise), so I fail to see why it shouldn't stay on Misplaced Pages. If you think the article does not pose an adequate/incomplete portrait/biography or fails to satisfy Wikipedias standards, I would choose another template. I've added an expansion template since the article could certainly be improved. Thanks in advance! Saxbryn (talk) 21:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AgeofempireskingsDS.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AgeofempireskingsDS.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ρх₥α 00:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done — H₂O —  00:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Mon Calamari cruiser

I gave the lead a minor rewrite to expand the content. You may want to look it over as I'm not that familiar with the topic. Hope it helps. (Guyinblack25 07:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC))

Kingdom Hearts Featured Topic

		The Original Barnstar
		This Barnstar is for the help you've given in the maintenance and progression of the various articles in the Kingdom Hearts Featured Topic. Thanks for the advice and feedback on the articles over the past half year. I really had little idea what to do with articles when starting on the first KH game article. Now the topic is 9 articles with 4 FA, 1 FL, and one more on the way to FA. Your help is remembered and appreciated. (Guyinblack25 23:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC))

LOTD proposal

You either voted on the original list of the day proposal or the revised version. A more modest experimental proposal is now at issue at WP:LOTDP. Feel free to voice your opinion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge of Unforgivable curses

I attempted to megre the information to Magic (Harry Potter)#Unforgivable Curses however having never really attempted a major merge before I fear I may have botched it. Any chance you could help clean up my mess? ]

Harry Potter

Please stop nominating every Harry Potter acticle that you come across for deletion. Some people like that series, although you apparently do not.--Cartman005 02:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Joseph McCarthy

Please don't make contentious edits like this without discussing them on the Talk page. The edit you replaced had two major problems: First, it included an unattributed opinion that, although representative of a minority view, was presented as fact. Second, it included a paragraph of information about Kim Philby et al, that had absolutely nothing relevant to McCarthy. Doing a knee-jerk revert of such a problematic edit for no other reason than that it appeared to promote a pro-McCarthy view is not constructive, and gives the appearance of being deliberately disruptive. RedSpruce 16:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Privilege of Peerage

Left comments on the FAR page. Regards, DrKiernan 17:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Over tagging

There was a page i created (beside the point) in which you over tagged. Please tag carefully. It is hard to keep up with backlog, when people are trying to keep it clean. Overtagging does nothing good to an article and is unnecessary. PLease when you tag, also be very descriptive in the talk page as to the purpose of the tag. I am going to redo some work on that article you just tagged (dragon aspect) then untagg them. I spend about 5 hours per day on trying to clean up backlog. Again, please "Tag with care". --businessman332211 01:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, overtagging is unhelpful sometimes, but at most, I put 3 very specific tags; no references, since they had none, in universe, since they were written in a fan-oriented way, and sometimes notability, which is a very valid tag for many of those articles as they are very obscure and are of questionable notability. Much beyond that I agree with you, too many is unhelpful, but I put the ones I put for a reason. Judgesurreal777 01:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You can keep the conversation here. I have it watched, and after it's over I will port a copy over to my talk page for reference. However, there are some things I would like to speak about. I created this article (normally the ones I create are) based off of the request list. I look through there and find one's I am interested in and create them. This one seemed interesting so I created it. It does have "references" So I might remove that one later. I have all the available references. Aside from that could you be so kind as to co-work on this article with me to fix "notability" and "in-universe perspective". I am pretty sure since you tagged it that you had in your mind thougths. Can you work "with me" on getting it to the proper status, or perhaps co-edit it with me to get it to where it need's to be. Please respond here and after the entire conversation is over I will let you know specifically that I am unwatching the page, and at that point I will port this entire conversation on my talk page for reference. Or if you wish to carry this conversation on my talk page please port the entire thing (header and all) there and then respond. Thanks --businessman332211 01:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you list the specific articles that your are referring to? I tagged many, so perhaps you could list them here, or provide some examples so we can speak specifically. Judgesurreal777 02:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The specific one I am speaking of is Dragon Aspect It's one I created from the request list. --businessman332211 02:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here is a good example; Padme Amidala. This is an example of a featured article relating to something fictional. Or this one Master Chief (Halo), or this one Jack Sparrow. As you will see from examining them, they have whole sections on how this concept originated, how it was designed, what the creation process entailed, and what popular reaction did it have. Dragon Aspect has none of those things, and that's because it's probably not notable, and notability basically means it has all of the things I just listed. The Universe of Warcraft probably has enough to become a featured article, but all the sub articles from the fictional universe probably shouldn't have their own articles because they can't meet these requirements. That is why I tagged it that it needs references to real world analysis of the article in order to show it has notability. I hope that helps. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. That makes sense. The hardest policy is the in-universe policy/guideline. It's the hardest one for me to grasp. I am working on it. I am goign to rewrite part of the article this week. Try to locate some interviewers with the original writer's, or see if I can find some concept ideas on how it was created or whatever else. For reference I am taking this page off my watch list, I am porting this conversation over to my talk page. If you happen to need anything after this then put it on my talk page and I will get back asap. --businessman332211 (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Warcraft

First, thanks for helping clean up all the Warcraft articles. (Trying not to say Warcruft!) Some of your recent AFDs are not complete, though. For example, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Lord Perenolde is missing the template that categorizes it. Did you make them by hand instead of using {{Afd2}}? Pagrashtak 15:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

In fact I did, I didn't know about that other one. What are the benefits of using afd2 template? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

It does some standard formatting, such as using the {{La}} template to present the edit/talk/history/etc. links, and also adds the {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD}} template, which will categorize the AFD. See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Onyxia for an example. After you add the {{Afd1}} template to an article, there will be a link for "preloaded debate" if you haven't made the subpage yet that will put everything in place for you. Pagrashtak 15:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Ghostbusters (franchise)

It doesn't look bad. I'm not sure what I can do with it though. I've got a few ideas to slightly reorganize and copy edit it, but that's it. Unfortunately I haven't yet gotten my feet wet enough with articles other than video game ones, but I'll look it over some and see what I can do. (Guyinblack25 16:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC))

Hey, I've looked over the article some more and I have some ideas I think will clean up the article, however I'm not sure how well they will be taken. A lot of it will involve removing some headings (mainly to organize everything and reduce the lengthen of the ToC) similar to the "Main games" section of the Kingdom Hearts (series) article. This mainly applies to the "Technology", "Movies", and "Television shows" sections. The video game section can probably stay as they are since most don't have their own article. Along with that I'll go through and do some copy editing to the text, try to trim down any in-universe info. If you think these changes might be too drastic, let me know and I'll hold off on them. As far as referencing everything, I'm not sure how to help with that. I'm not familiar with the reliable sources used for TV and movies. (Guyinblack25 17:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC))

When nominating articles for deletion via AFD...

