User talk:Master Thief Garrett/Archive03

I saw your note at Talk:RuneScape runes and I can't tell you how great it is to have somebody who agrees with me that this stuff should all be removed. If you look at a bunch of the talk pages, you'll see me arguing with users who keep complaining about how there's so much more they need to add and how they're going to split the articles into two, three, four more pieces. Let me ask your advice: what would you suggest with such minor articles like Castle Wars, RuneScape bestiary and the newest one RuneScape dungeons? I don't want to, but I might just VFD them until people get the point that this cannot continue to keep growing. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:01, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

(answered on User's talk page)

I've updated the R.C. Zaetta article :-) Just started reading up on this stuff, it's pretty fascinating! Also obscure... - Ta bu shi da yu 03:13, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(not sure this needs an answer)

Hi, I responded to your post on WP:ANI, I just wanted to say that I realize blanking the users page, probably was not a good idea, seeings I am not an admin. I thought of a way it could be done, and tested it, was more concerned about wiki being hacked, and wanted to assist. I provided all the info on ANI, I'm sure you have seen it by now. However, if it is deemed fit that I be blocked for inappropriate user page editing, I understand. BTW, he contacted me about it as well. Thanks. <>Who?¿? 10:39, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Um, why are you telling me instead of saying this on AN/I?

Good point, I actually thought of that, after I hit save. Mainly because you were the main admin handling it, and sometimes it seems my comments get ignored on ANI (probably just my "paranoia" :) ). I wanted to give a personal heads up I suppose. Thanks for replying. <>Who?¿? 11:04, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(answered on User's talk page)

There you go. ¦ Reisio 00:49, 2005 July 13 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for your excellent explanation of how to handle NPOV disputes on the Village pump a few days ago. I've linked the discussion on my user page as an example of a new user sucessfully navigating their first edit war. BTW, I see your name on a lot of good comments on VP - good job, keep it up! JesseW 07:26, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your replies to my query at WP:RD. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking 17:14, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Well yes you can have a 4 part trilogy! as Rockstar Games will prove when GTA 4 comes out in 2007. The GTA trilogy is GTA, GTA2, GTA3 & all the other games are sort of like parts of each games. Make sence? if not i'll try again tomorrow when im not so tired Good night Agent003

Ok i'll try and explaine better on the page Grand Theft Auto Trilogy.

Could you help me make the whole GTA info better on Wiki by Redirecting Grand Theft Auto (series) to Grand Theft Auto Trilogy? thanks Agent003

Just Redirect Grand Theft Auto (series) to Grand Theft Auto Trilogy! GTA Trilogy is a better page with more info than GTA (series). PLUS GTA Trilogy has all of the info on GTA (series) plus much more. It makes more sence to redirect GTA (series) than have both of them!!

You no it makes sence.

Ok, i see your point -- as GTA Trilogy page has more & better info than GTA series, can i just put the current GTA Trilogy page onto the GTA (series) Page? Agent003

• Ive done that now. please have a look and edit any info that might be wrong. Agent003

The only problem is that the page Grand Theft Auto Trilogy is now blank!

You really ought to see someone about that cough... yeh., okay - go to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Master_Thief_Garrett, accept nomination and answer the usual questions :) Grutness...wha? 07:39, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I found two articles related to non-very-known business outlets in Grand Theft Auto III (see Bitchin' Dog Food and Easy Credit Autos). Aside their presence in the game, there isn't much else that could be said about them. Perhaps a vfd on them are in order. ╫ 25 ^{chatter ↔ grafitti} 07:50, 19 July 2005 (UTC) ╫[reply]

After looking at both pages, i only see the need to delete Easy Credit Autos as it has no relavance to the game. Bitchin' Dog Food, however, should stay as it features in about 5 missions. - Agent003

There is a discussion about splitting this page on the talk page, though a simple split is probably too simiplistic. In reality, it needs to be split and then merged with the books' articles. There's no template for that... :) James 00:44, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the note; I hadn't realized that the merge template was for sections as well as articles. 01:00, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Please provide one section for the discussion of all the merges you propose. This will avoid the problem of discussing it in six different places. I suggest a new section in Talk:Harry Potter (plot). You can then use {{subst:mergefrom}} or whatever, and fill in correct links to the sections for the Discuss link ([[Talk:Harry Potter (plot)#Section name|Discuss]]). — 131.230.133.185 01:49, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Um, it was Jamesmusik who added the {{mergeto}}, I merely put the {{mergefrom}} to complement them. Hopefully he'll start a merging rationale soon, as I really have no knowledge of the content involved. And then it can be fixed as you suggested. Garrett^Talk 01:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary: Current word count: 310 >> 312 (counted using a Firefox extension so should be faultless)

