Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:07, 4 January 2008

I'm pretty easy going about what goes on here. However, if you have come here regarding an administrative action I have taken that you disagree with or wish to be clarified, or regarding a copyedit or cleanup I have performed, please ensure that you:

• Maintain a civil tone and are clearly interested in improving the encyclopedia.
• Bear in mind that I have been an editor since December 2005 and an administrator since May 2006, and have a big fat pile of edits - I am in no way "better" than any other editor, but I may have a greater understanding of Misplaced Pages policy and practice than many. To put it another way, Misplaced Pages is not the Stanford Prison Experiment.
• Know that I do not hate you (I love you), nor do I hate your company, group, product or friend (at worst, I am ambivalent towards it / them, and I may well love them too)
• Have read any and all links to guidelines or polices included in my edit summaries or talk page edits related to your reason for being here.
• Understand that disruptive, trolling or otherwise undesirable or unconstructive messages will be treated as they would on any other Misplaced Pages page.
• It's "Deiz". D-E-I-Z. Not Diez, Diaz or any other Spanish sounding misspelling...

Reliable Sources

Hey there, I'm having a bit of a conflict of opinion at a rather small article One Nine Nine Four. A fellow editor is attempting to add a "Criticism" section to this article that is sourced to a message boad with the opinions of 23 unidentifiable people. In my opinion, this fails Misplaced Pages:Verifiability and WP:BLP#Reliable_sources. I am not against adding a criticism section, just that it needs to be properly sourced and not based on the opinions of a few "fans" on the internet. I have removed this content, and requested correct citations are provided before it is re-added, however it just gets added back with the same source. I was wondering if I am correct in thinking that such material is not encyclopedic without proper references. Cheers Nouse4aname 08:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. There really isnt much to say about this movie right now, I've trimmed out the padding. If others continue to add unsourced or unnecessary content we can take a look at further options. Deiz talk 11:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Hadn't thought much about the cast list actually, but it looks a lot better now. It seems a petty thing to argue about opinions like that, but if you let it go on one article then it'll get into everything. Thanks for the edit! Nouse4aname 11:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Seoul Subway infobox

Take a look at this and let me know what you think. :) I've had to wing it a bit because I'm really not too sure what kind of information needs to be there, so any suggestions will be welcome. Regards. PC78 16:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks great! Give me a shout if you need any other help. Deiz talk 00:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Finally got around to finishing this off. The finished version can be found at {{Infobox SMS station}} should you feel inclined to use it. Regards. PC78 16:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Buu (disambiguation)

What does Bam's Unholy Union have to do with Buu? If nothing, then it should redirect back to Majin Buu. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Acronym. Deiz talk 08:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Cardinal Kung Foundation

Hi Deiz. You A7 speedy deleted Cardinal Kung Foundation about ten months ago. I restored it and GRBerry and I have been working to provide references to the article and identify significance to the organization in the article. If you object to my restoring the article, please let me know. Thanks. -- Jreferee 01:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. If an article can be restored and verified, all good. Nice work. Deiz talk 01:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

1994

It looks like this matter is getting a little out of hand! I wonder if maybe it should be made more clear in the guidlines that forums/message boards are not acceptable sources...there does not yet seem to be a concise list of acceptable/unacceptable sources, which may be a rather helpful tool for new editors (and even more experienced editors too). Nouse4aname 08:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Oxycodone

Deiz, could you restore the words 'potent and' to the beginning of th Oxycodone article? You protected it after someone badly cleaned up some vandalism. I think it's probably important to make it clear in the opening of the article that Oxy is a potent drug, otherwise it requires too much reading to see it's different from things like codiene.

