User talk:Thirteen squared

Leave me a message

If you leave me a message here, I will reply here, so please watch my talk page for responses. If I leave a message on your talk page, please reply there; I will be watching your talk page for responses. Thanks!

User	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Email

RfA

Hello, and thanks for commenting on my RfA! I see that you commented on my answers showing inexperience. For future reference and curiosity, if there any way you could point out what implies that? Thanks in advance. hmwithtalk 03:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I think EVula's response (neutral as well) on your AfD said it best and sums up what I think pretty well. --13² 12:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

As an addendum to this, I also worry about the lack of time spent on Wikipedia due to wikibreaks. You said that, before, you edited off and on for a few years. Is this constant editing? Or did you edit a lot for a month or two and then leave the project for two or three months? Without seeing the IP edits, it's really hard to tell and your account hasn't been around enough to see what the pattern was either. I usually won't support a request for adminship if there are long breaks in their editing history because I want a consistent admin who's not labelled as inactive for a lot of their time spent here. Since you have no way of showing whether or not you would be active the majority of the time, it makes me very hesitant to support. --13² 12:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

You supported my candidacy in my recently completed request for adminship. The debated ended 40/4/1 and I'm now an administrator. I'd just like to say thanks for taking the time to consider me, and thanks for the confidence in me. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified. Regards, WilyD

My RfA

Administrator Reedy Boy taking off! Hello Thirteen squared, Thankyou for voting in my RfA. You will be pleased to know that it has been successful!! Meaning that I, Reedy Boy, am now an English Wikipedia Administrator. It passed with a suprising 47/0/0, and I really am grateful of all your support, and I hope that I live up to your high expectations! If there is anything I can do to help you out, please, do not hesitate to contact me! Yours, Reedy Boy 16:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Tagging

When tagging articles, please check to see if a date parameter is necessary. You neglected to include one in this edit, but it has since been added. - Dudesleeper · Talk 02:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Eh. I added it; I just didn't add it right. --13² 02:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The Adventures of Mary-Kate & Ashley

Thanks for the rewrite on that - if you're familiar with it - was it ever a TV series? It appears that it was simply just a series of direct-to-video releases with no TV connection, but that's just the movie side. I'm just trying to get the right infobox & tags on it, but can't find any TV links! Thanks... SkierRMH 23:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Al Leong

Thank you for your input and suggestions. I would like to think that I would be coming here to thank you had your opinion differed from mine. Unfortunately, it's more than likely I wouldn't have. - Tiswas^(t) 08:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:Wine Welcome

Thanks for joining the The Wine Project. Please see the project page for general instructions and announcements, including details of our latest projects. Also, be sure to visit the Wine Portal. Again, welcome.--Charleenmerced ^Talk 17:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Wine Project Newsletter

The Wine Project Newsletter! Issue VI - May 6th, 2007

In this edition: News & Notes New wine members, maps wanted, fame at last Sub Projects Updates on Operation Stub Killer Wiki-Winos Why port is poison and a special night in Chinon - this issue features your stand-in editor, FlagSteward. Wine Improvement Drive - was Cabernet Franc, currently Châteauneuf-du-Pape AOC

This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. If you have any Wikipedia wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter.

Apologies to everyone for this notification being sent out so late, events in real life prevented me from distributing it at the time, and the Wine Project's had a bit of a lull during the Northern Hemsiphere summer. But as the nights draw in, activity should pick up again, and hopefully the next Newsletter will arrive a little more quickly....

The next few weeks are the perfect time to take photos of grapes in the Northern Hemisphere - get your cameras out! FlagSteward 16:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Wine Project activity

This is a friendly note to let you know that you have been moved to the Inactive members page of the Wine Project. Users are moved to this page when two months have passed without any Wikipedia activity or 3 months have passed without any contribution to a wine related article. The intent of the Participant list is to function as a resource for other editors wishing to get in contact with wine project members for comments or question on Wikipedia's wine article. The goal of this process is to try and maintain the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Participants as current and up to date as possible with active and contributing members. Please note that this is not intended to be a negative reflection on your Wikipedia or wine related contribution and it is well known that sometimes outside life can take editors away from Wikipedia for some time. You will always be welcomed to rejoined the Wine Project should you feel that the time is right. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk or on the Wine Project talk page. Best wishes. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Legends of the Hidden Temple

“ This "IS" a television show that "WAS" filmed...see the difference? If you don't, go ask the people over at WP:TV who have made this the guideline for all retired television shows ”

Sorry for bothering you, but can you point me to where this policy is? I tried looking in the TV WikiProject style guidelines as well as the Manual of Style, and I couldn't find a guideline saying anything of that sort. RJaguar3 | u | t 03:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that after I posted. However, it's still just basic manual of style and complies with basic grammar rules. If you posted at WP:MOS, I almost guarantee they'd tell you it should be "is." I think the only time it can change to "was" is if it is no longer aired anywhere. Since Legends of the Hidden Temple can be viewed on television, it cannot be changed to "was." Think of it this way: "was" is used for things that don't exist anymore, "is" is used for things that still exist. Ignoring the fact that it is no longer produced, does LofHT still exist? --13² 14:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Use of "is" and "was" in fiction, film, and television articles?.