Hi Garrett, which extension is that? I tried looking for it, but haven't been able to find it. I've been copying & pasting into TextPad, but it would be very handy to use a Firefox word counter. Thanks, --Deathphoenix 13:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's called, unsurprisingly, Word Count, but it's not on the central extensions index for some reason. Note that it does not work in edit boxes (like this one) for some reason. Anyway, enjoy! :) Garrett^Talk 23:07, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly! It works like a charm. Right-click brings up a whole lot of options, so it's time to clear out some of my Extensions. :-) --Deathphoenix 01:28, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

File:Three blade safety razor.jpg

Just have to say, I loved your commentary at the Ref desk on, um, "male satisfaction proceedure." I hereby award you a disposable razor to help you in keeping your palms in check. -- Essjay -· Talk 15:53, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, yes, get the contacts! Although, I find that mine bother me when I spend twelve or fourteen hours on Wikipedia; I have to wear my glasses for marathon sessions. (Editing sessions! Marathon editing sessions!) -- Essjay -· Talk 23:18, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all -® 08:07, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,man,nobigdeal,yeah,y'know?Congratulationsanyway.(Sorry,myspacekeyisbroken).Cheers,smoddy 10:44, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Back and running now! smoddy 11:19, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome; congratulations! --User:Merovingian (t) (c) 12:11, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, and congratulations on your adminship! I wonder a bit about your deletion of Pinin Brambilla Barcilon, because when I looked at it I seemed to find some evidence of notability. I have brought it to WP:VFU if you care to discuss it. Thanks, Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on the promotion; I know exactly what you're feeling! Yes, there is definately additional stress associated with the job, but you'll love it. If I can be of any help with anything, just let me know. Good luck! -- Essjay -· Talk 14:34, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome, and let me add my congratulations as well. Thanks also for the help on the Flaccus page. Happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 14:55, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion illustrates well my strong reservations about the "no assertion of notability" criterion for deletion of articles about people. Although it's in poor English it does state that he was the Spanish minister of "Health and Consumo" from 1982 to 1986 in the first post-Franco socialist government formed by Felipe Gonzalez. You either missed it or don't consider this an assertion of notability.

