This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ste4k (talk | contribs) at 08:58, 25 July 2006 (Arbitration Request Filed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 08:58, 25 July 2006 by Ste4k (talk | contribs) (Arbitration Request Filed)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)I will generally respond to individuals on this page, to article discussions on that article's talk page. Please add new topics to the bottom of this page and/or in a new section, like this.
- /Archive - from September 2005 - February 2006.
- /Archive 2 - March - July 2006.
other wiki templates
I just noticed Template:Gentoowiki, which is used on article pages, as opposed to our Template:Wotwiki which is said should only be used on talk pages. Could you point me to this guideline? --Gherald 08:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Long talk page
<<Is there a template for this? I'd love to mark a few pages that I come across, but don't personally have time to archive when I see them... if not, I can make one, but just wondering. -- nae'blis (talk) 14:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)>>>
Yes, it's template:verylongtalkpage. Helicoptor 01:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Amusing comments
Keep up the good work with the clever comments at Misplaced Pages:Redirects_for_deletion#Mazda Mazda2 → Mazda Demio through Misplaced Pages:Redirects_for_deletion#Mazda Mazda6 → Mazda Atenza. —Centrx→talk • 22:19, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Image:Admin.sxc
I saw your spreadsheet about new admins, and it's interesting data, but I think you had a methodological flaw. Instead of raw support-oppose*3, that column should probably be equalized to a percentage system (support/support+oppose). Then people who had less voters aren't penalized, and your top placements shift a bit (although not in most of the lower cases). Also, Deletes/day is probably a better sort key than raw # of deletions, since the latter is prejudiced toward people who have been around longer (this puts Jaranda in first place by the way, instead of you). -- nae'blis (talk) 16:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well I had three sheets on that spreadsheet, with the ranking via three measures, total deletes, delete rate and also delete rate per unit net support. You can have a look using the other two sheets. The reason that I think the percentage system isn't as true as the net support, is that the guy who gets 100-0 is presumably more hardworking or has contributed more than the person who got 25-0; hence I'm using it to work out which admins seem to be overrated or underrated. Just to see who got lots of votes and hasn't been doing much.Blnguyen | rant-line 02:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
My typos are my own
because the talk page is not article space, and my mistakes are mine to make. If I want to change them I'll do so. The only changes I make to other's comments are to thread them if they've been placed out of order, or sign them if they're unsigned. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way as there is a template to that effect Template:Notyours.--Crossmr 18:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Of logs and sticks
Greetings Nae'blis. Your recent reply to me on the Starcraft Units page (which is up as an AfD right now) strikes me as ironically relevant to the sentence you have in your very own profile regarding "lynch mobs, factions, cabals, and armed camps." Treating each Wikipedian as if he/she is part of a single homogeous faction without any differing opinions leads to factionalization. Nowhere did I state that the page is or is not a game guide. Others did. Thus, your comment:
- Blizzard... has endorsed much of the strategy on this page. I wish you guys would make up your mind on whether or not this is a strategy guide or not.
is neither clever nor correct with regards to my post. Who are "you guys?" Wikipedians may vote for something for different reasons. Attributing the arguments of others as mine in order to undermine my argument is something you probably are familiar with, it is the strawman fallacy. The fact that, despite my numerous (and voiced) reservations, I voted Delete marks me as quite clearly separate from those in both the Keep and Delete camp. Lest you misunderstand, I'm not angry, but merely annoyed that despite taking so many pains to explain my reasoning both for and against (unlike the others who merely stamped in typical "concise" style "Crft. Nuft sad" and flew off to other AfDs ) that my argument was simply ignored and bundled with the others despite being entirely different. Perhaps there is not so much factionalization on Misplaced Pages as there is the perception of such factionalization. -- Solberg 22:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)Solberg
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of experiments from Lilo & Stitch
Per your suggestion on the talkpage, I have implemented merge porposals aross various articles. See here. -Randall Brackett 22:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Porn star notablility
Thanks for your insight on the Afd on Erik Rhodes (porn star) and your remarks. My concerns are several fold. First with the campaigning done within a group with a bias, it helps to set a precedence on an area that has much wider impact. My biggest concern is the notability of a gay porn star. We are talking about a very vocal but small group here. Only a small percentage of gays even view pornography, so if there is not notability outside of the career, I don't see how that meets the test. A side concern is the number of links to sites that sell porn, even under the heading of filmography. The only way that I would have known of this Afd is because of the DAB discussion I got into over the established actor of the same name. Thanks. Doc 00:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
"Black Art"
Wholeheartedly agree. So what does your usename mean, anyway? - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Ahhh, it actually comes from Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series of books, where it's a title for "second in command", sort of. It's been my handle/e-mail online for a long time, both as a reminder that I'm not in charge, and not to be so self-effacing. I find it a nice compromise... -- nae'blis (talk) 15:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to the B List
Yes you were on it; User:Cactus.man has a copy here. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 15:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Eluchil's RfA
Did you by chance vote support here without being logged in? There's been some problems with imposters, but sometimes users get logged out accidentally, etc... just checking. -- nae'blis (talk) 13:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't vote in this RfA. It looks like an AOL vandal took a liking to my sig and copied it in order to abuse the process. Now that you mention it, I am having problems staying logged in to the servers and my Talk page keeps losing conversations. They exist in the history but not on-screen. A problem with the Wiki LDAP server, perhaps? (aeropagitica) (talk) 15:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I've had trouble with getting bumped off my supposedly persistent login too, but I figured it was probably related to my firewall... no idea what's going on with your talk page. You didn't sign up for WerdnaBot's archiving, did you? Thanks for clarifying about your vote. It certainly is a distinctive signature. -- nae'blis (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I archive manually when the page reaches 32Kb, no bots required. I'll find someone who knows about Talk page problems and ask them. Regards, (aeropagitica) (talk) 15:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Arbitration Request Filed
I have asked for abrbitration involving User:Nscheffey. See here. Please post any comments you desire to add. Ste4k 08:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)