On another issue, my hard drive crashed, and I hadn't updated my email address with WP when I changed ISPs a few months back. My username was User:Johnpf, but my password was lost along with a lot of other important files. You can check that I'm on the same IP as my edits fron the last 3 months. How can I establish my identity and get a new password? WierdJohn 16:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It's only semi-protected so any accounts older than 4 days can edit it. I don't have a big problem with potent but it's probably unnecessary, as the facts in the article speak for themselves. As far as your original account goes, I really don't know. If you didn't leave any evidence of your identity attached to your account then you might not be able to get it back. Maybe try the Contact Misplaced Pages link on the left there. Deiz talk 00:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Zeitgeist the Movie Deletion

I saw these two links listed in the deletion archives for the listing ...

The Globe and Mail (Toronto Newspaper) The Globe and Mail

TheStranger (Seattle Newspaper) The Stranger (newspaper)

I don't know if they're significant enough. I will try and scout around for more. It's tough with the sheer amount of online material to find real newsprint stuff. Amira227 13:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

A quick search of Google News found these in addition...

The Globe & Mail

V247

Amira227 13:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• The G & M article is subscription, and doesn't mention Zeitgeist by name in what can be seen without splashing out $5. The Stranger article... there's a couple of paragraphs but it's probably not enough to nail as a significant reference in terms of establishing notability. When attemping to recreate a previously deleted article because new / more sources have come to light, it's important to be sure, very sure, you have the goods. V247 is a passing mention, counts for nothing in this game. Have you seen the Vancouver Sun piece? You're after a couple more of them. Deiz talk 13:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah, fair enough. Maybe have to wait another month for more stuff to surface. I found some references to it being shown at festivals. There are 9/11 Truth filmshows going on publically. What with 9/11 just passing again there will be more stuff soon.

San Diego City Beat

+ one in the Berkeley Daily Planet, which won't load currently.

Amira227 13:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• I think that's a good idea. Citybeat is just a listing. Again - significant coverage in major media sources. Deiz talk 14:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• I paid a few canadian dollars and got a copy of the review. It is all about the movie. Don't know if I'm allowed to post it on Misplaced Pages, as I guess it's copyrighted. What do you think? I couldn't see anything from the Vancouver Sun btw. Amira227 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• I found the VS piece on Google or Google News a couple of weeks ago. Let me sleep on the G&M question. Deiz talk 14:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• Here's a link to the G&M article. Do you recall anything about the Vancouver Sun article? Amira227 16:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

• The movie's being shown next week in a London venue. It's listed on the websites of the Guardian and the Evening Standard. Not enough yet, I know. Amira227 08:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

• Another not-so-strong one showing up on Google News - OpEdNews Amira227 14:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

• And, another minor one - here on Boise's Arbiter Online Amira227 19:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• Picked up from Google News - Scoop Independent News Amira227 09:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• A press release from Marketwire, including Zeitgeist's winning of an award at the 4th Annual Artivist Film Festival and Artivist Awards. Amira227 14:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• And another press release from Marketwire Amira227 14:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• Good work on the research.. sorry for not being on top of this more, activity has been limited recently and what time I've had has been focussed on another - now hopefully concluded - issue.. seems we're still in kinda the same boat as before, lots of references that outline the content and to some extent the impact of the film, but still not from the sources that would ensure a cast iron place in WP if those who sought deletion the first time around were to stricly enforce the notability criteria.. Scoop, for example, has a WP page but it essentially reprints news form other sources, and the original source of the piece, realitysandwich.com, hasn't yet got it's own article.. Likewise the Artivist awards seem pretty big within their niche - an indicator of notability - but I can't see an article for them. Of course, as time goes by and no further references appear, a further argument that ZTM hasn't made a lasting impact could be advanced. I'd be disappointed to think it will never hit the heights required, but I'm still reluctant to say I think we have enough to comfortable satisfy WP:N et al... Deiz talk 13:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• There's an article up on wikipedia now, I see. Amira227 20:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

  I knew it would happen.. I haven't been active much recently, sorry I wasn't more help. Deiz talk 23:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Itaewon.

