User talk:Matticus78/Talk archive 2007

		The Original Barnstar
		For saving my homepage in the face of vandals thanks. St.daniel 20:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome and thanks for protecting my homepage--St.daniel 21:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Userpages in mainspace

Hi, if you find a userpage mistakenly created in mainspace by a new user, as with Nguyen Xuan Huy, please consider doing this:

• move (in this case) Nguyen Xuan Huy to User:Nguyenxh
• tag the redirect at Nguyen Xuan Huy for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#R2
• subst the template {{nn-userfy}} on the user's Talk page (and ideally a welcome message too)

This is a bit less WP:BITEy than simply deleting the page and often avoids problems. Also, if they continue to re-create their user page in main space (as a vanity article), the fact that it has been explained to them means we can take action without worrying that they are simply clueless. Thanks, Guy (Help!) 12:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Sadegh Asadi

Hi,

I would like to know why you deleted this article. Please reply as soon as possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dathrilla01 (talk • contribs) 11:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

Hello. The article was deleted because it did not say why this person is notable. Remember that Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information, and although there may be an article about a real person, that does not automatically make that person notable enough for an encyclopedia article about them. In order to be notable enough for an article, that person must be the subject of multiple, non-trival published works from reliable sources, so that any information that is written about them can be verified. Thank you. ~Matticus ^[[User

Dingdongs

I know it's a crap page, but I was having fun on this other wise dreary encyclopedia full of anally retentive users. kthxbi SchoolBoundstone 11:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make joke pages, take it to Uncyclopedia instead. Wikipedia is a serious project. There is no halfway point, no "oh, let it slide - it's not harming anyone". The authors of Encyclopedia Britannica or Encarta would not put in joke/nonsense articles for fun, so neither should Wikipedia. ~Matticus ^T_C 12:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedball

I hit the wrong button when saving. I have since gone back and restored it.Jvbishop 15:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I could tell it was just a genuine mistake and not an attempt to disrupt the article, but I dropped you a message anyway. Pobody's nerfect... :) ~Matticus ^T_C 16:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Martin Heron

It would appear that you assumed the article Martin Heron was created by User:MartinHeron, which it was not -- I created it(!). Just thought I should bring this to your attention if you were using some automatic heuristics which had brought up a false positive... -- Ratarsed 13:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Five digit year format

Can you tell me how wikipedia is affected by the five digit dates. If you will check, it's only there in the articles section which I added. I am not changing anybody else's year format, unless I am changing the section also. -Samuel Pakalomattam 21/02/02007

The Manual of Style (dates and numbers) asks editors to use the conventions listed there for dates. It is convention to link days and years in articles (like this: February 21 2007), and these are linked to articles that list events for those years, something which doesn't work if the date has a leading zero (you'll see 02007, for example, just produces a redlink). Templates such as {{cite}} also expect dates to be listed in the ISO format YYYY-MM-DD, which is converted by the software into a more readable form, which again would be broken by five digit dates. In any case, it's proper that editors should all follow the manual of style for things like this, so as to minimise any confusion. ~Matticus ^T_C 15:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The Manual of Style (dates and numbers) says nothing about not using five digit years.-Samuel Pakalomattam 21/02/02007

It doesn't say anything about not using the Japanese imperial year system and writing "Heisei 19" instead of "2007" either, but that doesn't mean editors should just arbitrarily start using that system wherever they feel like it. Every single example of a year after 999 Common Era in the Manual of Style is shown using four digits. The only uses of five-digit dates on the whole of Wikipedia are in the Long Now Foundation and related articles, and then only to explain their ideas and give them context ("the group writes years using five digits instead of four: 02007 instead of 2007"). In normal use Wikipedia uses the ISO date system of four digit years, because that's what the software expects, and that's what readers and other editors expect. ~Matticus ^T_C 21:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well since you agree it doesn't say anything about not using five digit numbers, now it is just a question of why you feel the need to change what I am writing because you think others expect a four digit year format. If you think so. then get the manual changed. Until then it is just your word against mine. If you would be so kind to change it back, I would appreciate it. Since you did all the changes in one day, I will give you til Saturday to either change the manual or change back all of the four digit years to five. I will on Saturday, Lord willing I am still here, change back my edits back to five digits. Others whose five digit years that you changed can argue for themselves. If I understand it, you and I are both equal in this role of editor, and your words don't mean any more then mine. If I am worng, and your words mean more, then you have til Saturday to show me.-Samuel Pakalomattam 22/02/02007

