This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I'm currently taking a wikibreak, I will do your instructions when I get back.--SKATER Speak. 14:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't have enough main space edits apparently for AWB, and I can't get Linky because I'm using my school laptop and haven't had access to my desktop in a while.
Ha, thanks for the revert. At least he didn't leave a barnstar. CliffC (talk) 21:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The big push continues.
And it seems to be working!
The good news is that there's growing support for outlines, and there are more editors than ever editing them!
The bad news is that the complainers are disproportionately represented on the project's various talk pages. While many editors work diligently on the front end, a handful of complainers are trying to tear down the project behind the scenes. Fortunately, barely enough supporters have been watching those pages that no consensus for moving or merging the outlines has succeeded. So far...
Most of the opposition seems to be unaware of the complete range of what outlines are used for. They just don't get it.
This is why it is important to complete the outline article draft. An article with a comprehensive treatment of outlines would be the perfect place to refer anybody unfamiliar with outlines to.
Opposers also don't seem to understand how outlines differ from some other page type that they prefer. Some think articles are good enough as an overview, others think portals are more in-depth, still others think categories or navigation boxes are the most efficient and useful way to organize and present topical information. Some have simply never seen an "Outline of" page before and think they are a new type of page (they've been around under other names since 2001).
If you run across anyone who doesn't understand the role of outlines on Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Why do we have outlines in addition to...? might help reduce their misconceptions or uncertainties about outlines.
To add the outlines and related support pages to your watchlist (takes less than 30 seconds), cut and paste them from Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Watchlist into your raw watchlist. For a way to improve the display of your watchlist - by namespace (very useful) - see Watchlist sorter, or use the "super fast upgrade" at WP:OTS.
Or go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Watchlist using Related changes (currently without the talk pages) and click on "Related changes" in the toolbox menu on the sidebar on the left side of your screen.
The big push started with about a thousand banners and notices being placed on article talk pages all over Wikipedia.
But it didn't stop there...
The following Wikipedians have joined the OOK team.
Be sure to stop by their talk pages and introduce yourselves.
I asked a bunch of mentors at WP:ADOPT for advice. Several of them answered on my talk page. Most of those who replied were happy to help, and posted some very good ideas. A couple even joined the project.
Here are their ideas, and what is being done about them. A few of the tasks still need volunteers:
To the tops of about 30 subject articles, I placed a test batch of hatnotes leading to the corresponding outlines. The hatnotes look like this:
The rationale for the hatnotes is that each outline is a topical guide for its subject, and since tables of contents go at the front of a book, a link to each outline should be placed at the front of its subject.
Unfortunately, not all editors agree. Some of the hatnotes have already disappeared. :(
Note that the "Lists of topics" are of two types, including outlines and indexes, so discussions to remove, move, or merge those are usually relevant to the OOK. Also, outlines are a type of list, so discussions that affect lists in general also pertain to outlines. We've got to be on our toes!
I've excluded links to live discussions, out of respect for WP:CANVASS.
Here's a directory of outline support pages:
The Transhumanist 03:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Penubag needs feedback.
I've posted a few changes for him to make to it.
Please post additional comments and suggestions for him at User talk:Penubag#Chocolate banner.
Thank you.
The Transhumanist 02:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
As you know, Penubag is working on a banner to advertise the Outline WikiProject. And he's almost done.
The banner prominently presents the "Outline of chocolate", which of course will become the most widely advertised outline as soon as the banner goes live. The first thing many editors will do after seeing the banner is look for that outline.
The problem is, we don't have one.
So that's our first outline collaboration!
I started a draft this morning.
It needs to be finished and moved to the article namespace before we can start using Penubag's banner ad!
Come join in on the fun. It's chocolate!
The Transhumanist 21:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Guess who's back?[1]
It's now quite clear he is a Genre Warrior. --Kingoomieiii ♣ Talk 14:49, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I left him a friendly message on his talk page, with a warning that I will dig through the archive and create another ANI case, or find my old one.--SKATER Speak. 18:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I need your opinion on a situation I've been handling for a little over a month. I came across a flame war while I was on another vandal hunting spree, after reading through it I left both User:Kingoomieiii and the IP address User Talk: 67.242.56.62 Aka User:Spooky873. I soon got into an argument discussion with King and reported their actions too Wikiquette alerts (Too lazy to dig it through the archives). I agreed to help him against 67, who was edit warring and going against consensus on Foo Fighters articles and prepared an ANI case (Again in the archives) against him which was promptly ignored in the "BANNING XENO IS MORE IMPORTANT" Drama. After a break, 67 is still continuing his edit warring. You can see most of what you need: [2] and [3]. I'm at my wits end here, the only option I have is to message an Admin to look into this themselves. --SKATER Speak. 19:05, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Just thought I'd let you know that the IP's edit warring again. The one who's changing the genre of Foo Fighters even after you warned his about it.--Abce2|AccessDenied 21:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Never has a stop sign on a web page brought me so much joy. Cheers! --Kingoomieiii ♣ Talk 18:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 15 June 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 10:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Is it perfect? Can it be improved?