I should have responded sooner - sorry 'bout that. I'll try to improve the page when I get a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardyandtiny (talk • contribs) 13:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Scanger

Hello Mr.Deiz. While i appreciate what your saying I'm rather skeptical about having to say scangers wear tracksuits and support Celtic. I mean it's something we see on the street. I had restored the article to what it was like a while back and although it was unsourced it was accurate although it probably needed to be updated. It was also a very popular article and people would often say to look at the scanger article on wikipedia and it couldn't have been popular without being accurate. The H-Man2 19:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Look I have to say this. Ik now about although policies but the problem about wikipedia now is that usrs have lost sense. Many users are now just blindy following these 'rules' that were written by someone just like me and you instead of having an actual discussion. The rules don't always fit. As I said this is about something we see on the street which doesn't need a newpaper artcile to back it up. Now have we have a proper discussion about the article isn't of just pointing out these 'rules'? The H-Man2 16:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok i just looked at my last comment and it is hard to read. Next time I'll use microsoft word before hand! But the point is that to anyone who's from Dublin it is well known what a scanger is and looks like. It's not something that would be disputed. The H-Man2 18:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject External links

Hey, Deiz! I'm Arknascar44, and I was wondering if you're still interested in helping out over at WP:WPEL. I've done some work on the project page and created a couple subpages and some templates, and am really interested in reviving it! Cheers, Arky 17:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

BAM

Please read the article on Bianca Montgomery and Maggie Stone before you make reversions you are not versed in. Thank you. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 10:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Right. It's a catchy acronym given to 2 lesbian characters on a TV show. Who both, incidentally, have separate articles. Anyway, thanks for the explanation, keep the dab if it makes you happy but save the patronising tones. 30,000 edits, never been reverted before? Not the greatest example of friendly, civil communication for a WMF communications coordinator to set either. GL with Wiki Atlanta. Deiz talk 11:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

...I really didn't mean anything patronizing. You weren't versed in the revert, I asked you to do so. My thank you wasn't a thank you with a snap or a head tilt. I'm just kind of speechless. I mean, I can be a bitch, but I definitely wasn't one there. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 11:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Dog Meat

I didn't initiate reversions and I am the who re-started the discussion instead of returning the favor of continued reversions. Thanks.melonbarmonster 21:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Williewoodbowls.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 19:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Simon Davies

Having the currently active player as the "primary" article is a good example of recentism. When the current Simon Davies retires, and another, equally successful Simon Davies comes along, would he deserve the "primary" article, while the current one gets pushed back to "Simon Davies (footballer born 1979)"? As I see it, neither player is any more notable than the other; one played for Manchester United for a few years, while another has trollopped around mid-table clubs for much of his career, so it is equally possible that anyone searching for "Simon Davies (footballer)" could be searching for either one of those two.

I hope that has clarified my reasoning for moving the article. - PeeJay 11:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Alexei Sayle image

Put the image into Alexei Sayle's Stuff article. Does this qualify as fair use? --Lec CRP1 05:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Aptronyms

Hey Deiz, I responded to your entry on my talk page Thanks Keeper76 15:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your patient explanations on my talk page. Enjoyed your userpage, BTW. I think I may try the random 10 someday... Keeper76 19:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

cky videography

hi, the videography will be a different article, but the link will be on the cky page.

check red hot chili peppers.

ill create the page and then let you have a look before adding.

--Ry90 01:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Jackass, userspace

Now, wait just a minute!!!

• First, I fixed it my way so that no one has to change their screen/view size to see it fully.
• Second, I thought it could be useful for some users.
• Third, before you even think about deleting these pages, I'm sure we could reason around this.
• Fourth, I work hard to find the information, even though the pages are not yet entirely complete.
• Fifth, this is the place for free information, why not give the public everything they want to know!

WIKIVUE Detroit (talk) SAT SEP 29 2007 1:49 AM EDT

You realize what you did made it into one narrow column about an inch wide but about a page and a half long? Also, Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a dumping ground for information. Be advised Deiz is an administrator with a great working knowledge of wikipedia policy so it would be beneficial to consider his advice. — Ocatecir 11:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Dog meat

regarding the dog meat section in the Korean cuisine article. Firstly I saw your user page, and saw 'user lives in South Korea' and assumed you were just another user with a pro-Korea POV, but then I saw the admin tag, and assumed that someone with POV issues is unlikely to become/remain an admin - so maybe you are the guy to ask about this.

