User talk:SilvaStorm/Archive 1

This archive is for discussion before December 8th, 2006. To view the current talk page, please go here

Danielle Rousseau

Hi. Please do not revert this page without first reading the discussions on the talk page. If you feel that the page should not redirect, please list your reasons on the talk page instead of just reverting the page. Thanks. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 12:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

St. Patrick's College, Silverstream

Hi, your edit of 22 July was tagged as "minor" even though it was a total rewrite of the article. A reminder: Wikipedia is not an advertising service or a school prospectus---the article has a pro-school tone and contains adjectives which try to boost the schools image, and includes enrolment information. Any problems, just reply to me :D Cheers Mr Bluefin 04:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually on further inspection it seems to be lifted from the school's website [1] and [2]. Please don;t contribute work that's not your own---at the bottom of every edit screen it asks not to violate copyright. While the site has no formal copyright notice it would be safe to assume that the school holds rights to the text. The page has been reverted to the last good version. Mr Bluefin 04:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for deleting basically all my work on the article. --SilvaStorm

Not withstanding the personal comment, you can't just copy-paste text from external websites unless its in the public domain, which this text probably is not. Also, Wikipedia is not an advertisement---the school's prospectus page is a school advertisement. Mr Bluefin 07:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words. However please revert your addition of the school's prospectus, since it goes against Wikipedia's copyright and vanity/advertising guidelines. I won't revert, since I've got no intention to get into multiple revert sessions. I don't mean anything personally against you btw, but someone else in time will revert to the previous version. Cheers Mr Bluefin 09:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do you revert? --SilvaStorm

Henry Gale

EDIT: According to the interview with Carlton Cuse in the Boston Globe, he stated that Henry Gale WILL be a main character, but this had NOT been officially confirmed before this. SergeantBolt 11:27, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So do we need to see Michael Emerson in the main character credits before he can be included in the LostNav? --SilvaStorm

My Apologies

I didnt see that it was a redirect. I just saw a page that didnt have much to it and was an internet slang at that.

Again, my apologies. --Bearingbreaker92

It's okay, thanks for the apology. :-) --SilvaStorm

New Game Article

Hey! I see that you made a new videogame related page. You might consider joining the computer and video game project- right now I'm adding your new page to the "new pages section" and attributing it to you. --PresN 21:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. --SilvaStorm

Re: Drive shaft

Hi -

I see that you redirected Drive shaft to Charlie Pace. I put together that the connection was to the band, but when you diverted the page, you broke the link to driveshaft. Just as importantly, you marked this edit as minor. As a gentle reminder, minor edits are those that don't change the substance of the page - redirecting a link from an automotive part to a television show character's page is not minor.

I see also that you had some earlier confusion on when to mark an edit as minor, and I see that you've marked every edit you've done recently as being minor (and several of them are not) - may I direct you to Help:Minor edit?

Please, though, don't be discouraged from continuing to add to Wikipedia. --Badger151 06:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on your talk page. --SilvaStorm

Hmm - someone else may have access to your account, then: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Drive_shaft&direction=next&oldid=69185670, or I could be misunderstanding. But if you'd like the band to have its own page, why not start one for it? --Badger151 07:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would, but the annoying buggers on here would probably delete it or redirect it! That's the way it goes on Wikipedia. --SilvaStorm

Well, there are a few rules we all have to abide by, but they're similar to those for writing a paper in high school or college: we have to avoid plagiarism, and we have to have substance to what we write. I see that another user noted that you used copied-and-pasted text from a school's website - doing so is typically copyright infringement, and can have legal repercussions, which is why it's not allowed. I also saw your page on Lost's Widmore Corporation, which merely mentioned that the corporation was mentioned on the show - if you tell us what the corporation does (are they an automobile assembly company? a law firm? an international shipping company?) and why they're important on Lost, that would be valuable - I, for one, don't know the answers to those questions. Check out the type of information provided at Hanso Foundation for more ideas. --Badger151 18:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It might. I expect that there are users who specifically look for stubs, so that sounds like a good idea. You could also put it in the Lost category. You know how to assign an article to the stub category? --Badger151 06:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it! --Badger151 17:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Lost-Not in Portland.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lost-Not in Portland.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