Penubag loves feedback. Please let him know if it can be further improved.
Thank you.
The Transhumanist 22:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Several members of the WikiProject have been hard at work.
Buaidh has been building and refining the outlines on the U.S. States, the states' historical outlines, and the Historical outline of the United States. Lately, his edits have dominated the project's watchlist readout. (I think he's overdue for a barnstar or two. hint hint)
Penubag has been working on medals for all the main branches of the OOK, and has completed the OOK WikiProject's animated advert banner (see below).
Highfields has been filling in the currencies for each country on their respective outlines.
NuclearWarfare and Thehelpfulone have been busy with WP:AWB, posting banners and notices, and helping our sister project, the Index WikiProject, get established. Indexes work hand-in-hand with the outlines and are prominently linked to from the top of most of them. And the outlines, which serve as tables of contents, are only as good as the pages they link to.
Since we started integrating (linking) the OOK and its support pages into the encyclopedia and into the Wikipedia community, activity on outlines has been increasing. Though there's still much left to do.
But I digress. There are a couple more...
Stefan is building the Outline of sharks.
MacMed has joined our advanced wiki-tools team, and is currently adding links to outlines in the corresponding subject articles' see also sections.
Be sure to stop by their talk pages and say "hi".
Penubag has finished this WikiProject's animated advert banner, and it is now being displayed on the Wikipedia ads template which in turn is displayed on about 2000 user pages. Each time someone access one of those pages, there is a 1 in 184 chance of them viewing this:
Wikipedia ads | file info – #184 |
If you'd like to display the banner on your userpage locked-on to the ad as above, use the following code:
{{Wikipedia ads|ad=184}}
(By the way, it's been awhile since we've barnstarred Penubag).
If you haven't already, please add the entire project's watchlist to your watchlist. Here's how:
I forgot to mention this step above. :)
I can't make heads or tails of 'em, but these links were on Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge:
I discovered an AfD discussion on possibly the first article named "Outline of", which was called Outline of Islamic and Muslim related topics, and which was created 4 years ago. Of course they deleted it. But now it has many friends, and so it has risen from the dead. :)
See the DRV discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 June 7#Outline of Islamic and Muslim related topics.
Recruiters needed. Drop me a note if you are interested.
I'm impressed with the level of enthusiasm and work going into the outlines. I'm proud to be working with each of you.
The Transhumanist 21:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
This outline is approaching completion.
I added a bunch more links, finding them with the following Google site-specific searches of Wikipedia:
(You can use the wikicode for the links above as the basis for new searches - just replace "Gibraltar" with any other country or region name).
The redlinks need to be bluelinked where possible. The most useful way is to create redirects leading to the material (which is usually included in a section of an article - see Wikipedia:Redirect#Redirects to page sections. That way, when the redirect pages are replaced by the actual articles, the links will already point to the right places.
Please take a crack at it, and bluelink a few.
Thank you.
Good luck.
Have fun.
The Transhumanist 00:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
That was fun. :)
The Transhumanist 23:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Work is proceeding apace...
The current consensus is that we can't place a hatnote leading to an outline at the top of a subject articles unless the outline being presented is of at least the same quality-level as the article.
Improve outline quality by completing them.
Place hatnotes for the outlines of high enough quality.
Guidelines pertaining to outlines need to be updated. Outlines emerged as a class of pages only a few months ago, and most of the relevant guidelines don't cover them specifically. For example, Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists is incredibly out of date.
Invite wikignomes, wikielves, and wikifairies (all 2500+ of them) to help on the outlines .
Identify 600 more subjects with coverage extensive enough to justify outlines, create rudimentary drafts for them, and post notices to the corresponding WikiProjects and subject talk pages to help build them.
Convert outlines titled "List of" to outline articles, and add them to the OOK. There are a few hundred of these. Conversion instructions are needed.
