User talk:2/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:2. 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

(Wehberf (talk) 19:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)) Hi Mr. Senseless , I would like to discuss Extol Internationals profile page. Evidently you placed a delete tag on it however it is now sourced. I pleaded my case here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Extol_International

(Cwnz (talk) 11 December 2007) Hi Mr. Senseless, (Re statistics education) I'm new at this. You deleted my category statement "statistics education" and added "mathematics education" and "mathematics". Statistics ed is sister discipline to maths ed but not part of it so I'd prefer "statistics education" and "statistics". Do you have reasons for doing this that a novice might not see? I'm also interested in how to set up "statistical education" and have it redirect to "statistics education" so that searches are handled properly. Thanks, cwnz

(Cwnz (talk) 12 December 2007) Thanks very much, cwnz —Preceding comment was added at 19:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Though a speedy keep without new evidence pretty much means that a gun was jumped, thanks for having the grace to withdraw when wit became clear that doing so was for the best. Consideration can hardly be taken for granted online. I'd like to chat with you for a while, but this will have to happen after I do away with enough of my existing commitments, principal among which right now is writing a term paper in four hours so cheers. --Kizor (talk) 18:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

May I suggest you upload this image and other images with a free license to commons? You can do so using Commons:Special:Upload. -- Cat ^chi? 21:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually just realized I could have and should have done that. Thanks for the heads up! Mr Senseless (talk) 21:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) -- Cat ^chi? 02:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I removed the CSD tag on this article. Although I actually agree with you that the article met the guideline, I thought that since there all ready was an AfD going on, the best thing to do was to allow the community to weigh in on it, or maybe even fix it up (if such a thing is possible). If you decide to replace the tag I won't contest it, although I don't know whether an admin will agree or not. For what its worth, I voted "weak delete" on the AfD. Cheers, Xymmax (talk) 21:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The proper place for that kind of report is the conflict of interest noticeboard: WP:COI/N. Daniel Case (talk) 01:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Congrats, you got a really good voice there... are you a professional opera singer? -- Mentifisto 19:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 44 support, 4 oppose, and 3 neutral. I will work hard to improve the encyclopedia with my new editing tools (and don't worry, I'll be careful).

  jj137 ^♠ 01:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

(from my helpdesk question) Thanks for your response. Yes, I do have excel, I just don't use it much. Can you explain it to me how you do it in excel? Since I want to reverse more than 1 list. I have office 2007 btw. Garion96 (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, in that way. Yes, that's easy although still quite a lot of work. I was hoping more of something you could just click "reverse" and all is done. :) But this is still better than doing it by hand. Thanks, Garion96 (talk) 22:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

adding this to make sure MizaBot III is archiving my talk page correctly Mr Senseless (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

		The AFD Barnstar
		For fine contributions to WP:AFD, I, Sharkface217, hereby award you this barnstar. --Sharkface217 22:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome. --Sharkface217 23:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, one can earn barnstars relatively easily here. Just a heads up. --Sharkface217 23:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Pbsclassiclogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I'm back. You might be happy to know that the term paper that kept me insanely busy for a while was on the ethical issues on the use of combat robots in the near future, and was very well received. It warms an old fogey's heart to see how fast you've jumped into things - though if you keep up RC patrol, you might want to invest in a vandalism counter, such as the one on my page. They come in handy userbox sizes these days.

Enough rambling. I mentioned I wanted to have a talk about Angry Video Game Nerd AfD and some of the surrounding issues. First of all, "not encyclopedic" is not a good argument: It encompasses all possible problems, resolving to a tautological "this shouldn't be in an encyclopedia because this shouldn't be in an encyclopedia." We know that - be more specific. Also, we're currently the #8 most popular site on the entire Internet without any generally accepted idea of what an encyclopedia is - if we allow a single person's opinion that something shouldn't be here as a valid argument for deletion, well, at that point we might save everyone some time by blowing up the place and going home. The latter also applies to scope. If you want to discuss in detail why we shouldn't have articles on such things as the Nerd and Chris Croker, we can, but I have to warn that my response schedule may be erratic.