Please use Template:afd2 as described at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion. I have manually repaired a number of your nominations that appear to have been written directly to a new page rather than using this template. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, remember me?

I've been looking at what you wrote, and frankly I have no reason to believe the Homestar Runner character articles should've been merged. There is a TON of relevant, encyclopedic, out of universe information that was lost in the merge that can VERY easily be sourced. And at the very least, Strong Bad has pop culture notability. When you merged the articles, you removed this info, and frankly, I'm a little upset by this. :) --Sir Crazyswordsman 02:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Monty Python Deletions

Good morning. While clearing closed and unsorted debates from the Articles for Deletion Categories, I came across your Monty Python-related deletion nominations. I note that some were sorted as Games and Sports (Code G) and some were sorted as Media and Music (Code M). In an effort to keep the debates sorted correctly, I moved the debates for Trojan Rabbit, Brother Maynard, Patsy, Prince Herbert, and Concorde to the Fiction and the Arts category (Code F). In most cases, characters and elements from Film and Television (and performing arts such as theatre) are added to this category - unless the article is on the format or medium itself (i.e. DVD), in which case it goes to Media. This has the added advantage of keeping all of your noms sorted together, which should help interested editors find related debates. Hope this helps and - as an added note - thank you for helping to clear some of the cruft out of the Monty Python articles. Best, ZZ ~ Evidence 15:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Popups malfunction

I suspect you're having a popups (see ). If not, please be sure that the intermediate edits you are reverting truly are vandalism. One editor even posted to the talk page explaining his/her edit, with good reasons. Cheers, 71.182.215.210 (talk) 02:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's another one: . Might want to get those popups issues looked into.  ;-) 71.182.215.210 (talk) 02:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Blade Runner Link farm

What is a link farm, and how did that apply to Blade Runner? Notable fan sites were included as they do provide a "unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." - RoyBoy 02:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Two things

Firstly, you might want to consider gettings WP:TWINKLE, if only to nominate for deletion. As others have pointed out to you, you have not nominated some articles correctly. For instance Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Patsy (Monty Python). If you look in the history, you will not that the article had already been put up for deletion, and you over wrote the past one, creating a bit of a mess. Twinkle just makes things easier in that respect. Secondly, you might want to archive this page. It's getting exceedingly long. I (talk) 04:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Extremely. There is a button at the top, , and you just click which, (AfD CfD TfD etc.), categorize it, and add a summary. It automatically lists it, and notifies the original contibuter. I (talk) 22:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I (talk) 23:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

AFD again

What's going on with Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nirn and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nirn (2nd nomination)? Pagrashtak 22:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it more or less. Pagrashtak 22:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Like I said in the edit summary, they should be dealt with in a different fashion rather than just obliterating all of them. While some of these just don't plain need to exist, some do in some other form. I wanted the Elder Scrolls project to take care of this. ♣ Klptyzm ♣ 22:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

True, sadly enough. I started a discussion a good while back about these articles and no one did jack crap about it. I hate to say it, but if no one else even wants to look into it, I probably won't do crap either. ♣ Klptyzm ♣ 22:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I hear that. When I get some time, I'll help out with that as much as I can. ♣ Klptyzm ♣ 23:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

Hi! I see you edited a lot on that article. Anyway, I am curious what your thoughts on the whole matter were? If you would be so kind as to send me an emnail (as it probably isn't relevant enough to the project to discuss online), I am curious in your opinion and thoughts. Thanks! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 23:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Elder Scrolls

I have no idea where that came from. At one time my account was shared, but this is no more. Go ahead and get rid of it. I wish I had known. Thanks. :: RatedR 00:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The Elder Scrolls

Good work on all those AFDs! It must have been hell filling out the paperwork. All for the better, I suppose. Also, please AFD/Prod Argonian and Black Marsh as well; I wrote them, I know that there's no real-world information supportable by reliable sources. There's only one real third-party source, the Argonian Compendium, and it's from a "fansite" so most reviewers shouldn't like it. Most of the other "real-world" information is OR. I appreciate that you've nominated for GA, but I don't think that either Argonian or Black Marsh deserve full articles ATM. Thanks! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 00:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Yay! There's some Setting info in the current Oblivion article that could make its way quite easily into such an article. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 17:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Your disruption

Hey, why don't you actually put some effort into saving information rather than destroying it? Copy it into other wikis and then turn the articles into redirects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alertother (talk • contribs) 18:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Your username

Hey, sorry if it's off-topic, but just out of curiosity, are you a real judge? (In my own world I am a Great Pumpkin King, but in reality, I am a teacher and historian). Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 21:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Afd

Is there a logical reason to tell me about an Afd twice? I didn't even create the article. It was moved to another location then later someone pasted it over the re-direct. - Quolnok (talk) 05:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of United States of Earth

United States of Earth, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that United States of Earth satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and the Misplaced Pages deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/United States of Earth and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of United States of Earth during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

A good area to look through

As I've seen you nominate video game article in the past, I thought I would suggest an area to go through: Category:Video game stubs. I slowly go through what I can, but I simply don't have enough time. There is some good content in it, but there is a lot of things that could just be redirected, merged and/or deleted as well. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Requesting to leave me be

Hello, Judgesurreal777, I really couldn't care less what happens to all The Elder Scrolls articles anymore, since I left the project and the pages in care of other people. So would you please kindly stop posting AfD messages on my talk page? I'm getting tired of deleting them. --Koveras  06:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I would like to assure you that nothing has changed in my attitude towards TES articles over the past ten days. :) --Koveras  19:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

afds

I know we disagree about some of the articles, but there is no question that much of what you are sending Afd should get deleted or merged. But the workload there is getting excessive--I try to keep up and make comments on a few, but it's faster to nominate than to defend. (At least if one is going to defend intelligently, not just paste a response to everything. As you know, i try never to do that.) If you want to encourage sensible work there, perhaps you could try smaller batches. If you do have consensus, it wont hurt if they go a little more slowly and it would show more regard for those who make think differently, rather than give the appearance of trying to overwhelm them.