The notability criterion is extremely broad and can easily result in deletions of articles that, like this one, only need a copy edit. Please consider using a cleanup tag instead of deleting. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:00, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on your adminship. I am confident that you will use the extra powers wisely. I wouldn't have supported you otherwise. -- JamesTeterenko 16:53, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete articles just because you don't understand the language in which they are written. Please carefully read the deletion policy and try to follow it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:56, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think this is a CSD by way of A2: [1], right? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:32, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so--at least I hope we can't go around deleting articles just because they're also on the German Wikipedia. Someone also pointed out to me that the history already contained an intelligible English language translation that only needed a bit of cleanup--which I have done. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:09, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like what was done was a machine translation of the German article, which was copy-pasted in. There wasn't any appreciable editing or translation effort put into it—and it started out as a pretty poor machine translation, too. The original author even gave up and pasted in the German version, since it was so mangled. I'd call it a (generous) CSD A2, though your new version (very nearly a de novo creation) certainly can stay, Tony. I'd also say that we want to discourage the copy-pasting of uncleaned-up machine translations. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:36, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please reconsider your deletions. This is an article about a bondage toy, a fact that could easily be confirmed by googling. Please do not assume that something is nonsense just because you have never heard of it. I've cleaned it up a bit but ideally I shouldn't have to trail around cleaning up your mess. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:18, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I see you're clearing out the backlog over at TfD; it needs it. I also saw you're deleting only some of them: I suppose this is because the others still have entries in the "what links here" section? That's because they are just links to the templates, like {{templatename}} or [[Template:TemplateName]], rather than actual instances of the template being used. They are fine to delete: all that will happen is that those links will go red. Do correct me if I misunderstand, though. (And congrats on the adminship!) -Splash 16:59, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I traced this to a a .mil site which I suspect makes it public domain. In any case don't just delete stuff because (as you say yourself) you're "too lazy" to follow the copyright problems policy. You don't have to be an administrator if you don't want to take on the responsibilities associated with the job. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:38, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I hope you don't mind me mentioning this. I would suggest you be very cautious when speedily deleting pages, particularly in the early days of your adminship. I urge you particularly to check your definition of patent nonsense, particularly as it applies to Wikipedia. Patant nonsense is something that couldn't be understood in any way, not just something that is plainly ridiculous. Cheers, and good luck! smoddy 17:54, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Garrett, allow me to congratulate you on your adminship. I feel I have to echo Tony's concerns here -- you're diving into deletion with some gusto, and as a result, I believe you're making some poor on-the-spot decisions about speedy deletions (and some good decisions also). It is better to exercise caution when deleting, in my opinion-- half the time when I vfd something, I'm told quickly it qualifies under speedy deletion criteria. But that hesitation of mine (which admittedly cost me 2-3 minutes) allows others to have a look and chime in. Most troubling to me is your apparent belief that a submission in another language is speedyable. The page Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English exists for a reason, I think, and if you're not familiar with it, I hope you'll give it a look so that you can use it in the future. I know my arrival here as a spoilsport is probably not particularly welcome, but you have to remember that the controversial actions of any admin are usually taken by fringe editors as evidence of "the great admin conspiracy". That makes everybody's job more difficult. In the long run, I think you'll find your life is easier and the 'pedia better served if you take a slower course through deletions. If you IRC, use the wikipedia channel as an easy way to ping a friend and ask them what they think of an article. In general, unless what you're looking at is "adhfkjh" or "john has a small penis", I strongly suggest reviewing the speedy deletion criteria before deleting something on those grounds -- I always do, and I'm often surprised that what I always thought was speedyable is, in fact, not. If you want to chat about this, please drop me a line -- I try to be a very open-minded person who's willing to see other sides of the argument. Best of luck in your newfound responsibilities, Jwrosenzweig 18:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have undeleted The spill canvas as it does not meet the speedy deletion criteria, even though it is of no use whatsoever to the project. Please try to be more conservative in your speedy deletions deletion of material -- however limited its value may be -- in violation of the guidelines gets the various m:inclusionist forces all fired up, and no good ever comes of that. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:19, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also Lisa Shock. Please note that just because someone has placed a "speedy" tag on something doesn't absolve you of the need to determine whether the page qualifies as a speedy yourself. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:30, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Finally I note that you have deleted several articles as "advertising." While I have not undeleted any of these, because they are of dubious value indeed, they still should have been listed at VfD rather than speedied. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:38, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto what everyone else says. While it's great that you're going through the new contributions, some of the things you sd'd were copyvio or vfd candidates (and you even acknowledged this in a few edit summaries). Cheers. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:39, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Let me add a couple of finer points.

• Always take a look at what links to each page (especially templates) and make sure you're not going to break something when you delete the page. For example, Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Sane shows it is in use on Wikipedia:School articles needing evaluation. Deleting leaves a confusing red link and unintendedly invites re-creation.
• Make sure to delete Talk pages, and any archived talks, as well (ex. Template talk:Swwiki).
• Images on VFD'd pages should not be automatically deleted ("14:38, 22 July 2005 Master Thief Garrett deleted "Image:Caraccsecfv.jpg" (part of a failed Vfd)"). Be very careful with images because they cannot be undeleted.

If you could take some time and apply these points to what you've already deleted, that would be best. -- Netoholic @ 18:46, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• To take Netoholics first point: it's ok to leave a redlink to a template behind if it's been through TfD (as SANE has). It's just necessary to remove any actual instances of it from pages. I was the one who cleaned up that long list that's at the bottom of TfD now and have quite deliberately left references (but not instances) to them on talk pages alone: the instructions say that's the way to do it. It calls attention to the fact that it doesn't exist anymore so can't be used. -Splash 18:56, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I did have rather a rough first time didn't I? I guess I did misunderstand several things. Most notably I misunderstood the new vanity criteria thing, it wasn't worded the way I was thinking for some reason. Gah. :(

I deleted that failed-VFD image because it was in holding on IFD, and they said it was only waiting for the VFD to finish. Right? Well no-one had voted to keep it, right?

Oh and the templates, they were in the section for ones completely orphaned, so I assumed they were OK to delete. Hm.