Add a description of outlines to About Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Basic navigation, and add tips about outlines to the WP:TOTD and Tips library.
The Transhumanist 20:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Minnecologies has done an incredible amount of work on Outline of forestry and posted a note to me on my talk page requesting feedback.
I've posted my observations at Talk:Outline of forestry#Finished outline review.
Please take a look at the outline and let Minnecologies know what you think of it on the outline's talk page.
Thank you.
The Transhumanist 19:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC) Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 20:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC).
I'm sorry that I haven't been available to assign tasks lately. For the past 3 days (not including today) I've been almost totally consumed in discussions concerning the location and very existence of outlines. Today I finally broke free and got back to work on outlines. Felt good.
A great deal has been happening with outlines and behind the scenes. I just don't have time to tell you all about it this time around. Here's the best I can do...
If you'd like a bird's eye view of everything that's happening with respect to outlines, see this page:
Or go to these pages (and click on "Related changes" in the sidebar's toolbox menu):
These outline articles, which were named "List of...", have been converted to an OOK format:
There are a lot of "List of" articles that are outlines. Some of them are on the same subjects as the "Outline of" articles. The following one have been recently merged:
The Transhumanist 01:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Phase two of outline integration (de-orphanizing outlines by adding links leading to them into article see also sections) is nearly complete. The better that outlines are integrated into the encyclopedia, the more use they will be to readers.
Due to greater exposure through outline integration, and with most of the OOK team on school summer vacation, development activity on outlines has increased a lot...
Thank you.
Here's what else has been going on...
There are a lot of contradictions in guidelines related to outlines. I'll be turning my attention to fixing those.
The number of "Outline of" articles is rapidly catching up to portals, and will probably pass them by the end of the summer!
Keep up the excellent work.
The Transhumanist 00:51, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
...to award Buaidh for all his hard work.
It's at User:Penubag/Sandbox3.
But it's not done yet. Feel free to help improve it.
I'm hoping that everyone involved with the WP:WPOOK will sign it (please sign without a timestamp).
Thank you.
The Transhumanist 22:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by –Juliancolton | Talkat21:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Just a note after your userp, your signature still links to your original name. Obviously there are redirects in place, but the redirect breaks the Popups gadget, specifically, its quick user-link tools.
And thanks much for the review! --King Öomie 20:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
You are welcome! :) And look what that vandal did on WP:AIV – removed his report and replaced it with a report about ME. Good thing he is stopped now! Chevy Impala 2009 22:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at History of Terrorism, you will be blocked from editing.
Yes, look at the edit history or read the talk page, haberstr pushes a pov, it gets reverted then editors like yourself who just use bots without learning the history jump him and he claims that as consensus, you over reaction and under informed nature of the edits only adds to the problems.
actually you reverted your revert of your revert, which i then reverted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LSG280709 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
if by templates you mean the tags, when they have accurate dates and actually reasons on the talk page then i stop removing them otherwise their mislead drive by tagging —Preceding unsigned comment added by LSG280709 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Or if less, name them all.
I look forward to your reply on my talk page.
The Transhumanist 23:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
HELP! :'( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.145.205.252 (talk) 15:33, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Skater. I did put the RfC now. Looking forward for your comment on the RfC. And thanks for letting the other users finding the consensus (Ibarano and Zuovman) know about the RfC.Solinothe Wolf 10:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
It looks like everything is fine now. --Loonymonkey (talk) 18:01, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
OK, your assignment is to build the Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of gridiron football.
Have fun.
I look forward to seeing how much you know about football. (I know much less than you, I'm sure).
If you don't know what to do or where to start, here are some things you can do to that page:
The Transhumanist 23:55, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Do you live in your parent's basement?