I also wonder if you couldnt avoid some of this by simply merging. DGG (talk) 02:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

If articles have no notability, there is no reason to merge. And besides, there are people like you who disagree with merging since content is lost, so that route is often blocked. Judgesurreal777 22:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying not to debate them here, we have AfD for that, but to work something out with you, as I assume neither you nor I (nor anyone else) want to spend all our time with AfD on these. We won't agree on everything, but maybe there are some things we can agree about. In this case, I suggest it is better to merge articles on individual minor characters and places into larger articles comprehending all the minor characters (or places) in a game (etc.) , rather than short or long articles on each of them. surely we agree on that much? I think others would also, & that would get the short individual articles out of afd altogether.

Well, I think a project we can work on would be the merging of the 60+ Mortal Kombat characters, as I dont really want to fight a horde of MK fans over their individual notability over 60 AFDs! :) That would be very worth while, since the MK wikiproject created a lot of these articles and we can bring the topic down to a rationale number. Judgesurreal777 16:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The next question is whether to merge everything into a single article on the game, etc. (But if people interpret merge as delete, we won't get anywhere. If people interpret merge as keep everything, we won't either.) For minor games & the like , I think its a good idea. For those important enough to have books written about them, I think there will usually be too much material for that. some will reasonably go one way, some the other. If some of us dont try to combine them all regardless or size or merit, and others don't try to separate them all, regardless of size or merit, maybe we will need only a few friendly discussions about where the line is in the middle. Its the dogmatic insistence on keeping everything or deleting everything, which is the problem. If people try to make & keep as many articles on as possible, it's reasonable for others in a reaction to try to delete the whole batch, seeing most of it will be indefensible. If people try to delete everything as unencyclopedic, then tits only to be expected that others will in reaction defend them all, to prevent losing everything.
On other conflicts also, I see insisting on the rightness of one's own position and being unwilling to compromise that causes problems. As i see it, even when right, it pays to compromise to avoid wasting energy in conflict. How about you? DGG (talk) 05:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I withdrew one of the AFD's after the author proved the notability of the article in discussion. I feel that merger is so easily undone, And many times I have merged things and people who don't understand simply revert it and its back again. The beauty of this process is that bad articles stay gone, and it sticks much better than redirecting. I agree, where people are reasonable and understand policy, redirecting is a good idea, building consensus for merging and such. But I am increasingly finding that the process is obstructed by people who don't understand policy, and AFD is much less prone to that. Judgesurreal777 05:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

List of wonders in Civilization

DGG has removed the prod. If you want to kill it, you'll have to go through a formal AfD. Sorry. (Heck, I spend hours playing the game some nights, and I think this and similar articles are fancruft and should be deleted.) --Orange Mike | Talk 05:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I used to also--until I found a much better,which is WP--which came just in time as I had optimized my favorite scenarios as far as they were going to get. My idea of the level of content is that necessary to understand the games-- the details are learned from the manual. The basic types of wonders and civilizations define the overall structure--they are not excessive or unencyclopedic detail. This is a good sort of combination article. DGG (talk) 11:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Futurama deletions

Ugh. I support your work, but something tells me it's all for nothing. I tried to argue against the wave of keep votes in List of planets in Futurama, but as usual they end up snarky and bitter. I was thinking about an article such as Fictional universe of Futurama that would incorporate elements of all the Futurama plot articles, but it would be far too much work. Oh well. --Teggles 08:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. It involves effort. It's much easier to flag extensive articles for deletions in droves and get a pat on the back from other vets and admins than it is to actually improve upon or merge the articles. RobJ1981 even suggested to him where to look to get free brownie points in a few topics back.

Here's another way for FREE brownie points! Images now require a redundant fair use rationale. Well, since the rule is newer, a lot of images that were completely within the rules in 2004 and 2005 are free game to be deleted! A lot of the image uploaders won't even be around to contest it, because the hostile isolationist vets scared them off at one point! ShakespeareFan00 torched tens of thousands of useful images this way, and is now well on his way to being an admin! Isn't that GREAT!?!?!?! Why delete lesser-known articles when you can cripple a ton of important ones with little resistance!? Go, gobble gobble those points! Keep wikipedia 'clean'! 75.65.91.142 15:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Teggles, even if you did this--it would probably be nominated for deletion anyway. that may be why you really hold back, and I don't blame you. . DGG (talk) 06:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletions of more articles

What is the point of deleting fictional articles such as Myst V:End of Ages may I ask? Is it to gain brownie points, whilst avoiding any work? Sure looks that way to me. ToriaURU 05:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Debbie, do you really believe that two sentence articles on towns next to Duckberg are notable and reflect well on wikipedia? Judgesurreal777 05:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you contribute something USEFUL to wikipedia? Do some research yourself and merge some articles instead of DELETING stuff others have spent time on and sweated on? THEN tell me that articles are useless. ToriaURU 05:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Umm, look at the page of accomplishments, where I keep track of either articles or images I have contributed to; it may not be overwhelming, but I do what I can. And besides, deleting bad articles is crucial to keep wikipedia from being filled with bad articles. Would you prefer I keep all of peoples "hard work", and let wikipedia suck? Judgesurreal777 05:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not a pissing match to see who has the 'bigger contributions'. From your last 500 edits, you are clearly putting forth minimal effort and focusing all your energy to ruin articles while failing to properly justify why exactly the article should go. WP:JNN and WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC in the nom isn't good enough. You just throw it out there and hope someone else will put in a decent amount of effort in their delete vote to try and translate your weak nomination into a proper deletion reason. 75.65.91.142 23:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Be civil, or expect to be at Misplaced Pages a very short time. Insulting me will get you no where, and I am not afraid to stand behind my contributions. And by the way, either use policy to argue, or don't contribute, as you simply disrupt discussion. Judgesurreal777 03:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

why not do as I--remove the very worst stratum, and try to improve the others. its not good vs evil as a dichotomy. DGG (talk) 06:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

