User talk:Delicious carbuncle

Template:Archive box collapsable

Kristy22

Just letting you know, I moved the WP:AIV report to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Moved from AIV - Kristy22. Feel free to comment there. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toni Ann Gisondi

Regarding your last comment to the discussion, I was referring to your declaration of intent to continue complaining about the state of the AfD. AfDs are for discussing the inclusion of content, not complaining people's conduct in the discussion. Since I don't have anything to add to the deletion discussion I finally brought this thread of the discussion out of the AfD, although I hope it doesn't carry on beyond this clarification of what I meant. BigBlueFish (talk) 18:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification of what was meant when you labelled my comments "complaining". Again. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment: Hey no worries - and no hard feelings. You only nominated it because you felt it deserved deletion, and that is your opinion. You aren't the one making horrible comments and I have absolutely no quibbles with you! I just wish the AFD exercise was over, though, as I do feel it has turned into a rather personal attack on me by at least one editor, who I had cause to give a warning to for Edit Wars a few days ago.--Seahamlass (talk) 07:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• • Further comment: Is there any way you can close this AFD 'debate' now, as it has just descended into total cyber-bullying. (Or at least close it to people who have already contributed - me included - but keep it open to anyone else who might have a genuine point of view ?). There is no debate on whether to keep the article, just the same two editors continually picking at me and my work. Also, can I ask, is there any way of reporting a Wikipedia editor for cyber-bullying? Many thanks. --Seahamlass (talk) 14:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

OK - Thanks for your message. I'll try and ignore it, but ..... well, you know. Its like prodding a tooth that is hurting with your tongue. You just can't help doing it...--Seahamlass (talk) 15:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

from steweydewey

hows about u let me change the sandwich page. huh? did u look to see if it was vandalisim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.124.175 (talk) 03:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Humor

on User talk:Articpimp. I got it. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 22:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Ben Muriithi

Hi Delicious Carbuncle,

I apologise if I sounded a little rude. I was unhappy and dismayed by the reason given and the speed with which you wanted to delete the Ben Muriithi article. Herebelow is a new development;

Just awhile ago, a bunch of Kenyan lobbyists using my email address have joined the fray and posted their protest thus:

" We totally disagree with your contention. We intend to take legal action if you go ahead and delete this article on Ben Muriithi. We very strongly feel that what you describe as notability is very relative and you are using that to discriminate against third world celebrities. We feel that you don't have to appear in American papers to be considered notable. In fact it is very rude of you to refer to publications you know nothing about as non notable. We will raise the issue in court. We have also noted that you have included any Tom, Dick and Harry so long as they are American. We also intend to raise that in court as it borders on racism".

I wonder what you would make of it.

Thankyou

BMJ Muriithi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmjmureithi (talk • contribs) 00:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've already posted your previous legal threat to WP:ANI, so I have no need to address your unfounded and quite ridiculous accusations of racism any further. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 00:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

But we retracted the threat as advised. You do not have to be rude. We are just arguing our case. If that is what we feel, you have no right to call our sentiments unfounded and ridiculous. We still feel that if for nothing else, the references quoted do qualify him as a notable writer. You may disagree but that is our view, and it is not ridiculous. Thankyou delicious. (Bmjmureithi (talk) 15:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC))

You posted a retraction at the AfD, which is one of three places you posted your legal threat, and you later deleted that retraction. Someone else restored it. To be on the safe side, you may want to post a retraction here as well. I'm sorry if you find my comments rude, but I am wasting no more time on this, so please do not leave me anymore messages. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage

Just a note to let you know- if you want no userpage, rather than a blank one, you can tag it with {{db-user}} and it will be deleted. J Milburn (talk) 14:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

National Foundation of Republican Women

Can you point me to the page from which it is a direct copyvio? I don't see any on cursory examination, but I'm happy to look again. Actually, nevermind, I just found some. I've emailed the user for permission, will give them a courtesy amount of time to contact me back with permission, and then we'll go from there. - Philippe | Talk 14:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, found that after I emailed you. The template for G12 says on it: "This criterion applies only if the material was introduced at once by a single person, there is no non-infringing content on either the page or its history worth saving, and there is no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or free license. See CSD G12." I think there's a credible possibility that we'll get an appropriate free use license, so I'm willing to leave it up until it's resolved. If not resolved quickly, I'll delete it. - Philippe | Talk 14:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