I realise the dog meat issue can be controversial, some wish to condemn people who eat dog, some want to deny it, some want to promote it - whatever, if I had any issues that I wanted to get across I would be contributing to the dog meat article, editing the criticism section.

My point (and yes it is small) is that the word "tried" has certain implications, to me it implies a single tasting, or maybe two tastings to confirm to the taster, if it is agreeable with their palette or not. Whilst this may be exactly what happened for some of the people on the stated %, that % also includes many people who eat it on a regular basis - the word "tried" seems very wrong for those people. For example, I would not say "I have tried computer games" because I did not merely test my like/dislike of gaming, I gamed on numerous occasions - for me "I have played or I play" would be more accurate.

Also use of the word "sometimes" is redundant - no one in the world imagines that anyone is eating dog meat 24/7 - unless there is some implication that something is done "always" then the word sometimes is redundant, not only redundant, but in this case it seems POV to me, if someone wants to comment on how often it is eaten, then state "on average Koreans eat dog meat X times a year" and back it up with verifiable evidence.

I wont comment on what drew me to this article, neither will I comment on my personal opinions regarding dog meat, but what I will say is that while editing this article, I do not display any POV, and merely push for factually correct comments, without any POV stated or implied.

Give me opinions, I realise it's a minor issue, relating to two words, so if you can't be bothered, I really would understand. thanks.Sennen goroshi 07:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I have also added how often it is eaten, by those who eat it - this should remove any confusion regarding if the majority of people "try" it, or "eat" it - I always think its better to state verified facts, than to use words which might imply something. Facts are better than implications.Sennen goroshi 08:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

My issue was not with your edit per se, it was with yet another edit scuffle.. I went back to the last version before the disagreement sparked off. I appreciate your rationale, and hopefully we can sort stuff like this on the talkpage.. facts are always better than opinions, and clear language better than vague / subjective.

I do live in Korea, but can say with a clear conscience that I have no POV on Korean issues either way - I don't have or pretend to have any great understanding of Korean affairs beyond the passing interests that one might expect to have while living in a country. I've been an admin for 16 months, at the time I ran for adminship I was living in Portugal, and had no POV issues there either. I've been involved in admin stuff on an extremely diverse range of topics, and treat articles more closely related to my likes and circumstances as I do those I have no interest in or knowledge of whatsoever.

I've made my feelings clear on the article talk page - I hope admin intervention will be unnecessary, but if edit warring, 3RR violation or incivility requires action, action can and will be taken. Cheers, Deiz talk 12:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't revert edits on the grounds that they are unsourced, when the version you are reverting to is equally unsourced. Bsharvy 11:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

You added unsourced information, I removed it to a previous version where that line has proved stable and doesn't tug the heartstrings about eating pets. Maybe worry more about sourcing your edits in future. Deiz talk 11:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Everyone has a POV. Linkboyz 13:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:ThongSala1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ThongSala1.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 12:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Question.

Hi, Deiz, I have a question about personal abuses including racial and personal attacks done by a wiki user. I think Sennen goroshi is going too far to attack his opponents without common sense. The user mentioned "comfort women" as "chon prostitutes" and insists the slur against Korean,"chon" is an acceptable term. Moreover, Sennen goroshi compares Ledtim's response to him/her with a rapist's crime. You can see the evidence here, Ledtim's talk page . Of course I've got personal attack regarding English by Sennen goroshi. You can see it in my talk page and his/her page. Ah, Sennen goroshi previously erased his talk pages completely, so you can see just my angry responses toward him/her now, so see also this his/hers]. I want to report the bad behaviors to Wiki administration, so let me know where I have to report the matter. Thank.--Appletrees 13:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Trouble is, you're both guilty of something - it would be very difficult to apply any action to one and not the other. I suggest you two leave each other alone - if you have editing disputes, try a request for comment rather than personal attacks. Given my involvement in editing on Korean topics, it's not really appropriate for me to make blocks, so if there is a specific incidence of a racist personal attack or other truly unacceptable behaiour, you should post on WP:ANI with specific WP:DIFFs. Cheers, Deiz talk 05:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Foie Gras edits