I revised a section on Lord Robert May, but it was undone. I simply removed the part of the section not referenced in the cited article and reworded what the article was saying (it wasn';t about religion per se, rather about co-operation between religion and combating climate change. 98.198.83.12 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
No problem. 98.198.83.12 (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
OnWikipedia:Requests for adminship/Skater I think you meant to type "I'm anxious to see how I measure up", not "I'm anxious to see how I level up". Prodego talk 22:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Unfortunately, I have closed your RfA early per WP:SNOW. Please do not be discouraged, many admins pass on their second attempt and you are likely to do the same if you continue to be an asset to the community. All the best, \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 01:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
You've got a funny idea of vandalism. I'm taking a nonsense opener that, as someone who just learned about this guy 5 minutes ago, didn't help me learn about him at all and just left me confused. If you think that's vandalism you should get your head examined and take an IQ test. Please explain what's so horrible about clarifying who this guy is? --208.38.59.163 (talk) 18:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Doesn't calling someone's contributions "vandalism" also violate CIVIL and isn't TWICE reverting people's edits without knowing what's going on actual vandalism and unconstructive to this site? Maybe you guys shouldn't shoot the messenger. --208.38.59.163 (talk) 18:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and calling the opener unintelligible IS commenting on on the contributions- I don't even know who wrote the opener so how can I be calling them unintelligible? --208.38.59.163 (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
King, why not let your boyfriend and I deal with this between us, kay? Now Sk8, you think calling someone a vandal TWICE is assuming good faith? If you really AGF'd you would have actually looked at the revision to find proof that I was vandalizing...if it sounds familiar that's because it's the whole "innocent until proven guility" thing that civil (there's that word again) societies use. I could see making the mistake once, but since a lot of vandals wreck and then move on to wreck the next thing the sensible thing would be to double-check if this was a bad edit or not. I'm glad you finally saw reason and looked at it, but to attack me twice out of the blue and then get mad that I would respond to you and not act superpolite to the person who called me an unconstructive vandal is asinine. Remember that YOU came after ME, not the other way around. As far as "may offend", maybe you should read the articles about Canadian Human Rights Commissions- if you go thru life not saying things that may offend someone you'd never make a sound because someone WILL be offended by anything. Maybe you guys don't get what "unintelligible" means (or are too sensitive about others that might), but the word doesn't mean "unintelligent" but "unable to be understood or unclear to the mind". Unintelligent may be a personal attack, but unintelligible cannot be. I'm glad that you apologized (sadly too many peeps on here wouldn't) but you should have ended there and not tried to justify with some non-apology apology. If you had sad "my bad, sorry" EOD I would have accepted that and moved on...would have saved all of us a lot of typing. :D Sadly, the word "vandalism" is probably the most misused by editors on this site and I think it's that culture that has caused you to use those terms that would likely offend a reasonable person.
You seem like a decent person, I just ask that you use due diligence when using this Huggle thing to try and minimize a mistake like this happening again. I know there sadly is a lot of people who actually do vandalize, but that's why the AGF policy exists. Yes, it's not easy being the good guys. I do consider this matter closed as I believe you will learn from your mistake. Peace out. --208.38.59.163 (talk) 20:02, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello! In your interest, I have closed the dispute on the Wikiquette alert page. If there are anymore further attacks by that particular user, please notify any administrator on the WP:AIAV or myself so further actions can be done; since this issue has been posted as a dispute; a temporary block might be issued. Don't worry, this message will be posted on the talk page of all the users involved in the matter. Thank you! Happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 01:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I have just submitted a comment on your Editor Review. Cheers.--LAAFansign review 20:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
I LAAFan award Skater with the Anti Vandalism Barnstar for your continuous efforts in stopping and reporting vandals. LAAFansign review 20:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC) |
Dear WikiProject Video games member,
You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games membersor{{User WPVG}} somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in recent months.
The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.
All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:
Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.
—WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot 03:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Ridiculous. Meanwhile he can continue provoking me by breaching the consensus and adding propaganda to articles. PRODUCER (talk) 16:53, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
We's everywhere!! Anyways - I'm not the only /b/tard sysop - not by a long shot, just that people keep their heads down, y'know? How many admins on here have their ED membership on their userpage ;) - Alison ❤ 05:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
{{talkback|Kingoomieiii}}
King Öomie 15:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
In August you thought I was making unconstructive edits to a page. This was my own former talk page. I had just undergone a name change moving away from my real name and was ensuring that the page was deleted. Thanks for ensuring that future edits are actually unconstructive before marking them as such. Naipicnirp (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
You are doing good patrolling--but watch out for articles about professors. Full professors at major universities are overwhelmingly likely to meet the standards of WP:PROF. For the purposes of CSD A7, anyone even indicating they are a professor anywhere is making at least an assertion of notability,l and wouldn't qualify for speedy--but might possibly be deleteable via prod or AfD. Ditto for anyone where the article asserts a book (except self published), or any other significant creative work--you'd need to search first, so it needs WP:BEFORE and then AfD if you cannot find anything. (Musicians, though, have their own rules for speedy--see WP:CSD A7) DGG ( talk ) 18:08, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Time for some catching up...