{subst:web-warn|Stick Death

Stick Death

A tag has been placed on Stick Death, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain web site, blog, forum, or other community of web users that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. If you plan to provide more notable material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately, and also put a note on Talk:Stick Death. An administrator should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 1 under Articles. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and then immediately add such material.Blood red sandman 07:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies on behalf of the system

I want you to know I wasn't delebritaly talking down to you, and i apreciate I am still pretty new here. However, I was using a template on your page, and whilst it does sound fairly rude, it kinda has to be because it usually goes onto inexperienced user's pages. I don't have time to write out my own version for every eventuality, so I simply used the existing templates, and it's not really my fault if they could be improved. - Blood red sandman 17:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not in Portland (Lost)

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose the deletion of an article, you may comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. --Milo H Minderbinder 13:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page was deleted per the AfD, and has already been recreated and deleted per speedy delete already. Please do not re-create the article until the information is available from a reliable source. Thanks. --Milo H Minderbinder 14:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same goes for Tricia Tanaka is Dead. Please don't create these articles, they will just be deleted. --Milo H Minderbinder 15:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Tutts

Please stop recreating The Tutts. To see why it is being deleted, see WP:MUSIC. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up, the article was not deleted because it lacked references, it was deleted because it fails to assert the notability of the band. You really need to read WP:MUSIC. Thanks! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you haven't read the notability guidelines and have kept reposting it, I've salted the article. It's nothing personal, but not every band meets our requirements. If you read the WP:MUSIC guide I've been trying to get you to, you see that. Under our criteria for speedy deletion A7, "Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content. An article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject." is what I've been talking to you about. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 13:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lostpedia ban

The reason you got a ban on Lostpedia is on your Lostpedia talk page. If you'd like to show me the users who are also creating this content, I will take action appropriately, but if I'm not made aware of them or don't see it happening, I can't do anything about it. You've been warned several times about creating content about rumoured titles, and wrapping it up in another coat (ie adding ABC Media Net needs to confirm it) doesn't change the fact that you created it when asked not to. --Plkrtn 09:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously banning you doesn't help, as when we do, you seem to ignore what we've asked of you. I would be willing to remove the ban on the proviso that you do not create any character, crew or future episode pages, and if you do the ban will be restored. I don't want to ban you, but I can't think of any other way to constantly be reminding you that you keep creating things you've been asked not to. --Plkrtn 09:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No its not enough. You obviously haven't read the rules on Lostpedia as to what constitutes valid information or not. Natasha Henstridge claimed she was to appear on Lost this season, but we haven't seen her as of yet, so she hasn't been added to Lostpedia. The only source is someone from the production, be it Disney, ABC, Touchstone, Bad Robot, The Fuselage etc --Plkrtn 09:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK the ban should be removed I believe. If not let me know on here. Please, please, PLEASE read the rules before you continue though. --Plkrtn 09:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:TheTutts.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheTutts.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward1

LOST episode article titles

Why did you move all the (Lost) ones to (Lost episode)? --Milo H Minderbinder 15:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you missed this question. According to WP:TV-NC#Episode articles, the articles should follow the format Episode Name (Lost). If you're going to make a change like this, particularly when it goes against a guideline, please give a justification on the talk page beforehand and make sure there is consensus for the move. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The other shows aren't following the guideline, and it's possible that there may be changes. One person thinking "it looks bad" isn't reason to move all episodes of a TV show, especially without proposing the moves with other editors first. --Milo H Minderbinder 22:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, I'm not in total disagreement with your moves, but I would like to make you aware that there is currently a massive dispute about the naming of Lost episodes. If you would like to participate in the discussion, your comments would be more than welcome, but it's probably not a good idea to be moving articles until we are sure that there is consensus. I do, however, recommend that you add the following pages to your watchlist, so that you can participate in related discussions, and help ensure that there is consensus. :)

Thanks, and if you have any questions, please let me know. I look forward to working with you on the Lost articles! --Elonka 20:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(followup) Just checking, have you had a chance to review any of these discussions? We could really use your help... --Elonka 00:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it! Probably the best place to state that right now is at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lost/Episode guidelines. --Elonka 00:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SilvaStorm, I'd hardly call "it's probably not a good idea to be moving articles until we are sure that there is consensus" agreeing with your moves. And on wikipedia, the whole concept of "someone important" doesn't exist. --Milo H Minderbinder 13:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irony

These biscuits have been said by many to be "nice", which is ironic, as the biscuits themselves are called "Nice".