On a related matter, someone has edited the copyrighted material out of the article, and sources have been provided- there is no reason left for deletion, and I have withdrawn my nomination. J Milburn (talk) 14:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

image

thank you for uyour message do you know how i can find pictures on wikiepdia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gladof2001 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC) hello

By "deleted and possibly illegal", I had hoped to convey that the inages have been deleted. I'll try to be more clear next time. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

AIV Report

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! Stwalkerster [ talk ] 12:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Optivus Proton Therapy

I'm confused!! I've tried for days to edit and correct our wikipedia page but have gotten nowhere with critics. I'm having difficulty setting up the page correctly but I am diligently working on correcting any mistakes. Every time I go to our article, something new pops up about the page being deleted because of non worthiness!! That's upsurd. Proton therapy is an incredibly useful form of radiation therapy and we wanted the world to know who created the first system. I gave background information, our CEO's information and information about our current system at Loma Linda University Medical Center in California. I noticed Varian has an article that seems to promote their background information and goals but critics don't seem to mind their wording, so we would just like the same consideration.

I know I'm new to this format but if someone could help me with the style than I think it would be a very helpful article to those looking into proton therapy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kjohnson47 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It may be helpful to read WP:COI and WP:CORP. You can argue the reasons for your article to be kept here, but be aware that the existence of an article about a similar company is generally not considered a justification. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

every link to my site banned

Every link on wikipedia to my site at dareland.com has been removed and I've been banned as an editor. The claim is that I am a spammer because I've only posted links to my site, links that have been up for years, often to other sites. I believe this ban makes no sense. Thanks for this opportunity to defend myself.

I wrote the liner notes for several movies on the Criterion Label that are now out of print, including Midnight Cowboy, Five Easy Pieces, and sex, lies, and videotape. You haven't taken down the link to my liner notes to The Harder they Come, not because they're any more valid than the rest of my writing, but because the link is to the Criterion site instead of the exact same article on MY site, which you would have taken down. How are my liner notes to The Harder they Come any less valid than my liner notes to Midnight Cowboy, Five Easy Pieces, and sex, lies, and videotape, which you DID take down, simply because the link was to my site instead of Criterion (they're out of print so they no longer have them up).

I've written thousands of articles in more than 25 years of professional journalism, instead of rewriting the articles on wikipedia I simply provided links to my interviews, and now you're punishing me simply because I gathered them all in one place.

To blanketly condemn everything on my site is unfair to me and your readers. You're not removing the links because of any problem with the actual content, no readers have ever complained, but simply because I'm the one who provided the link.

If Joe Shlabotnik posts a link to my interview with James Cameron on the LA Weekly site, that's cool, but if I provide a link to the exact same article on my site, that's spam? Yeah, it's self interest to a certain extent. All writers want readers. But that's not all it is. It's an interview with the director of a movie that someone has gone to all the bother of looking up in wikipedia. Why deny them what could be the actual information they're looking for?

Similarly, you've removed links to my interviews with Tracey Ullman, Jonathan Demme, Neil Jordan, John Waters, Godfrey Reggio, Dean Stockwell, Timothy Leary, Robert Anton Wilson, Russ Meyer, Michael Nesmith, and numerous others. People didn't click on those links because of ME but because of the information in the article about the person whose page they were visiting. My site is completely non-commercial. I'm not selling anything. If the links were to the place they were originally published, the LA Weekly or Movieline or Billboard or Daily Variety, they'd still be up, but because I gathered all my material in one place, the links are taken down. This makes absolutely no sense and is actually insulting. You're saying my work is somehow now invalid for no other reason than I'm the one who told you about it.

Believe me, I understand the policy of discouraging people linking to themselves, but it seems to me you've got to take it on a case by case basis and actually look at the material to determine whether the link provides information of value to the reader. In my case, I say it does, and respectfully request reevaluation.