You have a very good model there, but I think I do the same thing, only there is a lot of junk. Another model user is User:Guyinblack25, who combined all the Kingdom Hearts characters into one article, which will probably soon be a Featured article. The nice thing about his situation is that he didn't have a horde of fanboys shouting at him every time he merged and trimmed content, and reverting his redirects. That's why I think we need to start a proposal to create an "Article for Redirection/Merger" so that we can have definitive decisions on whether something is to be merged or not. Judgesurreal777 06:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I was the one who finally got most of the Pokemon articles merged. I succeeded using calm, rational discussion, I compromised with users... and I had more fanboys down my throat than anyone has had. Sadly, I did the opposite in the Futurama planets deletion. I should have learned. --Teggles 06:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I would certainly support you in trying to get a better way of discussing mergers as alternatives to deletion. Having it as one of the results from an AfD tends to work erratically in either direction--often losing content, sometimes keeping too much. A merger can be either a keep or delete in effect, depending on how it is carried out. It's really not a branch of keep , which is the present official status. But let's first see what we can do with WP:MERGE, which does have a procedure, which works well for uncomplicated cases. I am reluctant to propose another XfD like process. DGG (talk) 06:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't threaten me.

Extremely rude. 75.65.91.142 05:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

complaint

I've just had a look through your edits and I am not impressed, you have nominated thousands of articles for deletion and you are causing extreme damage to the project. Well let me put it like this, you are giving wikipedia a bad name. Because its an encyclopedia on anything, its not called the "Game of deletion encyclopedia" is it? I am abandoning looking up information from this site because of your actions and I am going to make several online and press reports about how bad this website actually is. Mark my words wikipedia is going down for what you've done. Just you wait. Derekbishop 15:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI this editor has a record of one (1) article created, and deleted. (No other edits, aprt from the one above). The article was tagged for speedy deletion as {{nn-bio}}. I added a {{hangon}} and invited the author to cite references that the subject of the article was notable (and indeed existed) on 30th November. No further input was forthcoming so I deleted the article this morning. I'm not sure where you come in for his incivility, as as far as I can see you've been completely uninvolved with that article. Tonywalton  | Talk 16:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. "wikipedia is going down" could be interpreted as a legal threat, I suppose, or just as a threat of inchoate evil. Either way, I'm keeping an eye out. Tonywalton  | Talk 17:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I think by "going down" he justs means losing quality and usefulness (in his opinion). I don't believe it was intended as a threat. No need to overact to him—this is just another case of a new editor who is not familiar with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. Pagrashtak 18:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Or maybe not... Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Concern_for_my_adoptee. Seems like a retaliation only account. EconomicsGuy 20:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

• One thing that I think it means is that users that focus on an nominating AFD-first, rather than trimming and merging, or talk with a wikiproject that is affiliated with that page is shown as rudeness that would alienate users and degrade Misplaced Pages. -71.59.237.110 (talk) 00:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you...

I've been dealing with vandals for a long time. I'm thinking that you've come across your fair share. Nihiltres has been helping me out but I'm afraid he's a bit caught up, possibly on a wikibreak. I'd like to bring the following to your attention:

• Suspected Sockpuppets of Omnifish

• Suspected Sockpuppets of Hargon10

• the most recent vandalism stab at my Talk Page

Please help me block these users once and for all. They're all mean spirited. They obviously don't WP:AGF, and don't know how to become a positive contributor to the 'Pedia we have running here. If you could help me I'd be much obliged.

Thanks much, and happy editing. :: RatedR 19:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thank you for your help. You can just copy all this to him. :: RatedR 20:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll look into it, though I'm already confused by all the names involved. Marskell 16:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) The accounts at issue have been blocked, and I'll block other accounts, where obvious. Judges, I posted to RatedRestricted that he (or she—assuming) could use some mentoring. I encourage that, in this case. RatedR could be a much better user, with mentoring. Marskell (talk) 21:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification...

...regarding the Winnemac (fictional U.S. state) AFD. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:SC template

The template is not a dump for all the articles in the category, its supposed to be a codified depository to the subject. So in order to effectively treat the characters as a notable real-world topic as opposed to the old horrible in-universe character articles with the old horrible in-universe template structure, all characters should be linked from the Characters of StarCraft rather than from individual links on the template, especially as there are only four articles and three of those attest a major amount of notability to the content in Characters of StarCraft. The locations link can stay until its fully notability-assured rewrite is complete, the same will be true of the species and psionic technology articles. As for Revelations, its not a novel and its not that notable either and should probably be merged somewhere rather than have a whole article. -- Sabre 18:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Chocobo

Both articles utterly fail comprehensiveness and verifiability as stands. No one has commented at all on the Chocobo Racing page after I delisted it, almost two days ago. And as it doesn't meet the GA standard, I removed it from the Featured Topic. Standards have not been raised; it simply shouldn't have been promoted to begin with. David Fuchs 21:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Futurama Places deletion

I don't know how anyone could argue that this article does not contribute greatly to Misplaced Pages. There's no other reference source that covers this kind of material (75.42.168.159 (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC))

NPA

I would have mentioned this to you off-line if your email were enabled, but I want an apology for the comment that "it is exceedingly clear you have no understanding of WP:FICTION, and it is critical if you are going to continue participating in these discussions for you to understand it." You can say what you like about my arguments, but please keep the discussion limited to them. DGG (talk) 01:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD Backlog

I think AfD is getting backlogged a bit. Have you noticed that I have been tagging loads of articles for reliable sources? That got the attention of a few editors (see my talk page), and may result in a natural selection process in which the most popular characters get worked on while the forgotten pages get timestamped. The timestamps will then make it harder for people to argue that a deletion nomination "came out of nowhere". I've found that if editors are educated about notability, they are less resistant to the idea of combining characters into lists, deleting a few minor characters, and generally cleaning up. AnteaterZot (talk) 00:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I'm signing off now to get dinner. AnteaterZot (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Editing Misplaced Pages

Thanks for your follow up to Marksell's post.