• The templates were ok; you didn't just obliterate instances of them, you just left redlinks in talk pages which, as the instructions on TfD indicate, is fine. Otherwise, we'd have to go removing whole sentences adn things from talk, which would be peculiar when we're only after the template. -Splash 03:03, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Splash, I didn't say he should get rid of all redlinks. The point is to make the template's removal make sense. For Template:Sane, making a post on the talk page of Wikipedia:School articles needing evaluation saying the template is gone, and recommending that the red links be fixed, would have been a good solution. Also, much like when people mark speedy deletes, you still should make a quick confirmation before pushing the delete button, since you're the one responsible. -- Netoholic @ 03:12, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. It was me who went through the bottom of TfD orphaning and the like and moved them to the deletion cell from where MTG took them. There should really have been messages from the original TfD nomination stating the fact (practical considering the small no. of places most TsfD are in use); clearly there weren't in this case. -Splash 03:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But that's not really my problem, is it? I mean, when they go to the holding cell they're supposed to be stripped ready for "the delete button" right? Hm. Garrett^Talk 03:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is true, but that doesn't absolve the deleting admin of all responsibility. I could have been a troll trying to force through the deletion, after all. -Splash 17:59, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to tread more carefully in future. I've just installed that VFDing Javascript so that should make Vfding hopeless articles less of a bother. Hm.

Sorry all, I guess I just screwed up big time. Oh dear. :( Garrett^Talk 23:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for your cordial note and congratulations. freestylefrappe 19:03, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Your quite welcome, I'm sure you'll do a great job, despite that shiney new delete button ;) (btw, I wouldn't follow that one <g>) ∞Who?¿? 19:04, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A google on Manugistics shows 139,000 hits. Perhaps a bit overly quickly deleted? I have sdded some content on the company, as opposed to the application for which they are named. DES 19:54, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA success was well-earned. -- BD2412 ^talk 20:38, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Now its my turn to thank you for your vote. As for your Wikipedia namespace, I have read a lot of that stuff surprisingly its just I haven't edited it because I'm not gonna add to it without discussing with other users. Anyways, thanks! Redwolf24 (Talk) 21:38, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Damnit Garret that was my deletion. Now I'll have to block you for my first action :-P (just kidding, of course) Redwolf24 01:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! I did think of that... after deleting, muhahahahahaaaaa!! :) Garrett^Talk 01:46, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Master Thief Garrett deleted "Cable management" (patent nonsense, but not BJAODN-worthy... content was: '{{db|patent nonsense}}Cable management is the mistaken concept that the ubiquitous and prolific household spaghetti can somehow be managed with a ca...')

That doesn't look like "patent nonsense" to me. Remember if it makes sense, eve if obviousl wrong, it isn't "patent". I can't really judge this one without looking at the full article, but you might want to rethink it.

Remember patent nonese is ONLY

1. Total nonsense - i.e., text or random characters that has no assignable meaning at all. That means things like "asdfasdfasdfasdfatpotatoasdfasdfasdfasdf", where someone bangs on the keyboard a lot.
2. Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no intelligent person can be expected to try to make head nor tail of it.

The above obviously doesn't fit 1, does it fit 2? You might want to re-read WP:PN. DES 02:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You speedied this article. From the deletion log, it contains a pretty clear assertion of notability: "Chetan Patel is a principal consultant at BEA Systems , with 8 years of experience in architecting and building enterprise applications". Now whether that is really notable or not is unclear at best so must go to VfD. Which means I'll haul it over to VfU in a minute. In light of the messages above, please do go and re-read the speedy deletion criteria and apply them strictly; there is little room for latitude. -Splash 02:17, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen the info on VfU that that was, in fact, all the content, I think it is a hard case to call. I've said that an admin can close the VfU if they go along with you. I'm sorry if I was a little harsh; these new criteria (which I personally like a lot) need bedding down properly. -Splash 02:54, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's me (understatement of the century). Just becuse you think I am unworthy of the job doesn't mean you have to roll your eyes into the back of your head and respond with barbed words the moment your unfit candidate "sins" by making an error of judgement. Yes, an error of judgement. I admit it, I screwed up, simple, hominem erratum sunt and all that crap. BUT if you are going to tell me where I went wrong you should do it in a manner that doesn't reek of your displeasure. And there you go discussing my actions on /Incidents, and didn't even tell me. OK, so it's now a place I should be checking all the time, but that's not the point. You may feel all holier-than-thou right now, but you just slipped up there too. I'm not angry, nono, just... disappointed, that's all. Yes. That's the word I'm looking for. Garrett^Talk 00:56, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to see that you're taking this so badly. No, I didn't slip up as far as I'm aware, but feel free to suggest that in future people making edits on WP:ANI should inform the principal subject of their edits there that they have done so.