A more important matter is trying to research, discuss and improve the article before listing it for deletion. I don't know if this is done with the kind of nonsense that gets caught on new page patrol, but otherwise it's common practice and may even be required. Even if it isn't, it's still considerate. I have these really good reasons but I stayed up late writing this and suddenly find myself unable to concentrate, so I'm going to finish this section a bit later, ok? (Sorry! :P)

• AfDs are non-trivial drains on time, effort and morale,
• for all its size and clout, Wikipedia is an online community. Such acts of politeness and goodwill are not only nice but vital.
• Caution is especially warranted with articles on bizarre subjects: in my experience, even veteran users have high "miss" rates with their impressions of these.

A disclaimer: This is written as an opinion piece and not as a quotation of The Rules^TM. It carries no obligation, just arguments and their reasoning. I am an inclusionist, I favor broad inclusion criteria and the benefit of the doubt. But the last time someone accused me of lying in order to gain an edge in a petty online argument -- well, he calmed down and retracted it. Cheers, Kizor 21:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

couldnt have said it better. DGG (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I just heard your song - I know next to nothing about opera but I was certainly impressed :-P --BorgQueen (talk) 12:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Since the history merge looks like it won't happen please make all future edits to Court TV and move it to TruTV so that 4 years of edit history aren't lost to a redirect page. I've moved TruTV to TruTV (temp) for the time being. -- Cmjc80 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• Cool, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmjc80 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with these. However, I fixed two small typos. :-) Bearian (talk) 16:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Less than two minutes after article creation, you proposed speedy deletion.[1]. Please reconsider this very hasty move. Also, if you could, please let me know what research you did before proposing speedy deletion. Thanks. Ra2007 (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

New articles often start as stubs, please reconsider your hasty db, which you admit you added without performing any research. Ra2007 (talk) 22:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear 2, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia. -- AKeen (talk) 15:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick question since you seem to know what you're doing around here and I'm fairly new at all this AfD stuff. (hehe) I had a person voting on one of my AfDs get a little angry and say I should have proded the creator first since the article was new but I noticed you doing the same as me in many cases and tagging new articles for deletion. Is there a rule of thumb about tagging articles for deletion? Redfarmer (talk) 19:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your response and happy deleting. You're fast...you've beaten me a few times tonight. Redfarmer (talk) 19:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I've been checking your contributions and bascially all it says is "Request for Deletion", "Request for Speedy Deletion". Do you ever contribute to wikipedia, except for your deletions. Connorjack (talk) 19:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
--Sorry, I was a little angry at why my article should be deleted when I wrote this message.Connorjack (talk) 11:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dont Copy That Floppy.ogg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Just a couple of suggestions regarding deletions: Firstly, please allow new articles time to develop before using CSD or PROD - you prodded Discos Fuentes only 3 minutes after it was created. Articles are often built up by editors over several edits when they are created. Secondly, please at least do a Google search to check for notability of subjects before nominating articles for deletion. Articles that can have reliable sources added should not be proposed simply because they don't have reliable sources at the time. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 11:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for accepting my apology, and thanks for making a great comment on my talk page. Connorjack (talk) 17:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Mr Senseless: Would you please help me find the right deletion template to put on the redirect above? The redirect Lloyd-Jones leads to Martyn Lloyd-Jones. I have been bothered for some time now that a well know Classical scholar's name appears several places in red and have just created the an inadequate stub for Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones. Let Martyn not bogart a redirect. Thanks for your help. Aramgar (talk) 22:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I was aware that redirects were not subject to speedy deletion and did not know what to do next. Elonka provided a solution: it seems that a disambiguation page already existed for Lloyd Jones. I am embarrassed that I did not find that simple, logical solution myself. I look forward to working with you again. Aramgar (talk) 13:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which which passed nem. con. with 45 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thank you for your support and all the kind words that were expressed. I will try to live up to the trust placed in me by the community. I now have my homework to do and then pass the Marigolds.