Similar to what I said to him, I don't exactly know what I'm doing here, I just know that I want to keep Misplaced Pages clean, Vandals out, and articles out of 'stub'ornness.

I completely agree... I could use help. If you have any ideas on what I can do to expand wikipedia, and become a better editor, please offer them up. I'm in no place to say I'm any good... If I got an RfA, I'd get No's across the board. I certainly haven't done enough to even qualify as a positive influence on the Wiki. However, In my spare time I make sure that I support articles, create them where I see fit, and save people from the terrors of vandalism.

Thanks again for your help. :: RatedR 03:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

User Ghanadar galpa on Anti-Christian violence in India

Hi, thanks for your vote in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Anti-Christian violence in India. This article is nominated for deletion by user Ghanadar galpa due to malicious intent. Nomination of this article for deletion is part of the serial attacks on my articles by user Ghanadar galpa. Please be aware of user Ghanadar galpa. He had added POV texts in Human rights in India page. Custodial death is very high in India, torture in widespread in police custody. But user Ghanadar galpa tried to make it seems like that the police is innocent and the custodial deaths are exaggerated. In the Custodial death section of that article, he added texts like "The media in India enjoys a wide measure of freedom and has enormous reach and power. Technological advances witnessed during the last few decades have provided the media with new abilities hitherto denied them", which I later deleted. He is accusing me that I am not neutral. But the truth is that, it seems user Ghanadar galpa cannot tolerate any article or text which depict human rights violation in India, which depict violence against non-Indian religions in India. As I am trying to bring the truth in light, he is accusing me that I am not neutral. In India, violence against Christians by Hindu-nationalists is a issue. Conversion to Christianity may result in death in India. I have added information about these in the article. I will add more. Thanks and regards. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 11:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Can this be construed as vote-canvassing? I am compiling diffs of this otolemur guy running around wp frantically defending articles he created with malice that are being AfD'ed one-by-one (and not all by me mind you, see this and this for instance, both articles created by Mr otolemus Crassicaudatus).Ghanadar galpa (talk) 12:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not vote-canvassing. This is to inform a user who is interested in the subject. Good editors alaways give votes according to their own judgments. They are not influenced by others. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Beware of user Ghanadar galpa

Please let me aware you of user Ghanadar galpa. User Ghanadar galpa seems to be an irrational Indophilic propagandist. As I have told you earlier this user Ghanadar galpa seems cannot tolerate any article, any text that depict human rights violation in India, violence against non-Indian religions in India. See the Talk:Human rights in India. There he have falsely accused me that I have violated WP:CIVIL by boldifying words and refering him in third person in a article talk page? He have added POV texts there as I have told you earlier. His motivation is very clear. He is using wikipedia as a tool to spread a dirty Indophilic propaganda. See this. He have just whitewashed the mention of anti-Indian sentiment in Sri Lanka. Why? Seems very clear. He could not tolerate the texts "The atrocities committed by the Indian Peacekeeping Force and support for LTTE in southern India".

• User Ghanadar galpa is presently busy in a dirty propaganda campaign against me and articles I have created. He is more likely to disrupt the articles and texts he claim "anti-Indian".
• He used several wikipedia policies abusively. He nominated the article Anarchism in India for speedy deletion claiming it attack page. See this. Anarchism an attack page? Please note anarchism has nothing to do with attck. In wikipedia, there are articles depicting anarchist movements in various countries. Thus this article depict anarchist movement in India. See Talk:Anarchism in India. Also see List of anarchist movements by region. Currenty he has nominated Anarchism in India for deletion to spread anti-Anarchist propaganda.
• He also used anonymous IP address besides his username to edit wikipedia. The IP address 70.112.72.233 is used by this user for editing same texts. See this and this. This IP address has good contributions to the article on Bharatiya Janata Party, a political party in India known for there Hindutva ideology. See this IP address's contribution to the Hinduism in Malaysia - added information on anti-Hindu incidents.
• See his edit in Deepa Mehta, a film-director faced opposition by Hindu fundamentalists. He added criticism section. His intentions are clear. He is trying to disparge subjects critical to Hindu fundamentalism.
• I have created an article Anti-Christian violence in India. I know fanatic Hindu fundamentalists will not be able to tolerate this article. User Ghanadar galpa has nominated this article for deletion.
• I have created an article Crime against foreigners in India. Do you know rape incidents on foreigners are increasing in India? Scam are prevalent in India with scam artists preying for foreign tourists? I have added all these information in that article. But some user have nominated it for deletion claiming it non-notable. Now user Ghanadar galpa is abusingly trying to distract the debate there. See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Crime against foreigners in India and see and . He is now busy to distract votes from favour of articles I have created which this guy see "anti-Indian". I want to acknowledge good editors these facts. Thanks and regards. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Nominating articles in the scope of WP:VG for deletion

Would you be so kind to add future articles you nominate for deletion that fall in to the scope of WP:VG to the deletion list of that project? The list can be found at WP:VG/D. Thanks in advance, User:Krator (t c) 20:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Bullet points

Please use bullet points when responding to messages in AfD pages. See WP:TALK. SharkD (talk) 04:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Link's Awakening

Thanks for the link! :) David Fuchs 20:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your extensive and laudable work in AfDs. If only we all were so thorough. Mbisanz (talk) 21:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to move this to your box o' bling Mbisanz (talk) 22:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Help me Obi Wan Kenobi, your my only hope

Well, to be honest, anything outside of video games is kinda outside of my comfort zone. I'd really like to branch out more, but I'm a bit lost in other areas. But when I do try to improve an article there are a couple of steps I cycle through.