Congratulations and kudos to Buaidh, the first recipient of the Wikipedia World Developer Award, and the first inductee into the Outline of Knowledge WikiProject's Hall of Fame.
The award was announced about 2 months agos on the WikiProject's talk page, and on Wikipedia's Community Bulletin Board.
Buaidh created the historical outlines for all of the U.S. States, the U.S. capital, and most of the U.S. insular areas. He has also worked indefatigably day after day, improving all of the outlines of the U.S. States, and the outlines of all of the countries of the world!
Discussions can sure be frustrating - try getting a proposal through on a guideline's talk page sometime. Most of the time, it seems like the opposition is mindlessly following each other, like...
Zombies. (You've got to see this).
Yes, it's a proper noun. It's only proper, since we also have an article called Outline of knowledge which is about knowledge generically.
After a couple month vacation, I'm ready to slam the gas pedal to the floor. Are you?
Things are speeding up!
Take a look...
The following outlines have been added to the OOK within the past couple of months or so. Some of them were renames, some of them brand new, and some of them recently discovered after sitting in article space for awhile as orphans.
Here's some more pages that have been renamed to outlines even more recently, but that need to be converted to OOK format:
The following pairs of pages are content forks and need to be merged:
Only a few hundred more to go. :)
The Transhumanist 04:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 2, No. 5 — 3rd Quarter, 2009
Previous issue | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q3 2009, the project has:
|
Content
|
Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.
Hi, that move was incorrect per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) and I've undone it. Best, Sandstein 11:01, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
hello, tutorial one is done. Thanks. Ecoman24 (talk page) 17:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki libs
Hmmmmmmmmm --King Öomie 18:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I plead not guilty of harrassing AlanKC. Please read what we have said to eachother on both of our talk pages please and thank you and hopefully you will fairly see my point of view of this whole thing. Do what you think is right! It aaaaaaaaaaaall starts on the section VH1 DIVAS on MY talk page
So did you read all the stuff? Or do you want me to link you to them? Or can I please just forget about this whole thing and save my breath, put it behind me, and delete all that stuff off my talk page? --Homezfoo (talk) 09:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
okay bye. --Homezfoo (talk) 10:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC) |
But I 've had to remove your joining comment, [[11]], from the page. The part of the project is for historical reference. Abce2|This isnot a test 00:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay I know I said i'd put this crap behind me but can I just say something quickly and get it off my chest?
Okay, well I think its really rude that the Alan KC guy never admitted his own mistake about him thinking the Kelly Clarkson picture I upload was the same as another Kelly Clarkson picture. Look at THIS too. And it kind of shocks me a bit too since he is 40 years old and he is older than me and should be more responsible for his actions. I called him a liar in the beginning because I thought he purposely removed the picture because he didn't like it and I thought that wikipedia always wanted the most recent picture of a person's article as their default picture even if it were bad quality but I didn't know that but now I do so that is why I put it back but then someone else told me that it was poor quality and I realized that and I agreed.
Ithen called Alan KC a poopie head because he told me that the two pictures were the same. I scrolled down and noticed that they were NOT the same so I called him a poopie head because shit head sounds much worse and I was gonna put the picture back but I had to do more important things for my life at that time. Then he got offended I guess because I called him a poopie head (which is such a silly thing to get offended by, he should've just ignored it right then and there. I should have ignored what he said about the pictures being the same as well but I wanted to improve Kelly Clarkson's article because her default picture is old) and told an administrator who told me to quit with the personal attacks which I had no idea what those were on Wikipedia at that time.
So I then deleted all that stuff of my page cause I wanted to put it behind me but oh my god it came back eeeeek!
The next day, I logged in and they were reverted back by none other than Alan KC. He told me that I couldn't remove them that "it was a no no" and to read the rules or something like that. So then I was like uuuuuuuuh okay then. So... I didn't want to get in trouble with wikipedia cause I like editing articles on here for some reason, so I just left what he reverted back there but then the same administrator I think he reported me to, deleted what he reverted back on my talk page and told Alan KC that I CAN delete it off my talk page so I was like woo hoo! And in my mind I was like suck on that Alan KC. So then, I couldn't keep myself together from writing this to him on his talk page (Sorry for not specificly linking you to what I wrote, its because he archived the page and it made it harder for me to find my edit on his talk page history section). Which resulted in the administrator AMALTHEA to say this to me. That I should'nt gloat because my ass was on water-thin ice which made me think what the hell because all I ever did was call him a poopie head and a liar. I'm surprised he got offended by poopie head so that made me write:
"Oh God, Lord forbid that I ever get blocked from wikipedia for calling someone a mr. meanie pickle face next time. Oh the horror! I guess that's a personal attack here and you will suffer the consequences!"
