| Revision as of 01:17, 24 December 2009 editTheserialcomma (talk | contribs)3,804 editsm →you make no sense← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:42, 24 December 2009 edit undoSamboy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,613 edits →you make no sense: I have replied to your concerns here. Happy holidays!Next edit → | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
| How could i "attack you" by PRODing an article for deletion because it has no 3rd party sources? you don't own the article. the article isn't about you, even if you are the software developer responsible for the software. the article would be deleted or kept based on its own merits, regardless of how you feel about the nominee. i think that the maradns article has shown marginal notability at this point, since sources were added. when i PROD'd it for deletion, it had no sources to attest to its notability. i did search google for evidence of notability but didn't find anything substantial. you did a much deeper search, since you think you own the article because you wrote the software. but i don't see where the leap to assuming i did anything in bad faith comes in. you said yourself that "Since User:Theserialcomma has brought up the legitimate concern that this article doesn’t mention third-party sources discussing MaraDNS’ notability, which would be reasonable grounds for this article being deleted". ] (]) 22:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC) | How could i "attack you" by PRODing an article for deletion because it has no 3rd party sources? you don't own the article. the article isn't about you, even if you are the software developer responsible for the software. the article would be deleted or kept based on its own merits, regardless of how you feel about the nominee. i think that the maradns article has shown marginal notability at this point, since sources were added. when i PROD'd it for deletion, it had no sources to attest to its notability. i did search google for evidence of notability but didn't find anything substantial. you did a much deeper search, since you think you own the article because you wrote the software. but i don't see where the leap to assuming i did anything in bad faith comes in. you said yourself that "Since User:Theserialcomma has brought up the legitimate concern that this article doesn’t mention third-party sources discussing MaraDNS’ notability, which would be reasonable grounds for this article being deleted". ] (]) 22:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :I have replied to your concerns ]. Happy holidays! ] (]) 02:42, 24 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:42, 24 December 2009
GURPS Banestorm, and others
Thanks for your message, and for your edits on some GURPS articles, especially the notices about previous debates. There is no harm done in trying to restore "redirected" articles: it would be even better to add some sources! I live in Italy, so I have no easy access to (paper) game magazines which might feature reviews of these books... Happy editing, ] (]) 18:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Super work on Super Audio CD
|
The Cleanup Barnstar | |
| In recognition of your dedication in cleaning up Super Audio CD. Way to go! Binksternet (talk) 21:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC) |
Re: 209.150.50.65
Will do, thanks for the heads-up. –Juliancolton | 15:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Ladder theory
You are correct: the AFD on this article showed that people feel it's sufficiently notable for an article. That was three years ago, but I don't have any reason to believe consensus has changed since then. Thanks for pointing this out; if I'd noticed the AFD myself, I wouldn't have added the notability template to the article. Robofish (talk) 00:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:Fuerte-guadalupe-puebla.jpg
File:Fuerte-guadalupe-puebla.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Fuerte-guadalupe-puebla.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: ]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
MaraDNS
Glad to hear your project is gaining notability. That doesn't however change the fact that as the developer of MaraDNS you shouldn't be editing the article. Right now out of the 94 edits to the article, 34 of them have been made by yourself. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 12:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- What edits have I made this year (2009) to MaraDNS that violate the WP:COI policy? Please be aware that Misplaced Pages:COI#Non-controversial_edits points out I can be “Adding citations, especially when another editor has requested them” and “Deleting content that violates Misplaced Pages's biography of living persons policy.” Of this six edits I have done this year, one was to remove WP:BLP-violating material and the other five (edit 1 edit 2 edit 3 edit 4 edit 5) were to add citations and did not not change in any way the text of the article, and were done only after they were requested by another editor. I have discussed all of these edits on the talk page and no other editors have disagreed with my edits.
- I will add a wikipedian-bio template to the article’s talk page so other editors can be aware of these concerns. Samboy (talk) 14:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- just curious but how do you think that WP:BLP applies to this article? i don't see where the articles mentions your real name. Theserialcomma (talk) 20:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- It’s not exactly a secret I’m the primary developer of MaraDNS; the first hit when you Google my name mentions MaraDNS, not to mention the 5th hit and the 7th hit. Implying that I would just quit working on a project I’ve invested nearly a decade developing reflects poorly on me; it would imply I do not stick to my commitments. I have no problem having the MaraDNS page mentioning my current plans to no longer develop new features after I get MaraDNS 2.0 out the door; just don’t word it like I would leave security bugs unattended. Samboy (talk) 21:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- just curious but how do you think that WP:BLP applies to this article? i don't see where the articles mentions your real name. Theserialcomma (talk) 20:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
AES external link
Hello, I noticed that you put a message in my talk page, saying that I have been spamming the page on AES (the Advanced Encryption Standard). This is not true, however. I don't know if it can be considered spam, but I was simply trying to add an external link to my article, which I have written myself, along with the source code. Why is it that my link is not allowed to be placed in the external references? X-N2O (talk) 18:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
- I responded to your concern on your talk page. Samboy (talk) 03:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
you make no sense
on the maradns talk page, you wrote "Since User:Theserialcomma has brought up the legitimate concern that this article doesn’t mention third-party sources discussing MaraDNS’ notability, which would be reasonable grounds for this article being deleted" and on my talk page, you thanked me]. and then you wrote here ] "I have had an unpleasant experience with the editor User:Theserialcomma." and "I do not believe Theserialcomma made this proposed deletion to help make the Misplaced Pages a better place, but to attack me." - you wrote these comments about the same situation, which contradict each other.
How could i "attack you" by PRODing an article for deletion because it has no 3rd party sources? you don't own the article. the article isn't about you, even if you are the software developer responsible for the software. the article would be deleted or kept based on its own merits, regardless of how you feel about the nominee. i think that the maradns article has shown marginal notability at this point, since sources were added. when i PROD'd it for deletion, it had no sources to attest to its notability. i did search google for evidence of notability but didn't find anything substantial. you did a much deeper search, since you think you own the article because you wrote the software. but i don't see where the leap to assuming i did anything in bad faith comes in. you said yourself that "Since User:Theserialcomma has brought up the legitimate concern that this article doesn’t mention third-party sources discussing MaraDNS’ notability, which would be reasonable grounds for this article being deleted". Theserialcomma (talk) 22:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- I have replied to your concerns here. Happy holidays! Samboy (talk) 02:42, 24 December 2009 (UTC)