This isn't irony. The sentence isn't encyclopaedic. sʟυмɢυм • т • c 23:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Season 3, episode 7 (Lost)

This article has been deleted, as it is a repost of Not in Portland (Lost) which was deletewd following community consensus at AFD. I note you have already been warned about disregarding consensus, removing AFD notices and the like. This is disruptive. This is a final warning - continue to ignore consensus and you will be blocked, in order to prevent further disruption. Proto::type 11:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention

Please don't change the guideline when consensus to change it does not exist. Participate in the discussion if you wish, but don't just change a guideline. Jay32183 22:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image on your userpage

Having that screenshot of the Swan Station Mural on your userpage is not allowed as it violates the Fair Use rationale for that image. Please remove it.--Isotope23 14:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove afd notices

Like you did here. It is considered vandalism.--Isotope23 01:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of flashbacks on Lost

Your edit [3] to the above mentioned page may be seen as vandalism. You are not an admin, therefore you can't close these discussions. Further more, the debate had not reached a consensus, & in any case the consensus was leaning towards delete, rather than keep which is what you stated. Action & edits like these may lead to you being blocked for vandalism. You can have your say on the above mentioned page, but you cannot choose what happens, not even when you're an admin, as the community has to decide what the outcome will be. Please read the guide line for AfD's to stay out of trouble. From your user page I gather you like Lost. However, disrupting AfD's is not a way to go about making a point or changing the way poeple think. It will only get you into trouble. Thanks, Spawn Man 01:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning regarding you edit to User talk:Spawn Man:

Your edit [4] to my user talk is highly insultive & uncivil. Any more outbursts like that & I'll have no choice but to give an admin your series of disruptions & uncivil edits. If you continue vandalising proceedings of AfDs, making uncivil remarks & removing official templates, I have no doubt you will be blocked. I don't want to see you be blocked, but if you continue disrupting Wikipedia, I will have no choice but to hand it over. I have no opinion on any simpson lists - if you want, why not list them for deletion? As I said, read the AfD guidelines. The Lost article is indeed bad. It contains no information about the flash backs, only the episodes in which they occur. Seeing as how every episode has a flash back in it, you may as well visit the episodes of lost list. I totally agree that other lists out there are marginal, but I also agree that this list is fancruft, & useless & therefore should be deleted. Have your say on the AfD, but don't make uncivil edits to other people. Thanks, Spawn Man 01:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy by Doug Bell. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org.

Blocked for 1 hour for repeated blanking of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of flashbacks on Lost [5] [6] and for incivility [7]. —Doug Bell ^talk 01:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously 1 hour wasn't long enough for you to cool down huh? Anyway, your name sounded feminine, so sorry about the confusion. Heck, I thought Sango was a boy for a year... Anyway, yes you are being a disruptive user. Secondly, nothing could really have been done to save your article from deletion. Every episode has a flash back, so you would have listed every epsisode there. As I said, in this state, one may have just used an episode list. Also, I was not the one who nominated it. I think it was also prodded, but you deleted the prod? I may be wrong, but that tells you the article is in violation basically... Lastly, I'm not "laying into you". We don't have backs on Wikipedia to talk behind, only talk pages where we can choose to place comments or not. I was merely talking to Doug, as you were blocked. If you hadn't gotten yourself blocked after reacting angrily to my nice posts, then I would have happily continued our discussion. Anyway, I hope you can stay out of trouble from now on... Thanks, Spawn Man 01:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit a closed discussion

The AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of flashbacks on Lost has been closed, and as the banner states: Please do not modify it. —Doug Bell ^talk 08:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pages moves

Please don't do page moves using copy/paste, it messes up the page history. Instead, use the "move" tab at the top of the page. More info can be found at WP:MOVE and WP:RM. --Milo H Minderbinder 23:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed this. In the future, if you want to move a page and the redirect has a history (which prevents you from moving the page over the redirect), please list the requested move at Wikipedia:Requested moves. —Doug Bell ^talk 00:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]