1. I try to first make sure all the necessary sections are there and organized. For topics related to fiction that normally that includes some kind of overview of the topic, a history of how it came to be, related materials/merchandise, and some kind of reception/impact section. Of course each topic will have different types of sections with different names and what not, but once the sections are outlined, it's easier to know what to look for. Also with all the sections there, it's easier for other editors to add information to appropriate sections.
2. Then comes the research part, searching for whatever article/press release/interview I can find from whatever reliable source is out there. After finding some good articles, I read through them one at a time while rereading or skimming the Misplaced Pages article. Basically, if I find something in the source that is not in the article, I try to add it in. If I find something in the source that is already in the article, I add a citation. I pretty much go through this with what ever sources I have.
3. The hard part is trying to find something very specific that needs sourcing. Sometimes it can be easy to find the right source, often times I've had to surf the internet for an hour or two at a time looking for the right info. If I can't find I source, I ask myself how likely it would be challenged and/or how outrageous/precise the information is. Then I decide whether or not it should stay in the article.
4. Sometimes the content can be excessive or overly detailed. It can be hard to trim things down, especially when you're the one who added it in the first place. When that happens I go to my sandbox or a word processor and try to write that section from scratch without looking at what's already there. You know, just give the bares bones, especially when writing fictional content, like plot synopsizes or character biographies.
5. Repeat as needed.

That's what I try to do in a nut shell. Of course when you're working with other editors things can either go more smoothly or rough. The Kingdom Hearts articles went pretty smoothly because there was a group of editors that actually tried to work together, bounced ideas off each other, and didn't get that offended when somebody made a good faith edit that wasn't the best for the article. I may have added a lot of info into those articles, but it was everyone else that helped smooth it out and copy edited them into what they are now.

Of course, if you don't have the approval of the other editors working on the article, it won't go smoothly. I tried working on the video game article, and ran into all kinds of resistance. I only got the sections reorganized, and cleaned up and sourced the "History" and "Cheats" sections before I started bumping heads with SharkD on the "Platforms" section. I finally gave up because it wasn't worth the headache. Normally, I've found that if you add a source along with the content, it's hard for others to dispute/remove it. At that point they'll normally massage the text for you, hopefully to improve it.

Basically, the way I see it, the key to about 90% of writing good articles is properly sourcing everything with reliable first and third party sources. The other 10% is the copy editing and is the harder part in my mind. But sources establish notability and a semblance of factual accuracy. Because of that it's very hard for anybody to dispute the content attached to it.

Well, I hope my ramblings help you some. Sorry, I couldn't help more with the Ghostbusters article. Every time I look at it I get a bit lost about what to do with it because I'm not that familiar with the topic. I'll give it another go and see what I can do via copy editing. (Guyinblack25 16:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC))

Re: CfD nomination of Category:Nintendo Setting articles

Hi. Just responding to your post on my talk page. I looked at the discussion page and was not sure what you meant by "Category is empty due to article consolidation". What exactly is consolidation?

Thanks for notifying me. I created that category a long time ago hoping that people would fill it. I goes along with the other ones in Category:Nintendo articles by type. I just thought it would be easier having the articles sorted by type. If it isn't working out I have no problem with it being deleted. –bse3 (talk • contribs • count • logs) 03:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment about your work pit

You probably should just AFD many of the articles in the "proposed for deletion" section (as many of the clan articles had the prods removed already, plus others as well). Generally prods work at times, but if the fanatics are around, they will be removed (and usually for no good reason). RobJ1981 (talk) 04:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Fan Translations

Please read about how I feel about these, and if you disagree please state your reasons. Newspaper98 (talk) 23:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

We reached a decision, but it's still open for debate. Please read the talk page. One of these is that the translation must be COMPLETE. Newspaper98 (talk) 07:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Terra Prime

Hey, you can merge that pages to the other articles. I think that page can be converted to a disambiguation page without undergoing a deletion. -- Cat 15:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you comment

At Talk:BattleTech#Deletion_of_BT_articles. Thanks. PS. For the record, I support trimming some entries in that tree, but by merger. For that we need them listed in one place so we can see what should be merged where. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, here. Thanks, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

BattleTech

That template will still be rather large, even after merging and deleting. It's nice to see how close we are to encyclopedic coverage, though. Pagrashtak 01:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

...Do we have a workable and/or widely accepted definition of "encyclopedic", and if we do, can I see it? --Kizor, not logged in due to school projects and what not —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.232.106.73 (talk) 03:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Its not really one definition, its really the overlay of all the policies together, so if article meet all the various criteria, WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:WAF, WP:FICTION, WP:OR, then you have an encyclopedic article and content. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

To-do list

Hi! This is a friendly notice that we have addressed your concern with a to-do list and are trying to build a consensus at Talk:List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars#To to list. Could you stop by and give us your thoughts? Thanks! Taric25 (talk) 17:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deletion Daedra

Sorry for adding irrelevant information to wikipedia. While I'm not assuming you need my confirmation, I'm quite ok with cleaning it up by deleting the daedra article. Sorry for causing you extra work. JoerT (talk) 20:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

It's quite all right, I have written dozens of articles that have had to be consolidated and eventually transwikied and deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

A Hogwarts students article

Hi there! I would like to read your opinion about this Draft I made. This article would contain almost all students from the Minor G/S/R/Hs articles, except those Quidditch or other minor characters with little involvement (maybe we would create a section for "Others", like in the Minor G/S/R/Hs articles). Greetings!! Lord Opeth (talk) 05:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Pottsylvania AfD

I'm glad you withdrew the Pottsylvania AfD, but the nature of your posts are extremely condescending, and at times, downright rude. Might I suggest you take AfD's that don't pass a little less personally? You don't have to like WP:IAR, most of the time I don't, but it is there for a reason. Don't like it, but respect it, and try to at least respect the opinions of others even when they disagree. Justin 07:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Coalition of Planets article for Star Trek Enterprise....,

Hi, I'm VirginiaBoy (talk) 14:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC). I'm the one who wrote the Coaltion of PlanetsI noticed it said recommending that it be merged. If you decide to do this, that would be fine with me. Thanks for letting me know!