If you'll just take some time to calm down you'll see that I compliment you on your work so far and describe you as "certainly administrator material" who however, "only three months an editor...may be a little too green to exercise the good judgement we expect in all circumstances." I also said that you were "doing a good job and I don't want to minimize that." Administrators do fuck up. When this happens it should be discussed on WP:ANI, I've discussed my own fuck-ups there without embarrassment. We owe that much to Wikipedia. I second Snowspinner's words: "Thank you for cleaning up some of the piles of crap people leave around the project. I have absolute confidence everything you did was done in a good faith understanding of the rules". Welcome to the Monkey House. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MTG - congratulations! I'd have answered sooner but I was in Oamaru until a couple of hours ago. No probs with the support - as you probably gathered I was amazed when I found out you'd only been here a couple of months, because you were wiki'ing like a seasoned pro. You should have no trouble with admining. (If you do need advice on anything though, you know where I am!). Have fun, but don't delete the main page ;) Grutness...wha? 04:16, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Garrett, I'm not sure who you felt attacked by (as you indicated on WP:ANI, but I thought I would come here to be clear that I didn't intend to give that impression at all. If I didn't, then I am very glad -- if I did, I hope you'll tell me so that I can fully apologize, as it was not at all my intention to offend you or make you feel under assault. My note (as I re-read it now) is long -- sadly, I have no gift for brevity -- but I hope it offers enough encouragement and qualification that you can see it's just a war-weary veteran giving his best advice to a far more active (and therefore, I think, far more valuable) administrator. I believe you will be an excellent admin, and that in many ways you already are -- you've been active, you've been bold, and you've accepted criticism remarkably well, I think. Deletions are wikipedi-activities that try men's souls (and women's!). You've shown fine mettle, in my estimation. I dno't know what my esteem is worth, but such as it is, you have it.

As for why the "pigpile" on your talk page, I'm afraid it's a problem in the system. It's easy to make an admin, and almost impossible to de-admin. Accountability for admins, then, is almost always simply the advice and admonishments of the peer group (and other editors). It does tend to situations like this, where no one is absolutely sure how you'll react (and whether or not you like and respect the first few people to comment), so we decide the quantity of the response should get your attention. And in the process, we come across as harsh. I hope you'll understand our zeal (you must share some of it, since you spend free time here :-) and that all of us will talk a little more gently next time. As always, if you want to talk about any of this, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. If not, happy editing (and deleting ;-), Jwrosenzweig 06:08, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I want to echo James's statement. When I came on here to give a little advice, I was certainly not expecting the horde above to follow me. I hope I wasn't over-aggressive or too verbose (I share James's fault here!). I have every confidence in you as an administrator, and I'm sure that this experience, unpleasant as it has undoubtedly been, will help you to be more conservative in future! I also hope the ++ber-critical users above will have a little more sensitivity in future. Cheers, and good luck! [[smoddy]] 12:09, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see that you had a rough 24 hours+ being a little too eager with those speedy deletions. But like others, I believe that you'll learn from these mistakes and become a far better admin than you are now. Don't let the criticism stop you. The way I handle CSD is that I only delete them if I can make a very quick, immediate, on the spot judgement. If not, I either take them to VFD or let another admin make a second opinion. But it does take a little bit of time and experience to be able to spot them immediately. I don't know if that advice will be helpful to you, but that is how I deal with speedy deletions. Good luck. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 21:13, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. I would normally be able handle all this sort of stuff but I was just having a bad day yesterday so things kind of seemed to add up against me, y'know... I will certainly consider everything you've said. Thank you all so much. I feel much more satisfied now. :) Garrett^Talk 23:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The llama wasn't the only bad thing that happened after signing as number 13. Oh, I hope I didn't cause all this, :). Well, just thought I'd drop by and say thanks for the funny note on my user page. It's a real ego-booster to have that list of (I imagine smiling) sigs on my page. Makes me feel like part of a community (and breaking the taboo of writing on someone's user page really reinforces the fact tat it's a wiki, doesn't it?) So, now I'll hop over and read your user page and you'll see what I mean... (few minutes later)... Maori, huh? I speak it too. Er, well I saw Whale Rider (good movie), which basically counts. I'm probably wasting your time right now, and maybe you're really stressed out about your new adminship (looks like I'll be in the same boat tomorrow, though I'm still expecting 30 oppose votes in the next few hours), but I should tell you that I still fully support your adminship. I am a proponent of the (as-yet-unadopted) Wiki-policy: "Make Mistakes! (And Then Cower in a Corner While Being Abused by the Ones Who Can Set You Straight, and then Don't Make the Same Mistake Again (Unless You Do).)" How 'bout it? WP:MM!(ATCIACWBABTOWCSYSATDMTSMA(UYD))? Anyway, praise (like redirects) is cheap, so know that I trust your judgment and thanks for the message! --Dmcdevit-·t 09:28, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