Deiz, there's a separate article on legal issues and a controversy surrounding Foie Gras. It was a long and painful process of separating it into an article of its own, primarily obstructed by a couple of anti-foiegras activists. It took literally months to stabilize the article. Have a look at Foie Gras' edit history and the AfD discussion for the Controversy article, you will see what I mean. Regarding the material you added - it is already in Foie gras controversy#United_States. Cheers, Alex Pankratov 19:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that - all I did was remove some uncited, self-promotion puffery about a restaurant in Quebec, and cleanup the one useful, sourced piece of info from the section which bore very little resemblance to the content of the linked news article. Deiz talk 03:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Concern

I was concerned about your recent comment on the username talk page. I found it to be extremely condescending and patronizing. Although you said that you weren't saying that I was heading down that path, I could not help but feel that there was a veiled threat in what you said. I hope that I am mistaken. I found the comment especially concerning because you are an administrator. My suggestion was a good one, that if the policy is not saying what we want it to say, then we should change the policy. I agree, it is a stupid name. But the forum was not about if we think it is a stupid name. It 's about if the name is a violation of the policy. The more I reread what you said, the more I am led to believe that it was a personal attack. It it was not intended to be, then I do apologize. If in retrospect you examine what you said and come to see how it would be very easy to interpret it as one, and feel that you might want to apologize, then that would be welcomed. It would be helpful if you could give me the particular persons username so that I can review his comments, and his reasons for being blocked , so that I can determine if they have any bearing on my situation. Cordially, Die4Dixie 16:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

My advice is simple - there are other things to do on Misplaced Pages. Of course, any editor is welcome to comment on RFCN but I suggest you get involved elsewhere, lest ye get bogged down in the trenches and get sick of the place before ever finding out what WP is actually about. How many articles have you created / significantly edited? Take the plunge - take RFCN off your watchlist and see if you miss it after a week. No veiled threat, not being patronizing, no apology - just good advice. Take it or leave it :) Deiz talk 23:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

That was certainly more friendly. I do have midterms, so I will likely be less active. I see that you have a lot of edits.(understatement)I might ask you for advice in the future , if I might. I'll be in Edinburgh this summer, so if your back in Scotland then , I'll buy you a pint. Then its up to Balmerino, Fife and then to Port Soy, where my family has homes.Take care.Die4Dixie 04:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff.. I'm home for xmas but back Asia-side again next year.. I do miss home during the festival :( Ask me for advice anytime.. I got a bit too involved in AfD when I first started. Hindsight is 20:20... Deiz talk 05:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Destroying America

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Destroying America, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. B. Wolterding 18:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Destroying America

An article that you have been involved in editing, Destroying America, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Destroying America. Thank you. --B. Wolterding 08:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Block of User:GodDelusion

Was it really necessary to block this user? The RFCN was started by the user himself to request input on his username. I think it's only natural to assume he would listen to the result in good faith. Mangojuice 17:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Either way. If a username is disallowed, I see no reason not to block it. Deiz talk 05:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Civility? Not biting the newbies? Mangojuice 14:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm at a loss to understand why anyone would have a problem with a disallowed username being blocked. I'd also point out the accompanying talk page edit: "Per discussion at WP:RFCN, this username has been disallowed. Please choose an appropriate username if you wish to continue editing. Thanks." I don't claim to be Mother Theresa, but I don't see the problem. Deiz talk 14:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying it was bad, or that I have a problem with it. I just think it was totally unnecessary. The guy raised his own username as an issue himself, and we should be willing to assume that no block is needed to enforce the result. Mangojuice 20:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

regarding your civility warning.