Recent Ninja Turtles AFDs

Hi just to let you know I am VERY DISPLEASED with your random AFD debates for Ninja Turtles articles but one piece of advice I have for the character articles at least could work on trying to compress the information like I did with the Dr. Chaplin article to remove unneeded details and have it merged to the character list instead. -71.59.237.110 (talk) 18:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Returnjedicast.JPG)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Angr 19:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ghostbusters2008.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ghostbusters2008.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

More HP merges

Hi there. I reviewed both the Ministry of Magic and the Ministry officials articles and I think that your suggestion is reasonable, but I think that we should first shorten and improve the Ministry of Magic article, so that it would not become a whole bunch of crap with the Ministry officials article in there. We can also get this list of Officials shorter by getting rid of Amos Diggory, Dirk Cresswell and the Others section.

I also made a suggestion about merging the Death Eater article into the Dark wizards one. I made this draft. I think that an article containing both the list of Dark wizards and the information regarding to Death Eaters would be a strong one. I would be interested in reading your opinion. Cheers! Lord Opeth (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Remember your suggestion for Ministry Officials? Well, I merged some of them into the MoM article, except those who are members of the Order (Tonks, Kingsley and the Longbottoms). I also merged James, Lily and the Dursleys into one article. Lord Opeth (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Homeworldss-01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Homeworldss-01.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 03:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally

I came here to ask you to slow down with placing articles into the already overburdened AfD process, believing that to be less than conductive to fair decisions and the participants' respective sanities. Seeing that you'd just pledged doing so to DGG, though, I wanted to thank you for that.

Then I was hit by the double whammy of an ending semester and being in #¤%& pieces in the aftermath of an ADHD test gone horribly wrong. Now that I'm back on the ball sufficiently, thanks. (You still seem to nominate pretty vigorously, though.)

As a complete aside, I see that you've been cutting down Jurassic Park stuff lately. Can I ask you to leave the "inaccuracies" article, biological issues in, alone for the time being if you find it objectionable? There's an elaborate argument to be made for its value that is based on the way Jurassic Park personally reignited the dinosaur craze to the degree that at least half of all known T-rex skeletons have been found after its release and it's responsible for the modern depiction of such things as velociraptors; knowledge of the problems with Jurassic Park is thus a very important part of our coverage of dinosaurs. I haven't yet posted this argument on account of being in #¤%& pieces. --Kizor _{is in a constant state of flux} 18:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about the ADHD thing, but believe me medicine and proper mental and physical care can alleviate a lot of it, I know :) The reason I was nominating so many was I really have wanted to clear out the Elder Scrolls articles for a while now, and once I got Twinkle I finally got it done, now I'm doing a lot less, so that should stop the backlogging I may have caused. As for Jurassic Park, I was trying to clear out the stubby in-universe stuff, and that biological article appears to have dozens of references, so it clearly passes the notability threshold, so I wouldn't worry about it. It could even go for GA with some polishing and sourcing. Anyway, be content, and feel better! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your sympathy and smiley, but you misunderstand. The diagnosis was negative: I don't have ADHD. We also discovered that the amphetamine analogue used for finding that out is completely unsuitable for me. I'll spare you the details.
Good to hear that - I'm reasonably confident that the Jurassic Park biology article would survive an AfD, but it's better to not go to the trouble in the first place. The argument above can form the basis of said elaborate argument to deter possible trouble in the future.

Mind you, I still cringe when I see fiction deletions. I think the underlying issue behind what may be becoming our biggest content dispute to date are conflicting ideas of the scope and extent of the encyclopedia, ideas that must be brought out and analyzed if we're ultimately to develop a solution based on co-operation rather than force. I'd like to discuss these with you, but for obvious reasons might not be able to spend the necessary time and effort right now. Perhaps later. --Kizor _{is in a constant state of flux} 22:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Said discussion would be most welcome, as it appears to eat up much of our time debating and not article building these days. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Joyeux Noël

I just want to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Merry Christmas! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 01:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Ye Art Cordially Invited to the Annex

Hello, My good Fellow, listen and I shalt telleth Ye a Tale of a Wiki that well comes All Manner of Articles relating to Fiction. What is This wonderful Place of Fantasy, You ask? It is the Annex, Haven to All fiction-related Refugee Articles from Misplaced Pages.

Before nominating or proposing a fiction-related Article for Deletion, It is My sincerest Hope that Ye import It to the Annex. Why do This, You wonder? Individuals have dedicated an enormous Amount of Time to writing These Articles, and ’twould be a Pity for the Information to Vanish unto the Oblivion where only Administrators could see Them.

Here is a Step-by-Step Process of how to Bringeth Articles into the Annex:

1. Ye shall need at least three Browser Tabs or Windows open. For the first Tab or Window, go to Special:Export. For the second, go here. (If Ye have not an Account at Wikia, then create One.) Do whatever Ye want for the third.
2. Next, open the Program known as Notepad. If Ye haveth It not, then open WordPad. Go to “Save as,” and for “Encoding,” select either “Unicode” or “UTF-8.” For “Save as type,” select “All Files.” For “File name,” input “export.xml” and save It. Leave the Window open.
3. Next, go to the Special:Export Window at Misplaced Pages, and un-check the two small Boxes near the “Export” Button. Input the Name of the Misplaced Pages Article which Ye wish to import to the Annex into the large Field, and click “Export.”
4. Right-click on the Page full of Code which appears, and clicketh on “View Source” or “View Page Source” or any Option with similar Wording. A new Notepad Window called “index” or Something similar should appear. Press Ctrl+A to highlight All the Text then Ctrl+C to copy It. Close yon “index” Window, and go to the Notepad “export.xml” Window. Press Ctrl+V to pasteth the Text There, and then save It by pressing Ctrl+S.
5. Now go to the Special:Import Window over at the Annex. Clicketh on “Browse…” and select the “export.xml” File. At last, click on “Upload file,” and Thou art done, My Friend! However, if It says 100 Revisions be imported, Ye be not quite finished just yet. Go back to Misplaced Pages’s Special:Export, and leave only the “Include only the current revision, not the full history” Box checked. Export That, copy the Page Source, close the “index” Window, and go to the “export.xml” Window. Press Ctrl+A to highlight the Code all ready There, press “backspace” to erase It, and press Ctrl+V to pasteth the new Code There. Press Ctrl+S to save It, then upload once more to the Annex. Paste {{Misplaced Pages|{{PAGENAME}}}} at the Bottom of the imported Article at the Annex, and Ye art now finally done! Keepeth the “export.xml” File for future Use.