Kbthompson (talk) 15:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

		Thanks for your support
		Thank you SO MUCH for your support in my unanimous RFA. Take this cookie as a small token of my appreciation.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I have very little experience in AfD matters, and am asking for your input before nominating an article for deletion, because, quite frankly, I do not want to be seen as someone who capriciously nominates articles which do not meet AfD standards.

If you have time, please take a look at this article. It was created by the person who—as the intro asserts—is the very person who coined the term. Most of the edits are by that person. Most, if not all, of the sources link back to this person. I mean, at best it appears to me to constitute OR, at worst, self-promotion. But maybe I'm seeing it wrong. What do you think?

I selected you and many other editors pretty much completely at random; I picked one day's AfD archives, and clicked on the talk pages of the first two or three dozen editors' talk pages I came across. I hope that in using this selection method, I will get editors who are well-versed in AfD policies, yet who also represent a good cross-section of AfD philosophies. I will monitor your talk page for your response. Thanks. Unschool (talk) 07:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

• Michael Allan (talk · contribs) (my sockpuppet, ROFLMAO) hasn't been editing and probably not been logged in in the last 24 hours.[2] Chances (and the sensible assumption, I'd wager) are that he is not yet aware of the AfD at all. The bad faith in your ludicrous sockpuppetry allegation reflects only back on yourself.

• Außerdem, glaubst du dass Michael Allan in Deutschland lebt und eine deutsche IP hat? Siehe auch User:Dorftrottel/disclosure. User:Dorftrottel 16:00, January 12, 2008

• Finally, let me quickly log out and post my IP here so you can perfrom a WHOIS on it yourself: 87.78.181.230 (talk) 16:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, as a matter of fact, the sockpuppet assumption is bad faithed, as witnessed by the plausible alternative assumption that MA has simply not been logged in and is therefore not aware of the AfD. User:Dorftrottel 16:15, January 12, 2008

What's more, my very first comment on the matter on Unschool's talk started with the explanation that I "Saw [Unschool's] note on User talk:EEMIV." So you're also accusing me of blatantly lying. User:Dorftrottel 16:19, January 12, 2008

I don't care to amuse you. User:Dorftrottel 16:55, January 12, 2008

Good. User:Dorftrottel 16:59, January 12, 2008

Would you agree to a closure? I'm run some diffs and checked the logs etc. I can't find anything that would indicate a sockpuppetry case. Best regards, Rudget. 20:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

• Ok accepted, let's move on. I heard there's an encyclopedia to be built somewhere near here, maybe we can help out... :D User:Dorftrottel 21:22, January 12, 2008

• * A final comment on this issue over at User:Dorftrottel's talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unschool (talk • contribs) 21:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought I would share with you the new userbox that User:Kafka Liz has created. Aramgar (talk) 00:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

My personal Opinion: before claime what is not good please learn about vibroacoustic. When you was born the doctors put you in vibroacoustic camera to increase blood circulation. and handresd of article on PUBMED zbout study vibroascoustic which also called vibroacoustic stimulation. I want to mentin what without wicboucousti you will not live over one week. Our body used vibroacoustik ever minute. Without vibroacoustin and vibration on sound frequency life will ot be exist. It iase to cretics even do not knowing a subject. Yury —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.81.3.190 (talk) 04:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you already made contact with the ISP in charge of 64.2.200.91, or may I contact them? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 18:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The Special Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		For help with an infobox-- greatly appreciated. ApJ (talk) 15:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you review the comments on GossipReport.com entry. The site is totally CAN-SPAM compliant and although people may disagree with some of the content on the site, the vision is solid and significant. The site will give a more complete social history of people from a third person perspective instead of the first person perspective of other social networking sites. It is getting heavy traffic and is a viable entity and should not be deleted, in my opinion. If we could revisit the discussion, I would appreciate your support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaslate (talk • contribs) 16:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

"The Software Publishers Association gives you permission to copy this video for the non-profit purpose of promoting the ethical and legal use of software " does not allow for commercial use or derivatives thus is not sutible for wikipedia.Geni 20:57, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

One your position is incorrect and second even if it was it wouldn't make the video free enough for use on wikipedia. Even asside from the non-profit issues there is the whole lack of permission for derivatives issue.Geni 21:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

