Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by You Can't See Me! (talk | contribs) at 04:57, 24 September 2007 (→Userhood: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

(Anesthesia) Pulling Teeth

Removing a Prod template isn't strictly vandalism. It demonstrates that someone objects to the deletion of the article, so I've listed it at AfD to get a broader cross-section of the community looking at it. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It' wasn't so much the temp rm... it was the little rant added in that was pushing it. BTW, any track that isn't a single shouldn't have an article(for the most part). Heavy metal albums, in particular, have nn songs up the wahoo linked off of them. The bulk should just be re-directed. I am a staunch anon. I rejected my user account(after rolling over 21000 edits with it) for the purity of anonymous editing. If I were a logged user... I would be supporting, by vote, all of your recent AfD's. Good Luck! 156.34.210.48 03:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair point. I took the addition as being a different way of removing the prod template with a reason (as opposed to putting it in the edit summary), but I guess it can be taken however. Thanks for the support, too. I think this is going to be a long-term activity, getting rid of a lot of nn songs. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

You may meet with a lot of criticism, especially from the "metal" contributors. Heavy metal and all its related articles seem to bring out the worst in "crufty fanboyism" from a lot of editors... even those who are veteran Wiki contributors. Even, gasp!, an admin here and there can fall prey to the "let's fanpage it" disease. I respect your attempts to try and put the "pedia" back into "Wiki". 156.34.210.48 03:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I expect to, frankly. That's why I started relatively small with the non-singles on Iron Maiden's latest album, which I felt would be a bit less objectionable than a "classic". Given that someone pointed out that Metallica have articles on pretty much every song...well, I could hardly say no, could I? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Classic Guitar

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/Guitar#Acoustic_guitars, where the same statement about the 'Classic Guitar' is present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.95.56.216 (talk) 03:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It's wrong there too and should be removed. 156.34.210.48 11:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Userhood

Hello, 156.34.210.48. I saw your case on WP:AN/I. It seems that you have been removing User:Shutup999's contributions to Talk:Paul McCartney under the assumption that he is a sockpuppet of a banned user. Please try to assume good faith of our editors here before making accusations of wrongdoings.

That said, I had a look at your Contributions page and noticed that you have made a large amount of good-faith edits to a number of articles in the past two days. Honestly, I'd never seen an IP with that many contributions before, much less with half that many constructive edits. Have you considered making an account on Misplaced Pages?

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. (WHOIS  Geolocate  Proxy Checker Current blocks XTools Global contributions) (RIRs: Africa America Asia-Pacific Europe Latin America/Caribbean)