Noahveil (talk) 21:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Here's what happened - I saw an edit you made to Lee Strasberg in which you added a link to your site about personal experiences with Mr Strasberg, including your name in the link description. I followed the link, viewed your site, and decided it was an inappropriate link per WP:EL. I reverted your edit and left you a warning on your talk page. Then I looked at your previous edits and came across one with what could only be described as a deliberately misleading edit summary. I left you a message about it and also reported it. The end result was your block. Please note that while your credentials are impressive, and your arguments generally valid, this is about your behaviour on Wikipedia. Please also note that I do not have the power to block or unblock you, so please make your arguments elsewhere, perhaps to the admin that blocked you. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I have been unblocked but every single link to my website is still removed from Wikipedia. There were dozens. Since you clearly don't want me to post links to my own site, is there anything I can do about this? Here's a perfect example. I wrote the liner notes to Criterion's laserdisc of Five Easy Pieces which they had on their site. There was once a link to these notes on the Five Easy Pieces page. When Criterion dropped Five Easy Pieces from their catalogue, the link was no longer good, so I changed it to a link to the exact same article on my site. Now THAT link has been removed. Nobody has questioned the authority of the article. It's only been removed because I'm the one who posted it. Okay, I promise not to post any new links to my site, but is there any way to restore the old links, the ones that have been up for years without any problems?

As for the Strasberg article, it is a chapter from my autobiography so yes, it is mainly about me. But contained within the article is this...

(several quoted paragraphs removed by talk page owner)

Wouldn't people investigating the Strasberg technique be interested in this? What is the policy concerning articles that in their entirety might be about a different subject but which contain within them information that applies to the subject at hand?

Noahveil (talk) 13:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

You don't appear to have understood my last response. Please read it again before leaving me any further messages. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Atlantica Party

Hi. This page was deleted last year due to a lack of references. I have quite a few now and I am will post them once I sort out how to do it. Tap member (talk) 15:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

That's great to hear! Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Perftec

I am new to wikipedia and I would like to know how I could add the "perftec" paragraph on the blood substitute page of Wikipedia. It says that the information is copyrighted from another source but It has't given me the osurce where the info is sopyrighted from. I tried putting the information 'in my own words', if it's because its too close to the copyrighted material, could you let me know so I can work on it a bit more. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gatman29 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

If you write something yourself, I don't think anyone would have a problem with copyright infringement. The version of your Perftec page that I saw had sections that were copied word-for-word from a web page. See WP:COPYRIGHT for more guidance. But be sure to give references to back up the information you're adding. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, my version of the perftec page has been erased and I am re-writting the page. The brief description of Perftec on the 'blood Substitute page was written in my own words, although some phrases are just not possible to change when talking about government agencies and certian medical procedures. Did you see any problem with the description of perftec on the Blood Substitute page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gatman29 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't anything about the subject, but it seems consistent with what's already there. The whole page seems to have nearly no references. You should add references for your addition (and others, if you can). Delicious carbuncle (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I will. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gatman29 (talk • contribs) 08:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Billionaires

Well unfortunately the Forbes list seems to be incomplete if you research the Sunday times Rich list and other European Rich lists (like Quote). Therefore i think it´s interesting to have a list which also includes other sources to have a better overview of the billionaires of the world.

I would appreciate it if you first let me finish my approach and later on decide if you agree with it....

Finally I'm a little flabergasted of how quickly you noticed a site I just created 5 minutes ago. How did you find out? Iberned (talk • contribs) 20:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I was watching the New Pages page, so I saw your article when it got created. I understand what you're trying to do now. It looked like you were simply making a copy (which people sometimes do when they're just testing how things work). I undo the redirect, but I'm not sure that "cumulative" is the right word for this. Perhaps "combined"? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, Shall i redirect the page to Combined_List_of_billionaires? talk) 21:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Moved. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stone buster

Could not bring myself to speedily delete this. Could not source it either. Please make your case there. cheers, Dlohcierekim 20:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stone buster

An editor has nominated Stone buster, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stone buster and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

IP editing your Talk archive

Hello Delicious carbuncle. I happened to notice that an IP made an edit to your Talk archive. I left a note for the IP. You can revert the change if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 19:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! I hadn't thought to watch the archive, since I didn't think anyone would actually go into them and try to remove evidence of their past misdeeds. Clearly, I was very wrong, as there were two IP editors removing info about ISM Boston and legal threats that were made. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Red Button Design

I added the page to the request list and provided links to assist the creator, I thought this was the done thing to justify why the page should be created. I had no intention to create the page myself. My sincere apologies for this newbie error can the request be added back to the list of pages to create? My apologies again - MandaElle —Preceding unsigned comment added by MandaElle (talk • contribs) 16:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It probably makes more sense for you to re-add the request, but include the links this time in the request. Don't worry about the length - just put each link inside square brackets and they will be displayed in a shortened format. Use the "show preview" button before you save to see what I mean. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

My talk page

Oh, thanks for clearing that up for me, I was wondering what that was! Wildthing61476 (talk) 18:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk Page vandal

Thanks! Sullenspice (talk) 18:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)18:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for what? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I forgot to sign in before. Sullenspice (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

QlikTech Article

Hello Delicious,

I need help writing an article for the company QlikTech and its product QlikView. QlikView is a Business Intelligence solution with increasing relevance in this market.