Which is what he quoted from me to you which made me sound like a complete asshole who was pushing people's buttons but I'm not. So then I, being the responsible and kind person that I am, apologized to Alan KC for calling him that and then I told him about the Kelly Clarkson pictures not being the same because he said they were! So I tried to break the ice and be friends by offering him some virtual ice cream and then I complimented him on the things that he does. Now that i read it, it does kind of sound sarcastic and mean but its not! Curse how the keyboard makes you sound like sometimes! I actually tried to be nice to him but it was misunderstood. So then Alan KC gave me a warning badge for harrassing other editors. And again I was like "what the heeeeeeeeck!". I never said I was [harrasing him like he said:
Please press Ctrl + F to find the quote "You even admit on my talk page you've been coming on here lately for the purpose of harassing me." - from Alan KC on my talk page.
That was NEVER EVER my intention. All i really wanted to do was tell him about the kelly clarkson pics not being the same so he could realize his mistake and not make a similiar one in the future. And maybe also so he could apologize to me for saying that they were? But anyway, I guess he got offended by that as well which made me write this on his talk page. And then I met you. And I met you again here. And then I wrote something right there in that section to you. And then all hell broke loose and some random user gave me the "trout" and told me to kapish myself at the bottom of this page. And then again I was like what the heck. So i gave up trying to defend myself cause it obviously just made things worse. And now I am here writing this to you.
I just wanted to say all this cause it has been bugging me a bit because I got all this thrown at me and I was like WHOAH slow down there cowboy. Yeah it was wrong for me to call him a liar and a poopie head, but I didn't know that before and I also thought he removed the pic on purpose and lied and said to me that they were the same. Or maybe he DID do that in purpose? Who knows because he never said anything else to me besides tell me that, and revert my page, and give me a warning, and reported me to you. But anywaaaaaaaaaaaaaays,
And I also don't feel like you did not do the right thing here and I feel like I didn't get to explain myself very well so that is why I also wrote this. So NOW that I wrote all this..... I can move on with my life and make awesome edits to articles on wikipedia. :D And like Alan KC said on his talk page, he is no longer worth my time as well. :)
Hopefully this fire has been resolved now.
Okay thanks for reading and listening Skater.
Bye! =]
--Homezfoo (talk) 12:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I came across this while stub-sorting. Couple of points:
PamD (talk) 15:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Ju-Ju Clayton, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ju-Ju Clayton. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Giants27(c|s) 18:36, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Skater. I noticed your articles on Ju-Ju Clayton and Marcus Davis (American football). While I'm a proponent of articles on college football players, these two articles appear to fall below even the most liberal notability threshold. There are many who take the position that college football players are not notable unless they've won one of the major college football awards (e.g., Heisman, Unitas, Lombardi, Maxwell, Outland, Butkus, Doak Walker, Biletnikoff, etc.). I think that's far too narrow and that an All-American, All-Conference, or established star player for a big-time football program (like Va. Tech) should be recognized as notable. But absent significant, non-trivial coverage in the mainstream media focused on the player (i.e., not simply mentions in game coverage), a backup player or a freshman who has just scored his first touchdown doesn't cut it. There are plenty of notable players who need articles, so I certainly hope the AfD on Ju-Ju doesn't discourage your continued work on college football articles. Cbl62 (talk) 00:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Please move this page back since (gridiron football) is the correct term since he has played two codes of football.--Giants27(c|s) 18:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Skater. Not really a big deal, but comments such as this aren't really helpful or productive. In general, it's best to only post if you have something useful to contribute to the discussion. Don't want to come across as rude, but just something to keep in mind. Cheers! –Juliancolton | Talk 02:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Since it has been well over 30 days since you requested to be reviewed, I've gone ahead and archived your request as part of my effort to cleanup Editor Review. You may view your review here. Thanks & happy editing. If you have any questions, please message me on my talk page. =D Netalarmtalk 05:15, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Devin Frischknecht requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:15, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Show me an IP editor who mass-edits foo fighters articles with edit summaries including both the phrases "Post-grunge" and "are you serious?", and I'll show you an editor circumventing a six month block. →User talk:Enigmaman#Ugh← --King Öomie 22:51, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)