First of all, I don't know en: policy well. Second, I found what the word "hoax" mean :) So, Zlatiborians, The Zlatiborian Institute for Language and Literature, Zlatiborian language and Zlatiborian literature (I didn't read well this article and I first thought that the article should be rearanged, not deleted; but after I read it more carefully, I realized that it is a hoax) are hoax. I moved Zlatiborian language into Zlatiborian speech, because speech/sub-dialect exists and it is significant for Serbian dialectology. However, there is no Eastern-Herzegovian dialect here and Zlatiborian is the part of Eastern-Herzegovian dialect. So, I readded delete template to Zlatiborians, Zlatiborian literature and The Institute..., but left vfd for Zlatiborian speech. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 13:59, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you can see that I didn't say that the article Zlatiborians is not a hoax. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 13:59, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to en: policy, I changed delete to vfd to all of them, even all of them are hoaxes. --millosh (talk (sr:))

You may want to see this RfC, seeing as you commented on his conduct recently. Hedley 16:11, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. You've been flashing past on Recentchanges coz of the mass decrufting you're doing. However, I can't see that you are actually merging the info: you just seem to be wholesale replacing it with redirects. Is this really what you mean to do? -Splash 01:31, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's better! -Splash 01:36, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to actually utter an evil laugh, you might consider commenting at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Mwahahahaha. Uncle G 17:08:11, 2005-07-25 (UTC)

Hi... for List of Warcraft characters, i have seen you moving stub-sized articles into the main list... well i have reorganized the list and added several Mergefrom tags... if you're free can you please merge the Mergefrom-tagged articles into the main List and redirect the original articles appropriately... thanks for helping maintain the warcraft pages =)

Debroglie 11:52, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_new_administrators. I had you in mind when I typed it up... Redwolf24 01:22, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you've been following the policy proposal discussion, but as I have made quite clear, I believe certain comments directed at you in your first days of adminship by other "more experienced users" were unforgivably rude (not all of them, by any means, but quite a few) and that the approval and praise that have been offered to the offenders is entirely inappropriate. I hereby award you the Resilient Barnstar for having been subjected to dispicable attacks had having conducted yourself with grace and elegance through the whole ordeal. May the Wiki be blessed with your presence for many years to come. -- Essjay -· Talk 12:32, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

The Authentic Matthew VFD has closed. The results were

• Delete - 21 (58%)
• Keep - 11 (31%)
• Merge - 4 (11%)

This was declared to have been no consensus, and therefore a new VFD has been opened at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Authentic Matthew (consensus).

Would you be prepared to re-add your vote there? ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 09:40, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I need your help and maybe your mediation. SeeWikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Gwinett_County_Public_Schools. User:Dystopos has repeatedly remove my words when I asserted several things, such as when I mentioned that they are creating a type of anti-school deletion bloc not interested discussion, but rather in smothering opposition against the voting of schools. I'd like to know what right he has in doing this, and if you could undo his deletion. You're at least an admin. Please advise. Mandel 21:55, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

are now working, I think, at least for images not on the commons. (They popup whether it's a text link to an image or an image link at the moment). Give it a whirl and let me know if you find glitches, especially with images with unusual characters in the name. Also, if you have any ideas for getting the image placement improved (it's a bit hit and miss at the moment) then give me a shout. I'm just using

 '<img src="' + imgurl + '" width=60 align="right" valign="top"></img>'

at the moment, which isn't ideal. But I know very little about html - in particular, floats are unknown territory for me. Lupin 21:07, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The POV that was in Authentic Matthew before it was NPOVed has been re-created at a new article - see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Original Gospel of Matthew. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 20:10, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen you have some issues with Louis Epstein before, so I thought I'd invite you to comment on the RfC I've set up. He's crossed the line into edit warring over the em-dash thing. — Phil Welch 01:59, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, Garrett. Someone keeps recreating Tides of Blood. Since you originally nominated it for deletion, I thought you might like to keep an eye on it as well. android79 22:28, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