First, they are not "your" edits; anything you submit to Wikipedia is free to be edited by other contributors. Second, it is not my sole opinion versus yours, it is the community consensus versus yours. Thirdly, the manual of style explicitly states how to format years and gives examples. To quote directly from the Manual of Style (dates and numbers): "use four digits for years and decades after AD 999 (the same for BC)". There it is, in black and white, in a document authored by community consensus. If you want to petition a change in the consensus to explicitly allow five-digit years, then start a discussion about it in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Until the consensus changes, please use four-digit years. ~Matticus ^T_C 10:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you are right, it does say that. I missed it in my reading. I shall refrain from using five digit years, til there is a consensus. -Samuel Pakalomattam 23/02/02007

Errr, careful....

I want to thank what you're doing on Cop Movie (reverting the AfD tags that the contributors keep removing), however you may (and I repeat, may) be violating 3RR, however I am not really completely sure about the exact rules so I'm not sure. Just letting you know, I wouldn't want you to get blocked for doing (what seems to be) the right thing. --RazorICE^talk 09:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:3RR excludes "simple and obvious vandalism", which removing maintenence templates falls into ("avoidant vandalism"). I think I goofed and accidentally reverted their "deletion controversy" section a couple of times as well, but one could argue that's inappropriate anyway (though not covered by 3RR's exclusions, so I'll lay off it). ~Matticus ^T_C 09:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I believe you were right anyway, but it's better to be on the safe side. Thanks for it anyway, though! :D --RazorICE^talk 09:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I re-read the 3RR page and I think that what the contributors are doing is vandalism, so you shouldn't be in any danger. Sorry for scaring you. (though, do check the page yourself, I'm not entirely sure) :P --RazorICE^talk

my article

Sorry i didn't mean to start false appologies it was an accident and i didn't know what i was doing, or how to delete it. Sorry again.

Vandalism

Hey there. If you revert vandalism, be sure to leave a note on the user's talkpage. A list of templates can be found here. Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 05:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Digimon wrestling

FYI, I protected this article so it can't be recreated and Pelican was indefinitely blocked by another admin. Rlevse 01:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Roger that. Some people just don't get the message... ~Matticus ^T_C 01:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism on my userpage

Thanks, it is much appreciated! --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 12:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Zombie Comedy

A page you participated in creating, Zombie comedy, has been nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zombie comedy for the commentary. Captain Infinity 17:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

AIV

Hi, you reported User:Lolfag1 to AIV because of the inappropriate username. I've indef-blocked the user in question, but for future reference, concerns about inappropriate usernames should be taken to WP:RFCN and not to AIV. Thank you. Walton ^{Need some help?} 19:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

We demard Free Toast

please put back free toast it is a good page and will help wikipidia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Will.shall.not.stop (talk • contribs) 12:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Thanks

Thank you for your speedy action on Kep Enderby. It is a most frustrating problem! Gillyweed 13:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Response to Deletion of Article Welwyn Tool Group

If you could hang on for a few hours you would realise that we're actually providing a background in the large Welwyn Garden City based distributor - and therefore I disagree with your action on this topic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WelwynToolGroup (talk • contribs) 10:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

deleting an injoke?

hey. you know the page 'fubby' that you deleted? well, it was an in joke with justin (fubby), who helped me make it. It was not a personal attack or anything. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mercreature (talk • contribs) 07:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

heya!