I have read already published articles of BI companies (i.e. MicroStrategy) and I can't see a difference between them and my article, but no matter how, it was deleted. Since this is my first article maybe there is something I haven't noticed yet.

I would be more than happy to listen to any suggestions. Thank you, --Juan.martin (talk) 20:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Please start by reading WP:COI and WP:CORP. Those should help. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I am already reading them. But at the same time I would like to know why articles such as MicroStrategy and Cognos are not deleted. Again, thank you very much for your help. --Juan.martin (talk) 20:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know why they haven't been deleted. Each article is judged on its own merits, and the existence of similar articles is generally not considered a valid argument against deletion of articles that appear to exist only as adverts. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. About Notability: this company appears in the magic quadrant of Gartner, a well-known independent secondary source for assessing Business Intelligence companies. Additionally it has been mentioned in IDC, which is another well-known secondary source. Please check the reference links I provided in the article. About advertising: could you point which part of the article was "advertising content"? Maybe if I delete those parts the article can be published. About spam/COI: I want to make this clear, I am NOT an employee of QlikTech, I use the product and I use other BI products too. I want to contribute to the community writing about this new technology because it is increasingly becoming covered due to its ability to simplify BI analysis. I know this information can be very useful for others. --Juan.martin (talk) 20:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

So you're not this Juan Martin? By the way, I'm not an admin, so I don't have access to the content of deleted articles and can't review your links. I'm just an editor like yourself, and my opinion won't save or condemn your article (see WP:CONSENSUS). You don't need to convince me, just try to follow the guidelines I suggested to you earlier. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 01:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

NO U

NO UUUUUUUU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maccrazor (talk • contribs) 13:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

New Messages

Hello, Delicious carbuncle. You have new messages at Dustihowe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

x2 Dusti^{talk to me} 18:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Mistaken Identity

Hi Delicious Carbuncle, I am being accused of being you by Mark Bellinghaus and Jennifer Dickinson (Wearealone and Papillionbleu respectively). He even called New Zealand from Los Angeles where I reside the other day to call me names and threaten a lawsuit because he believes you are me. Could you possibly put him right on this?

If this is the wrong way to contact you my apologies - have no idea how wiki works, I just want this madness to stop.

Restawhile (talk) 20:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)restawhile

I knew absolutely nothing about Mark Bellinghaus until Weareallone (talk · contribs) inappropriately added his name to a list of notable photographers. I subsequently looked at his article and saw that it was largely self-promotion, so I nominated it for deletion. (Incidentally, the creator of the article was User:Mmmovie, who self-identifies as Mark Bellinghaus here.) In that discussion, I was accused by Weareallone and Papillonbleu of being several different people. I opened a sockpuppetry case against them, but it was inconclusive. By this point, I knew much more about Mr Bellinghaus and his enemies than I cared to.

I was further accused by Weareallone of "harassing" and "cyberstalking" him, even though I had done nothing of the kind and had been courteous in all my dealings with him. Knowing I was keeping an eye on their edits, on March 26 and 27, Weareallone made a series of garbage edits so that his edit history spelled out "Cyberstalking Freak del.icio.us Carbuncle .is Mermaid New Zealand Hello Pauline Berry". Papillonbleu made repeated edits to Buck Cherry and Crazy Bitch. I probably added fuel to the fire by leaving them greetings in my own edit history in response, once I understood their message. (But please note all of my edits were genuine and improved the articles.)

At this point, I've been completely unsuccessful at getting anyone to do anything about the situation. You can see my latest attempt here. I "want this madness to stop", too. I can't even edit Bellinghaus' article because of my conflict with Weareallone. My actions have been attributed to malice, but there was never any intended, I was just trying to improve Wikipedia. I'm sorry that Mark Bellinghaus is accusing you of something which you haven't done. However, I would like to keep any conflict you have with Bellinghaus separate from Wikipedia.