I suggest you read up on the history. Sesshomaru is a deliberately obnoxious editor, who has been involved in tendentious editing. He's actually questioning, days after I made it, a compromise edit made on his behalf, to the template HE chose to edit to. He's being combative because I dont' support some of his In-Universe attituded edits. This 'request' to change it to the other guy's version, after arguing for his version, is just him being deliberately combative. He wants a fight, so he got a taste of it. I'm not at all surprised that he ran for an admin, and I don't care that he did. He's looking to provoke others so he can get the 'wrong version' removed and his 'right version' put up. Follow up on it and you'll see I'm right. For example, here he puts it in. here it's reverted. here I spend two edits getting the text Doczilla wants in the template Sesshomaru wants. My thanks, after five days, is his gameplaying. ThuranX 20:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what ThuranX has against me, but his telling me to "get stuffed" doesn't sound civil either. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear Deiz, ______ __ __ __ /\__ _\/\ \ /\ \ /\ \ \/_/\ \/\ \ \___ __ ___\ \ \/'\ __ __ ___ __ __\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ `\ /'__`\ /' _ `\ \ , < /\ \/\ \ / __`\/\ \/\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/\ \_\.\_/\ \/\ \ \ \\`\\ \ \_\ \/\ \_\ \ \ \_\ \\ \_\ \ \_\ \ \_\ \_\ \__/.\_\ \_\ \_\ \_\ \_\/`____ \ \____/\ \____/ \/\_\ \/_/ \/_/\/_/\/__/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/`/___/> \/___/ \/___/ \/_/ /\___/ \/__/ For your contribution to My RfA, which passed with 8000 Supports, 2 Neutrals and no opposes. The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I am privileged to stand among them. Thankyou for putting you trust in me, I'll not see it abused. And now, I will dance naked around a fire. Party at my place! Cheers! Dfrg.msc 08:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Expand for picture....

Images on userpages

Am I allowed to have an image of any sort on my userpage? Kaktibhar 05:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

A limited amount of free-content images in the spirit of identifying yourself and your interests on Misplaced Pages are generally fine. Deiz talk 06:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hence album covers are not allowed in userspace. Deiz talk 16:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK. I'll revert to the last time the image wasn't up there. Sorry for wasting your time. Kaktibhar 22:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Bibliography

I posted a list of further reading per another users request; you walloped it. 'Citing sources' says "Further reading or Books or Bibliography section is placed near the end of an article and offers books, articles, and links to websites related to the topic that might be of interest to the reader" so it looked allowed to me. Discuss? 86.160.64.76 13:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The provision for bibliographies and reading lists is a far cry from the section you inserted.. Book title, year, author, publisher and ISBN are all that is required, and included items should be compliant with WP:EL. In the same way that fansites, blogs and pet project websites are generally disallowed, just because something has made it into print does not make it an encyclopedic reference. When citing books as external references or for further reading that do not have Misplaced Pages articles of their own, if you are unable to prove some measure of significance (e.g. notable author, notable publisher, reviews in notable places - different to merely proving existence), they can be challenged and removed by any editor per WP:V. Sourcing and verification are important policy concerns on WP, to which guidelines such as WP:CS are necessarily subordinate. Apologies if this is a little direct, just trying to get across the way these things work :) I do a lot of work on East Lothian articles and want to see them all expanded and improved. Deiz talk 15:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, point taken. It was a bit brutal to cut the lot in a oner, however: can you even imagine what that does to a neophyte's confidence? Will you accept an edited version (say, as the Haddington page has) per WP:V of the list - they are the major relevant Dunbar sources, from which the majority of the article was written way back, and which I and my colleagues use for all our published Dunbar and East Lothian material, which is often cited on other pages as external sources. I've been writing and publishing on Dunbar for 15 years now and am perfectly confident I know an authorative and useful source when I see one (hence the parenthetical notes on the post). That others may not have come across them or aren't familiar with them isn't really a problem - the real idea of a bibliography is to help the learner to a wider canon and indicate further study. As for challenges - I note that Groome and other on-line gazeteer content appears on many EL pages either as a citation or a simple cut and paste job - way out of date and bettered by more recent work in almost every instance, I'm afraid. It's the old time thing about pulling everything together to sort out the guff, I guess. Cheers 81.78.147.238 19:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Deiz - Don't know how often you look in? Extended intro, early history and tweaked layout of the Dunbar page. If you feel it need refs or citations at any point mark them up and they'll be supplied. If it looks OK, I'll work up the next section later (medieval history, ecclesiastical, education, burgh & civic developments - roads, ports, water, gas, light - tourism, etc).86.160.70.96 11:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a general need for sources and references, although the content seems authoritative enough. If you add further content, it would really help (and be in the spirit of the project) to add sources as you go. Why not register a username? Deiz talk 11:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