I wrote: Keep. Interesting portal. What harm is it actually doing? Grace Note 04:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC) You wrote: None, but we are supposed to "stick to our guns" as far as upholding our established rules are concerned, even if, as you say, there's no harm in it. We can't go making exceptions or they might set a precedent. GarrettTalk 12:17, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

The "rules" are just what we agree (barring the foundation guidelines set by Jimbo). If we change our minds, the "rules" change. Precedents are set all the time. I agree that they are often detrimental -- particularly when the arbcom invent new policy on the fly and then cite themselves as they use it to punish dissenters -- but wikis should have a bit of flexibility. Grace Note 01:26, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Authentic Matthew is back again! --Doc (?) 08:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC) Appreciate a scond opinion here, not only is Melissadolbeer doing her usual, but I seem to have wound up in a dispute with Mel Etitis. Please take a look at the bottom of the 'talk page' --Doc (?) 20:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I realise you might want nothing to do with this - but I've insitituted a poll to demonstrate support for a redirect to Authentic Matthew. And I've reverted the article to the earlier cleaned-up version in the meantime. I expect to get abuse for both, any any support (or even an admin's overview to ensure fairness) will be appreciated. I'm hopping we can finally settle this whole damn thing. --Doc (?) 22:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I saw you listed as one of our rare users who are good at Latin. Would you be willing to help translating a bit of text from English into Latin? Let me know please. Yours, Radiant_>|< 09:51, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, the person who submitted this article for deletion has changed his mind in response to my argument to keep. Just to make things simple, could you take a look at what I wrote & see if you agree also? If so, just strike through your argument, & if a consensus emerges to keep the article, I'll rewrite the article to explain his notability. If you aren't convinced, you don't need to do anything unless you want to, & I'll make my actions based on the decision of the Admin who closes this nomination. Thanks. -- llywrch 22:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am contacting logged-in users who have taken an interest in, or edited, Wikipedia_talk:Assume_good_faith, and asking them to respond to a question I have placed on that page which goes to the policy of WP:AGF.

Thanks in advance. paul klenk 23:48, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. I went ahead and added the footage to commons, too. --Joel 23:43, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I just came across some AfD that you speedied today (Oct. 11), and you claimed in your explanation that your usual closure for AfD's is "Bite Me." I don't know if this was supposed to be a joke, but it left a bad impression on me; I suspect you might not care, but I'm of the opinion that such superfluous vulgarity is not in line with WP:CIVIL. Thanks, Xoloz 16:24, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Garrett. Thanks for the time you put into that detailed comment at Wikicity Central about wiki4all.

Looking (for possibly the first time) at your "me" page here, I (who switched off Civilization at 2am today NZDT) got the impression that you spend a lot of time on games. Hmmmm. And three of your Babel boxes say the same things, or at least have the same number-codes, as three of mine; I never managed to get past ang-0.2). And this page tells me you are in the occasional dispute.

OK, if you ever want some light relief, there's plenty to be done at mi.wikipedia.org irrespective of whether Massey or VUW takes an interest. But beware the self-styled mi-2 named Node ue, who doesn't contribute much but argues like anything from the depths of the Midwest.

Kia ora! Robin Patterson 00:37, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

These comments were left at the top of my user page and I kinda missed them.

Thank you, thank you, Master Thief Garrett! You are the first person to recognize me as a human being. I will always be in your debt. --Poorman 08:40, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, I guess I missed this comment... ah well, can't answer 'em all...

I believe that you do not deserve the right to delete pages because you "feel" they don't deserve spot in Wikipedia. It is an "online encyclopedia," thus should contain every single fact that is known to mankind. douche bag bitch.

Thank you, thank you! :) That's the first time I've been called a douche bag outside of GameFAQs! Ah, happy memories of abusive n00bs. But where was I? Ah yes, inclusion. We are aiming to be (and have already achieved the status of) the most complete encyclopedia in the history of the world. Simple enough. However we do need to have some standards. A page about my hair colour, my videogame collection, and the points I argued in my recent essays are certainly all facts, you see, but they need some degree of worth in the world sense of things. Might I suggest you try Everything2; they never delete a word, and that's far more up your alley by the sounds of things. Enjoy! :)

I'm not sure the last time you were on E2, but they delete subpar writing all the time. Might not be a good idea to point people who are unhappy about their article being deleted there. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 19:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jenmoa/birthday --User:Jenmoa 17:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comments on Wikipedia talk:Schools...