Just on the penisland.net page, you have no idea of the scale of this as a joke in Ireland, it is almost impossible to get through a week of school without someone trying to send you to this website, it happens the country over. I fully realise why you would consider deleting and please go ahead if you feel my reasons aren't valid. cheers Plokt

The joke is worldwide, and I was already aware of it, but it does not satisfy Wikipedia's guidelines on notable web content so is eligible for deletion. Just having an amusing URL does not make the site notable in its own right, it does not satisfy verifiability requirements, nor can the article say anything more than "this site has a double-entendre URL which many people find funny". Not a good basis for an encyclopedia article, really. ~Matticus ^T_C 15:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well surely all pages which may provide information are of use, i do get you though, hold on a bit I'll try find some sales figures which may merit it's keeping.

Actually just delete, it's not worth my hassle trying to argue its existence, Have my leaving cert next week which is slightly more importnat!, perhaps a list of websites containg double entendre's should be created.plokt 15:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Torrent This! (The Movie)

I'm sorry for the attacks made on Ten Pound Hammer. But his comment about the deletion of this article was completely unneeded. I feel that the Torrent This! (The Movie) article shouldn't be deleted, thank you. Steelersfannumber1 01:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Torrent This! (The Movie)

FYI, the author placed the {{hangon}} tag in response to the {{subst:afd}} - which attracts attention as it causes the page to appear in CAT:CSD and CAT:CCSD. Since the author added this, it's presumbed to be {{db-author}}. The "dontdelete" tag came after, followed by another two {{hangon}}s. --Sigma 7 05:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Westgrove OGs

So, why do you feel the WGO page needs to be deleted?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mighty D.R. (talk • contribs)

Because it does not assert the importance or significance of the group, and does not provide references to support its keeping. That it has been deleted seven times under different titles indicates that it has been repeatedly assessed by other editors and found not to satisfy Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. There are many, many street gangs, but only those few who have been documented in multiple, reliable, independent sources can have viable Wikipedia articles because without those sources there is no way to verify any of the information in the article. ~Matticus ^T_C 08:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the revert on my user page, much appreciated :-). Cheers! - Myanw 13:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandal! Cheers! Geo Swan 23:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

lazio_gio blocked

Hello, my wikipedia name is lazio_gio You can reach me at [email protected] I feel I have been unfairly blocked, I am not a sock puppet of Vince B. What evidents do they have? I have appealed to the blocking administrator but he is on vacation. Please look into my case (I am not logged in because I am even prevented from editing your discussion page)

Vandalism on my user page

just wanted to say thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page, its much appreciated --Jac16888 19:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Jac16888 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

thought i'd stick this in here as well--Jac16888 21:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert on my user page

Never had my user page vandalized before. Thanks for the revert! --Iknowyourider (t c) 16:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Argos Translations

I notice you have tagged this page; it's been speedily deleted several times already. Do you knw if there is a way of preventing its re-creation? It would save us all some time … pablomismo_|\talk 15:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I see it's been deleted four times already. Only an administrator can protect a page against recreation by normal users, and is usually done at their own discretion for articles that get recreated repeatedly to the point of becoming a nuisance. You can request protection at WP:RFP - just follow the instructions there (read WP:PROT first if you're not familiar with Wikipedia's protection policies). ~Matticus ^T_C 17:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Zeitgeist the movie

hi, you have incorrectly deleted the page I have input. I have posted a Hangon tag, and within 5 minutes the page is deleted ... why has this occured?