Thank Ye for using the Annex, My Friend — the Annex Hath Spoken 06:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

please stop

nominating almost every article based on a fictional thing for deletion. I am loosing sleep over it and it is disturbing me that wikipedia has so many "deconstructive" editors, take my advice and please stop because this is supposed to be an encyclopedia of everything, not a deletion game. I believe you were wrong to delete all of the articles on the Elder scrolls related topics, and for that I despise you. Blueanode (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I tried to assume good faith when he started his crusade, but his usual response to statements like this have been harsh threats. He even shouted at a few admins that put in similar pleas, so I'm afraid we still have to put forth a lot of work to rush and save articles that are getting copy-pasted the same minimal effort generic deletion templates and statements. Just do your best to find proper references and sources to establish notability, but he's been known to not keep his cool when this happens. It really does feel like a horrible deletion "game," and I just had to simply stop playing. 75.65.91.142 (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Your crusade is very annoying for the fact, that you are nominating things that are notable claiming they are "not notable", for instance a subject that is notable to "star trek" fans that is very well known will be nominated for deletion by you, then people will come along who have never heard of star trek and say for you it is not notable, you are even nominating very high attention articles such as futurama ones for deletion, I want you to stop, you are tearing this encyclopedia apart and making yourself very unpopular. Blueanode (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Looking at your userpage, all the vandalism speaks for itself, you brought that on yourself with your rampant deletionism. Blueanode (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

No, its the price I and others pay for improving wikipedia over the shrill screaming of fanboys who dont want their poorly written fan pages deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't you dare talk to me like that, take a look at all that vandalism on your userpage, and the attention you are drawing to yourself, serves you right you deletionist troll, you are ruining this website. You are pathetic and many of the things you are nominating for deletion are very notable, such as Dagoth Ur, you bastard. Blueanode (talk) 18:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I was speaking in general, certainly you are not saying you are one of them are you? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I am a fan of everything, and you seriously dissapoint me with your unconstructive editing, deletionism is no different to vandalism in my opinion. Blueanode (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Star Trek PRODs

Hi, I haven't disagreed with any of the tags you have added e.g. unreferenced, but could I ask you to slow down a bit on the PRODding? There is still a backlog to merge from some AFDs which need more work than the simple List of Star Trek animals that I merged tonight.

Thank you for notifying at least some authors of the articles you PRODded. Please also consider notifying WikiProject Star Trek of your PRODs at Misplaced Pages Talk:WikiProject Star Trek.

Merger proposals rather than PRODs would also be welcome.

I have ambitions to work on other things with more real-life significance, but most of my available time seems to be spent dealing with PRODs on things that I consider worth keeping somewhere within Misplaced Pages. - Fayenatic (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I have suggested merges too, and I am very happy to see you in the process of merging a lot of the content in order to save it. Perhaps I will let Star Trek people know about some of the prods. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that would be welcome. . I also agree that some articles can be deleted without even leaving a redirect, e.g. Zanthi Fever - mentioned in a single episode, no incoming links, and a Misplaced Pages search will find the episode article anyway. - Fayenatic (talk) 09:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

My own article Stone of J'Kaa shouldn't be just deleted outright. The reason I created it was because of a lack of description of the artifact itself. In retrospect I should have just created a new paragraph to the P'Jem article. Incidently, somebody thought that didn't measure up either, and redirected it to the episode's page--which I just corrected a few minutes ago. Sweetfreek (talk) 07:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

User page protection

Hello Judgesurreal777, due to vandalism from multiple IPs, which would have continued from my experience until the page is protected (several other userpages were target of similar attacks in the recent past), I've protected your userpage for 1 day. If you want me to remove this, please let me or any other admin know. I hope this was according to your will. Regards --Oxymoron 00:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Geography of the BattleTech universe

Good job, but indeed there are few problems, with confusion on two levels: 1) past and present and 2) levels of administration/politics. We should divide the article into several sections. All Marches are geographical, not political entities (cluster of solar systems, I believe). Tharkad is a planet, so is New Avalon, Solaris VII, Strana Mechty, and of course, Terra. There are few other notable planets that could be added there, either under their own section or under a general 'other planets' section. Planets and Regions could form one of three sections, the 'stellar geography' (for the lack of better word, I am thinking pure geography) St. Ives Compact is a short-lived political entity; it should be moved to political section, which should be divided into Inner Sphere and the Clans. On one level I like collecting all Earth-central articles into Terra, while this makes an interesting 'history of Earth in BTech universe' kind of article, it doesn't really belong to the geography section. ComStar, Star League and Republic of the Sphere are probably notable enough to deserve separate articles; I'd merge and redirect Word of Blake into ComStar. Perhaps political section could be split off into Politics of the BattleTech universe, a new main article for Category:BattleTech factions and Category:BattleTech organizations (which probably should be merged...). Political history should probably be moved into politics, which should have maps for various eras of the BTech universe. If this sounds confusing, well, think in terms of real life and if and how can we classify EU, NATO or Roman Empire while discussing article on 'Geography of Earth' :) That's the nice thing about having subarticles - they allow you to split off stuff which doesn't fit well into more general articles. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Courtesy ANI notice

Hello, as nobody has had the courtesy to inform you of an ANI about you I thought I would. Just to add, I personally agree with your approach towards the unnecessary level of fancruft that is in danger of clogging Wiki up. There are specialist Wikis out there, this one is for the real-world, in my view! Whitstable (talk) 18:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent nominations

appear to be Misplaced Pages:Gaming the system, and I am not the wikipedian to suggest this, you are making a game out of wikipedia and its policies with your rampant deletionism, and if you look in the history of your userpage, everyone is against you and you are getting serious abuse, you are making a spectacle of yourself and soon more than wikipedia will notice you. Blueanode (talk) 21:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)