That's a long, and probably unsatisfying, response, but since you have been hurt by Bellinghaus' accusation, I thought you deserved a full explanation. I have no experience uploading pictures, but I'll be happy to help if I can. Wikipedia can be confusing at first, but it doesn't take long before you get the hang of it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you DC, I also left a message on Jehochman talkpage but they seem highly offended by what I said, which I am a bit shocked about as this is not unsubstantiated, as you know, you are right on the money about who they are, yes indeed, it is quite obvious to me this person was also the original writer of his own bio page. You have experienced what I have been putting up with for two years. (No I am not an Australian transvestite) OK, I realise this is all another issue, but meantime I do think this situation needs the attention of someone higher up in Wiki, as the trouble runs deep and needs expert supervision and authority. Though I am sure you are sick of the topic.

I have since found the same page you have put your complaints forward on and added my information/complaint to that. Hopefully someone higher up will be able to sort this mess out.

I hope I am not "pushing it" communicating with you again on your page, (am trying to stick with the wiki etiquette).

Restawhile (talk) 00:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)restawhile

I think you need to consider that people on Wikipedia are here because they like to edit Wikipedia and won't want to hear about something that is happening off-wiki. First of all, how do they know you are telling the truth? Second, what can they (or anyone on WP) do about it? Thirdly, from my reading of the situation, you and Bellinhaus appear to trade insults and accusations, so why would they want to get involved in that? You have an axe to grind. My advice? Learn a bit about WP and see if you like it, but don't expect that you can solve any of your problems with Bellinghaus here. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 01:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. It is my opinion that his wiki page is entirely self-serving and breaks the rules of wikipedia by being self-penned. And I admit - it is hard to not have an axe to grind when someone writes new lies about you daily. The site I referred you to was a last resort after two years of "putting up with it". It is also though, factual, unlike any of his propaganda. However, your reply puts me at ease because Wiki seems a really straight up, neutral territory as demonstrated by your own and Jehochman straightup/let's keep it clean replies and I am sure sooner or it will all work out and wikipedia will no longer be a holder of that person's self-serving propaganda. So I will all but butt out now and I appreciate your time and reply. I also tried to contact someone at www.carbuncle.com hoping it was you, but as a last resort I came here, as I could not find a contact there.

Is it ok that I add my blog to the Travilla Exhibition subject on here? You-know-who won't like it, but it is well researched. I would appreciate your opinion on this, perhaps you would like to read it first? It was however, written as a response/rebuttal to false accusations of the exhibition being fraudulent, once again in regards to the same person we discuss here. http://travillaexhibition.blogspot.com - it would balance against the link on there to an article that suggests the exhibition is fake? I will go with your recommendation. Or if you think it would need rewriting to be linked? removing references to who we are discussing.

Restawhile (talk) 02:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)restawhile

Blogs are generally not acceptable references (see WP:EL and WP:VER). One of my gripes with Bellinghaus' article is the number of blogs it links to, but that's being fixed. I see no reason why you couldn't correct any legitimate errors in his article if you properly source your references, but work on Joe Cotton and learn the ropes first. Regards. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your reply and info about blogs, best I leave well enough alone. I have now successfully added a photo to Joe Cotton's page and I thought that ok as I am one of the few people entitled to sanction photos of her going into the public domain. But I assumed I am too close to her to actually edit her page? I read up on this and its still not completely clear because I am something of a multi-tasker in the area of music, both record company, band manager, administrator and performer as well as personal friend to her? I promise this is my last question and shall just read wiki tutorials from now on. Regards and thanks.

Restawhile (talk) 02:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)restawhile

Yes, given that relationship, you are probably right. The full guideline is WP:COI if you haven't seen it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 09:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

HI again, I was wondering what happened to the alert on in regards to the wiki-stalking you got from wearealone, I can no longer find that alert on that page, has it been deleted, or dealt with in some way? I believe wearealone has now got himself into serious trouble because of his online libel in the real world anyway, but it would be good to know that wiki has also dealt with the problem you and I both had.