check 58.104.30.26 edit

you rv. my edit.. but i correct from 58.104.30.26 edit. just check his edit. his edit is not normal. also, i wanred him his talk page. Surehoped3 12:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

North Korea and weapons of mass destruction‎

This event depraved the relation between Japan and Korea. You will be able to agree. --KoreanShoriSenyou 18:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocked my account

Blocked account (zakaria Mohyeldin)

hello deiz u have blocked my account indefinitely, I used the methods suggested to try and unblock my account but I have been ignored. You have blocked my account as it seems to bear a resemblance to a living celebrity. nameley zakaria mohieddin,as I already explained in my e-mail 4 months ago and on my talk page. I had the account name before there was an article about him. Also my real authentic name is Zakaria mohyeldin, I was given that name because my grandfather happens to be zakaria mohieddin. as for the issue of it being confused with my grandfathers name. I hardly think that is a possibility cause my grandfather can hardly be called a celebrity.! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.10.6.85 (talk) 07:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Powerbocking

I noticed you reverted Delta999 "unconventional" re-write of this article. He replaced the article with his version again, so I reverted yesterday and added an image, but Delta999's reverted back to his inferior version again. I don't want to get into an edit war, but his re-write is so poor that I can't see anything worth keeping. You probably have a better idea how to deal with this. Basil Richards 19:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

User advised, page reverted. If it happens again, drop me a note here and I'll look at blocks / protection. Deiz talk 16:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

horrorcore

Hi Deiz i wanted to know if you could check out the page for horrorcore, it seems to have alot of pov and i think needs to be seen by an admin, i didnt know anyone else to ask. Portillo 05:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Horrorcore. Deiz talk 16:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Lee Jones (author)

I see you recently added the article, Lee Jones (author), to AFD. Would I be able to close the debate as keep, or should I keep the discussion page open for further comment? Rudget _{Contributions} 16:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Go right ahead. Deiz talk 23:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

RE:Buu Hoo

This is getting really, really silly. Can we reach a consensus on the Buu talk page before sparking another war? Please read the comment I left there before reverting and/or protecting the page yet again. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 08:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I think "yet again" is a little strong, given I protected it once, and have quite patiently refrained from doing so despite multiple subsequent reverts of completely correct formatting. Subsequent reverts that have now led to an uninvolved admin restoring and protecting the article to - hopefully - prevent this from becoming any sillier. Until you can point me to some independent examples of artificial redirects being created for this purpose happening elsewhere, I hope we can put this to bed. Deiz talk 08:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I obviously don't recall any ATM, but this dab could set a precedent for others, why does it bother you so? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 09:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Because it would be an unnecessary and frankly useless precedent to set. Deiz talk 23:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I asked you something back at that talk page. Think you didn't notice my newest change. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Non-admin closing

Yeah, point taken. If it hadn't been as clear-cut as this one had turned out to be, I wouldn't have gone anywhere near it -- just !voted keep per sourcing. Since nobody had !voted in a day, and it was almost unanimous keep after the added sources, I figured it was safe enough. I'm hoping to RfA sometime in the future, and I wanted the practice. :-)--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 00:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Caitlinmcclatcheypromo.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Caitlinmcclatcheypromo.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. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