"The given reason is: It is an article about a web site, blog, online forum, webcomic, podcast, or similar web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. (CSD A7)"

is incorrect and does not apply to this, however i cannot correct his page since it is COMPLETELY DELETED now.Squarepush3r 09:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

First, I did not personally delete the page, I merely tagged it; the actual deletion would have been done by an administrator (in this case, User:Stephen). Second, it was about a video posted on the internet but did not assert the importance or significance of the movie, nor did it provide any evidence of it being documented in third-party, reliable sources, so it was indeed eligible for deletion under the WP:CSD#A7 criteria (it is classed as "web content"). Third, placing the hangon tag alone does not protect a page from deletion, you have to follow that up by providing an explanation on the article's talk page. If you want the deletion of the article reviewed, open a case at deletion review. However, you may want to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's notability (web) guidelines, as you will have to justify why this topic meets these criteria. Thank you. ~Matticus ^T_C 09:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

hi, thank you for your response. in this case, I have researched and the Movie does not qualify for a Wikipedia page due to lack of sources.

"Third, placing the hangon tag alone does not protect a page from deletion, you have to follow that up by providing an explanation on the article's talk page. "

Don't you think it is silly for an article to be deleted within ~ 3 minutes of posting a HANGON tag, as do you expect talk page articles to be generated instantly? I do not seen how its humanly possibly to instantly generate a talk page, or make a quality one within 3 minutes of placing a TAG. In this case the movie in question does not have adequate sources to justify a Wikiepdia entry, and I will not review the deletion, however that doesn't make correct the deletion of ALL pages wtih speedy deletion tags, or else your system of HANGON tags is worthless. You have answered enough, I will bring my further question with the deleting party. Thank you.Squarepush3r 10:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Additions, sources and censorship

I do not take the criticism personally, it is a matter of fairness and facts. I did supply direct word-for-word quotes directly from Ebay, which were comminications Ebay sent me in response to feedback issues. I did also previously offer to supply the sources of these quaotes in some form (the email responses sent by Ebay) but I notice nobody took me up on that offer. Direct quotes, even in email are admissable in a court of law, and Wiki is not above the status of a court, so if it's good enough for a courtroom, it should be good enough for Wiki.

I do partially appreciate your addition to a very limited extent, as the addition is a mere shadow of what I submitted, but it is there to be read in its very limited form I guess.

The addition concerning the Benoit case may have been removed after 47 minutes, but my addition was first removed right after I had submitted it.

The point here is to be informative. What I wrote was correct and easily proven or checked by anyone who would make an inquiry. I notice that all you say you did to verify the facts was to look at the Ebay policies, instead of making an inquiry specifically asking if the feedback system had been abused or used for retaliation.

I stand by what I wrote, and it is fact, easily checked or proven for anyone who doubts it.

William McCarver

Hi I noticed you tagged McCarver. Of course the higgledy piggledy way it is written it should quite rightly be deleted but if sorted out it may qualify for an article -it does seem legitimate just written terribly , terribly!!!!

There are many articles on civil war soldiers

• http://www.rootsweb.com/~ilcivilw/scrapbk/mccarver.html

What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 14:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Your probably right - its just I beleived wikipedia was so developed in its coverage of the American civil war that many of the soldiers had articles. It required a lot of work!!! anyway and wasn't really worth it. Thanks anyway ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 14:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Dave Cataldo

I want to undelete Dave Cataldo—Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinlow (talk • contribs)

Buzz!

Hi, I noticed you deleted some of my edits to Buzz. If you know a bit about the game as well, Why don't you help me improve it!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Woggy (talk • contribs) ~Matticus ^T_C 09:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Could you help perhaps?

Thanks for editing and improving my mistakes. I didn't realise that in the 1st place. But seen as you know a bit about the subject could you possibly display an image of Buzz! Junior: Jungle Party on the article? I am new and don't know how to do this and i don't understand the instructions to do this. At the moment, The article is fine and now includes good information, But i think you will agree it still needs improving. (Woggy 10:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

help

Hello Matticus,

Actually I'm quite lost within wikipedia and I'm just trying to understand how does it work... I may need to write and edit lots of articles and if you can help me and provide me with some advices It would be great!!

thanks in advance.