There isn't a school cabal (really), but if there were, it'd be some users trying to work to replace the shrillness in school AFDs with dialogue, and assert that civility is more important than partisanship. If it existed (and it doesn't, really), it'd be dedicated to getting people to stop sniping and start talking.

There's no school cabal, really, but would you be interested in being a member if there were? - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 19:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Remember me? I was the sockpuppet from back ages ago. p.s. What do you call an exploding monkey? A baboom!!!! --Wonderfool 12:08, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help in restoring Arvanitic language to its rightful location. It had previously been moved quite arbitrarily by a user who disputes its status as a language, but it is Wikipedia policy to use the word "language" in the names of all such articles, regardless of the politics of their linguistic status.--Theathenae 13:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should know that Wikipedia policy has not been observed. This language/dialect has a disputed status and acording to Wikipedia policy should be at Arvanitic (linguistics) as per Flemish (linguistics), Mandarin (linguistics), Cantonese (linguistics) etc. If you check the Talk:Arvanites page you will see ample evidence to this (especially at the bottom). There is no evidence to support this *whatever it is* being a language. It's status is disputed, like Flemish and Cantonese. Rex^(talk) 14:12, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I took your advice and have arranged a poll over the name of the article in an attempt to build a neutral consensus. The poll ia at Talk:Arvanitic language#Requested move to move Arvanitic language to Arvanitic (linguistics), to reflect the fact that its status as a language or dialect is disputed. This is done in all other similar cases (Flemish (linguistics), Mandarin (linguistics) etc). Please vote support if you support the move. Rex^(talk) 16:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gday, This is a page you deleted and protected from recreation. I'm not sure what's to be done, though, when the original creators of the page put the nonsense they had in the page in its talk page... Should this be blanked? Somehow the talk page deleted/protected as well? I have no idea on the policy, if there is any, so please enlighten me! jnothman ^talk 12:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unfamiliar with deletion/reinstatement processes in Wikipedia, but since you voted to delete Andrea, I'll direct my comment to you if I may. You voted to delete "unless someone can convince us she was real". Maybe I can't convince you, but I can certainly assert my knowledge that she was an extremely well-known Australian radio personality in her day. She was famous for her introductory line "Hello, mums and dads" as much as anything else. When she died, it was widely reported in all Australian media. That nothing on her appears in Google (a statement I find almost unbelievable, although I haven't checked) merely says that Google, for all its reach, does not contain all information on all possible people, or if it does, you're not looking in the right place. I'm 55, and Andrea was already out of the limelight by the time I started listening to radio, but I can remember my parents talking about her with great affection. Fascinating how her obvious fame in her day has simply vanished. Where to from here? Cheers JackofOz 07:04, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have found some material about Andrea on Google - see [2]. Cheers JackofOz 01:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Lost images (MfD discussion)

Please contribute to the discussion. Uncle G 14:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Stills4small.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Carnildo or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you.

Thanks for uploading Image:Agahnim GBA rerelease.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 02:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the older revision for a bit of userbox abuse :P. And no - less cowbell! ElliottHird [talk | email | contribs] 11:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He wrote to info-en@wikimedia.org and wants to know why he was blocked. What's the story? The Uninvited Co., Inc. 22:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that a meetup is planned in Auckland for the 25th of June (see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland for more details), and that you are cordially invited. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 23:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Err... why are you linking to a mirror of wikibooks instead of directly to wikibooks? They are exactly the same, except one has a banklink from starsonata.com and the new one dosn't. Seems like there will be a fork of content.. and not necessarily a happy one. ---J.S (t|c) 06:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. ---J.S (t|c) 14:54, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if anybody else is reading your fascinating edit summaries on the deletion log? Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 12:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh man, I've been immortalized. On a related note, monitoring the block log is an excellent sign that I need to find something better to do. Cheers. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 12:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• 12:31, 28 April 2006 Procrastination deleted "Tijuana Brass' social life" (content was {{db-nonsense}})
  • I don't know which is funnier. Your joke, or the fact I checked out that redlink... Garrett^Talk 12:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh... nobody's ever gonna write that article anyway. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 12:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]