RE:Train Stations

Dear Deiz, I want to make it clear to you that I do not have some agenda here, I ran across these articles, I formulated an opinion, and I made a decision which is perfectly acceptable in Misplaced Pages, which is nominate articles for deletion. I did the correct procedure and stated reasons that I believed that these articles should not at this time be included in the encyclopedia. The reason for AfD is to formulate good debate on whether or not (an) article/s should be deleted or not. I and others made our arguments while others made theirs. It is my firm belief that your argument should stand for yourself. Coming to the nominator like I am some bad guy trying to delete Korean stuff cause I'm a stupid American who doesn't know that other countries exist is just plain wrong. Go to the AfD, make your argument, and if your argument is a good one, it will stand for itself. I hope you understand that this nomination was in good faith, and that I feel that I am a good user here, I think my experience speaks for itself, but it is very insulting to me to be accused of being biased, of being ignorant to the world, etc. I will hope that next time you will WP:AGF on my part and just make your argument. There is no need to rub it into my face. Well those are my thoughts and I hope I didn't make you angry or whatever, I just felt I needed to voice my concerns. Hope you have a good day/night and good luck editing.
Gonzo fan2007 16:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

My main point was that your comment seemed - and I mean no offense by this - but a little snooty. Like coming to me and saying that I just "have to get over " seemed to me that you were just trying to assert that you were right and I was wrong, totally forgetting that everyone has their own opinions and rarely is there ever a right answer to a problem. Also I apologize, a lot of what I said to you was based on your support of what others were saying, and if you read the whole AfD, I was basically ridiculed, attacked, had my faith questioned, questions were raised on whether I had an agenda, and I just wasn't feeling real good and then you sent me a message that to me seemed like an unnecessary comment that was just rubbing it in. I mean I am always open to criticism and comments, and if you feel like giving me links to past convos about this subject, I wouldnt have minded, but your comment seemed to me to serve no purpose. But heck I dont hold grudges that long, especially on Misplaced Pages. So I apologize if I offended you or whatnot, because it was not my intention. I truly hope that we can get over this and that maybe some good will come out of this (i.e. these articles will be worked on). But yeah so those are my thoughts, I hope you dont hold any grudges against me cuz Im totally cool with you. Well have a good day/night. Good luck editing!
Gonzo fan2007 00:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Aptronym

Hi Deiz, I've noticed you contributing to Aptronym recently (I think we've worked together on something there or somewhere else in the past, I could be mistaken though). I've posted a discussion on the talk page after a go-round (friendly) with another editor. Any thoughts? Thanks, Keeper | 76 23:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your comment on UCFD

Hello Deiz. Could you please explain me the meaning of "The Cause"? Your comment was "This is clearly a clever publicity stunt to advance The Cause. Nice job.." Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 13:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Masterpiece2000. Here's my tip for today: take all pages related to this UCFD off your watchlist and get on with something else. Deiz talk 14:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Read Me

I totally agree with you. My editing has slowed down and it will really slow down in the new year. Hope to still see you around occasionally, though. — Ocatecir 04:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Crystalmazebike.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Crystalmazebike.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. Mr Senseless (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Riffraffdinner.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Riffraffdinner.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. Mr Senseless (talk) 03:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Casslager.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Casslager.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

7/11

I added the pop culture reference of 7/11 in Rush Hour 2. Do NOT remove it again unless you can justify your actions.

Duhman0009 (talk) 15:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Who are YOU to say that it's a minor edit? This is YOUR POV and it's not valid, you failed. Duhman0009 (talk) 14:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you think I'm scared of your empty threats? You're the one in trouble man because:

1- You're using your PPOV to make the decisions on a Wiki page

2- You have failed to give out a proper reason as of why you have removed the content

3- You have removed something that is true and is on the same level as the other trivia, so if mine goes, so do the others

4- You're acting like the page belongs to you

Go headed, call a mod or admin, I dare you.

Duhman0009 (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lrwclaud.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Lrwclaud.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lwrpromodz.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lwrpromodz.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)