Thanks

Thanks a lot for all these advices... I'm still reading all the documents I have. There are so much rules and policies to respect !!

(Mariepan 11:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC))

Image source problem with Image:Bolexbrothers logo.png

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Bolexbrothers logo.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 20:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

re Schweigler

Hey there, i noticed you tagged a couple of the Schweigler articles for creation, because i got the others, its clearly just some guy creating articles about his family, however, he also made a category for them, Category:Schweigler, which obviously needs deleting, but i have no experience with category deletion procedures. What do i do about it? Thanks.--Jac16888 09:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Richard Honeck

Thanks for fixing the honeck/Honeck glitch - I was just trying to work out how to do that when you intervened. And thanks for categorizing, too. Mikedash 08:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Minus comic.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Minus comic.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 13:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Belden Thanks

Thanks for fixing the capitalization on the newly-added Jack Belden page.

I was puzzling over how to fix it.

Roregan 15:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Your AFD

Able was I ere I saw your AFD--Angel David 00:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting lactose intolerance page. I'd send you a star but haven't gotten there in my wiki skills yet...--Tallard 08:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sharkshoooter 11:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

So when i add these edits to your talk page, does it say u have a message? and whats happening with my pic?

Sharkshoooter 11:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not a vandal

i just do not know how to properly use this site and what was wrong with my picture? have u got a "personal problem" with me, will i now have you embuggering me everytime i make an edit? can you not tolerate Humor? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharkshoooter (talk • contribs) 11:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Thanks for catching the vandal on my userpage. I just don't understand them. I wonder if maybe... I am in the middle of a little argument on the lactose intolerance page, where the other user is getting... POed, is it possible they are related? or is vandalism typically a random act?--Tallard 19:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Me

is this how u mean to talk?

Double redirect

When moving pages, as you did to The myth of December 25th, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Thank you. VivioFateFan ^{(Talk, Sandbox)} 11:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

List

Yes, indeed it was copy/pasted. But as far as I know, when it´s a LIST, just like the ones listed below this subtitle (main spectacles, bibliography, album sales, etc) we are allow to copy paste. Besides, you only saw it now? You inserted a tag requirement of sources needed and you didn´t even check the "external links"? Lulu Margarida ^yes? 12:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I sent an e-mail to them, let´s see what the author will say. I agree there is a research, but this is the kind of research that is an assemble of days and etcs...Again, I fully assume the copyright, but I myself already knew all these relations surronding the 25th december myth. AS I didn´t find a citation, I provided this one.Lulu Margarida ^yes? 13:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thread at EAR

Is the issue now resolved, or would you like further help? We will need to archive the thread soon, but I don't want to do that prematurely. Adrian M. H. 00:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You don't see me

Hey. I actually had an reference, but I just thought it would be weird to reference just to one phrase. I just added the article because it was really hard to find that information. Let wikipedians vote. Thanks. :>)
Khullah (talk) 00:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Rock_your_Religion

I also fixed the categories. (Wah Ha Penn (talk) 11:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC))

question aboutmy page i was working on

i was not completly finished i had to put references and why i made it because the car of Tomorrow is no longer in exestince its the car of today —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nater65721 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

nascar

when are you going to update the car of today and the logos for 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nater65721 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Morris

I write the article about morris not to create a hoax, or prove a useless point, but I write the article so that more people than the 50,000+ already exposed to the use of morris as a slang term meaning for something to be enjoyable or cool. If more people are able to learn of this term then, it can spread and become the real deal. So please, just because the article isn't finished, and doesn't yet seem legitimate, does not mean that it will not be a good page. Furthermore, i can be blocked, but i'm not trying to cause trouble. I have a lready used my account to fix several errors I've encountered. So blocking me would do no overall good for Wikipedia. Let me work in peace and i shall continue to help the general public.

-Nato163 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nato163 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)