Restawhile (talk) 23:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)restawhile

Like past efforts, nothing happened. No one commented or even offered advice. I've found that WP isn't very good at dealing with conflicts, unless it's very clear-cut. However, Weareallone (talk · contribs) hasn't made any edits since I started trying to get something done about his false accusations, so perhaps it had some effect. The case got archived due to lack of action and is now here. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Topic Deletion

Hi Delicious carbuncle,

I just noticed you deleted the PaulDotCom Security Weekly page for not being notable enough. The information posted in the initial page was only the start, as there is definitely more to be put on there. I definitely feel it is relevant as it is one of the most popular security podcasts out there, and the team is involved in many interesting projects. If anything it is just as relevant/notable as Security Now!, another security podcast. So I don't see why my page would be deleted, when the other has been accepted. I'd appreciate it if we could restore this page, as it was highly relevant to people in the security industry. Thanks in advance. Seceditman (talk) 11:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Note that I didn't actually delete the article about your podcast, I simply nominated it for deletion. An admin who agreed with that assessment deleted it and you would have to contact them for a copy of the article. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 11:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not my podcast ;) Apologies for mis-posting. Thanks for the help. Seceditman (talk) 12:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Cumberland Head

I read your message. May I ask what I should source if an independence movement exists among the citizens of Cumberland Head. I realized that nothing is published on it, does that mean the information doesn't exist. How should I cite something if it isn't published? Thanks, AbruCH —Preceding unsigned comment added by AbruCH (talk • contribs) 13:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Then it's obviously not suitable for inclusion on WP. Please see WP:NOT and WP:VER. Perhaps you should start a blog. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the sarcasm. AbruCH (talk) 04:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't being sarcastic. Just because something doesn't belong on WP, that doesn't mean it's not worth writing about. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 12:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

THE GOAT

DELICIOUS CARBUNCLE - YOU FIGHT THE GOAT YOU LOSE

Sorry, I don't understand the goat reference at all. Owls and tapirs, those I get, but goats? It's getting so I can't tell the vandals without a programme. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

You have a new fan... I think

[1] No opinion, procedural notification of weirdness only. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 19:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It makes life interesting. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Hi. Thanks for the reply :) and I like your username - Did you have a specific building in mind, or just enjoy the word combination? -- Quiddity (talk) 03:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

What's that thing that guy said? A rose by any other name... Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Carbuncle.
What's Carbuncle? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Delicious Carbuncle would, were he not Delicious Carbuncle call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Delicious Carbuncle, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.

Flutterdance (talk) 13:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Not quite how I recall it, but that's the one. From the Bible, innit? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:User talk:Lovato45 - Look familiar?

Heh. I'll keep an eye out! ... discospinster _talk 14:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Unlinking is wikifying?

Hi, you asked on my talk page about this edit of mine [[2]], and about why I referred to it as wikifying the page, and why unlinking terms helps improve a disambiguation page. The best thing to do would be to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), which explains what disambig pages should look like, but I'll summarize the idea behind it.

Basically, disambiguation pages are not articles, they are very different from articles and are meant to serve only one specific purpose, that of allowing people who (for the most part) have just done a search on a term to find which of our articles they're looking for out of a list of articles with similar names. As the manual of style says, "these pages are not for exploration, but only to help the user navigate to a specific article".

As a result, each entry is supposed to be brief, and is only supposed to have one blue linked term, so that people can easily find what they're looking for. Disambig pages are not supposed to be interesting or informative, they are not meant for browsing around or finding new and unexpected things to read about, they're just there to get readers to the article they're looking for. Having lots of extra blue linked terms all over the place just makes it more difficult for people to find the actual link they're looking for. --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 07:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Centurion (Scarrow Novel)

Why are you deleting my page? I thought i'd gotten past this problem, theres not really much I can add to the page, apart from writing the whole plot. Which i'm not going to do. Why dont you tell me how I can improve it. And dont just give me links to policies, I wont read them. Actually tell me why you think it doesn't deserve to exist. And i'll make it better. Thanks, Jack. Rigsy05 (talk) 10:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not deleting it, I'm proposing that it be deleted because of one of those guidelines that you say you won't read. Feel free to ask again when you have read WP:BK. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 10:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

My user talk page is at stake!

I have removed the american idol data from my user talk page! Lovato45 (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Then I don't think you need to worry about your talk page being deleted. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 00:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Lewis Arquette

I don't get it. I submitted a picture, it was approved, I posted it, then did exactly what you asked me to do and removed my credit from the picture. Why am I now a vandal?

Noahveil (talk) 03:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)