For soemthing to be considered free enough for use on wikipedia derivatives have to be allowed. To be exact it has to meat the requirments here.Geni 21:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

From the page I just linked to "the freedom to make changes and improvements, and to distribute derivative works" which is policy per this foundation resolution.Geni 21:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:DontCopyFloppy.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC) --Mr Senseless (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dont Copy That Floppy.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Mister Sensless, I would like to revisit the conversation about the gossipreport.com entry. Earlier I posted the following comment on this page but didn't hear back from you. "Can you review the comments on GossipReport.com entry. The site is totally CAN-SPAM compliant and although people may disagree with some of the content on the site, the vision is solid and significant. The site will give a more complete social history of people from a third person perspective instead of the first person perspective of other social networking sites. It is getting heavy traffic and is a viable entity and should not be deleted, in my opinion. If we could revisit the discussion, I would appreciate your support." We have amended the post somewhat and will continue to do so as the site grows. There seems to be some support for keeping the entry and I was hoping to get the Marked for deletion designation removed. Thanks, Chad Slate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaslate (talk • contribs) 18:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. good luck with the opera. have a great day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaslate (talk • contribs) 20:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been looking at users and contributing and I would like to award you with The Original Barnstar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HomerSimpson1996 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Really it's no problem, you deserve it. Without people like you Wikipedia would have horrible articles, with no references no links etc. Thanks for accepting the barnstar! HomerSimpson1996 (talk) 11:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I think a movie qualifies for an article if it's in IMdb, but perhaps we can run and AFD and see if it's indeed notable or not? New York Dreams (talk) 03:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Ingram

This bassist has been on national TV and Music Videos. He is also ASCAP affiliated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chopperdudep (talk • contribs) 00:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Well it is a sign of being able to make music that is recognized by music industries and high officials

We have nominated the article for AfD in same time, just you beat me a bit early. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

1019 cool is a real article and im sorry if you know nothing about it but to us VCU students it means a lot...... It is our own lingo and the world should know about it.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.172.168.120 (talk • contribs)

I don't typically refactor talk page comments, but please use a single heading and don't forget to sign your comments. I have a bot archiving my talk page and it won't work properly otherwise. Thanks! :) Mr Senseless (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Edited My talk once again. Hopefully for the last time =) -
--Metimoral (talk) 21:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

i french guy and see your name link about secure disk. even only nero implement this technology find article in wiki could be more usefull than information not find in nero website where there is only publicity. it ll isefull to know how work this technologu and how secure is this technology even claimm nero. think also other technology do the same thing !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.47.66.89 (talk) 00:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

		The PCHS-NJROTC Abuse Report and Antivandal Barnstar
		For your service as a Wikipedia:Abuse reports contactor and investigator!

GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 23:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Interested in becoming an administrator? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

GO-PCHS-NJROTC would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact GO-PCHS-NJROTC to accept or decline the nomination. A page will then be for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2 . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Why did you remove two images from the CharlieCard pages? Ron Newman (talk) 13:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

link color still isn't working. one more signature test

19:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC) green isn't working, lets try this

19:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

• lets try this sig Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 16:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for offering to become an administrator. Generally, users must have around 1500 edits to the mainspace for the community to trust the user. You currently have less than 500. Instead of submitting an RFA now, you should get more experience writing articles, and maybe get an admin coach or have an editor review. I suggest you withdraw, and get a bit more experience before going through with another RFA. Malinaccier (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Know this: you don't have to withdraw because I suggested it, but I think that a bit more experience would do you good. Malinaccier (talk) 16:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Mr Senseless, I am sorry to inform you that I have closed your RfA as unlikely to reach consensus: there was a 4:1 ratio against the request at the time of processing. However, don't be downhearted by this: I can assure you that your contributions are both highly welcome and valued—many editors have failed their first request for adminship, only to sail through later and become well-respected administrators.

You may wish to review the Guide to RfA before submitting future nominations, as well as well as here and here, both of which list the more highly-supported RfAs. Additionally, admin coaching is a useful aid for editors interested in becoming an administrator. If I can assist you at all, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kindest regards, AGK (contact) 17:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)