Also, the whole Legends situation is very complicated. The show is technically still on Nickelodeon Games and Sports for Kids (take a look at the edit history of that article to see just how complicated the whole situation is), even though that channel was supposed to have become The N on December 31, 2007. Dish Network still airs the automated feed of Nick GaS, but it is not available anywhere else. So there is question as to whether it really still should be considered as "airing." RJaguar3 | u | t 15:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

hi dont get mad but how do u do these type of things on yo pg?

teach me bro

how do u do the things u do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginosboy08 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

First, I'm a chick. ;-) Second, I've just been editing on Wikipedia for practically forever. If there's anything specific you want help on, feel free to leave me a message and I'll try to help you as best as I can. --13² 17:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Historic places

The University of Evansville is unambiguously listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Additionally, there's no reason to remove a Wikiproject tag from talk space -- those are used to coordinate article improvement efforts. As such, I've reverted your edit and wanted to let you know why. — Lomn 19:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, as an FYI, Wikipedia is not an "American encyclopedia". The overriding rule for subjects that are not strictly American or British (such as the Department of Defense versus the Ministry of Defence) is do not change the existing convention. A pattern of such edits is seen as disruptive. — Lomn 19:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

ENGVAR

About this: This is not an American encyclopedia. We do not use American spelling on all articles except those with British connections. Instead, we use whatever spelling the article's original author chose. Please read the official rules on that topic. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Kitchen Nightmares - Trobianno's Restaurant deletion (again)

Hi,

There are numerous sources of this restaurant closed from the state seizing it for taxes. I just named ONE source...and if you call the restaurant..the phone number has been disconnected.

Do you want me to list more sources? I admit the 'Net is not the BESt source..but it's all I have without walking to the restaurant myself and taking a picture of the NOW empty building.

Let me know what I can do to ensure that this info is updated correctly.

Thanks for helping me.

-Charles —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pianomanx (talk • contribs) 17:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ashley Davies

Hello, Thirteen squared, in an edit of the Ashley Davies article, you stated, "...neither source says either of these things, it puts her and her homosexuality in a positive light, but it doesn't actually praise it so highly that it should get this wording."

But, in response to your edit, I point out that the AskMen.com reference does state her as an icon; it is not simply talking about the actress, and it is clear that it is speaking about gay youth in regards to her iconic status. Is it the fact that it does not state "LGBT icon" that you have a problem with wording it that way in the article? The AfterEllen.com reference also -- while not stating the exact word "notable" -- is still pretty clear about relaying how notable this character is. I mean, why remove that from the lead (intro), but let it stay in the Cultural impact section? Flyer22 (talk) 17:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I forgot to say that I have replaced that part about her being an LGBT icon, though I did not add back the rest of what you removed. Flyer22 (talk) 17:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be best to just keep the wording that is used in the cited article, otherwise you're drawing your own conclusions from it, which is considered original research. --13² 13:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, as can be told from my edit summary previous to this one, I'm for this suggestion. Flyer22 (talk) 20:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, the Cultural impact section states what the cited article states about that, which is the reason I'm sure why you left it in the Cultural impact section. Flyer22 (talk) 20:49, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct! :-) --13² 20:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Kitchen Nightmares

I'm glad to see you have concerns about the nature of some of the recent edits made to KN by an unregistered editor. I'm uncomfortable with his rather aggressive, versus bold, approach to his edits as well as his lack of willingness accept having his own work edited. Most troubling is his failure to register. Let's keep the discussion of questionable edits going, and perhaps he will moderate his tone a bit. Drmargi (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree completely. --13² 18:53, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Good deal. Fox has now removed the Casa Roma episode from the schedule, so I've taken it off the grid. They've got a two-hour Bones this week, and Hell's Kitchen starts next week, so I suppose they'll either deep-six the episode or save it until next season. I can't see leaving it in the table with TBA until we know something definitive. Drmargi (talk) 03:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

re: edits to Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School

Hello 169!

I recently saw that you removed a number of fact tags on this article, and while you gave a reason for it, I have been unable to find the relevant policy that governs this situation. The policy on verifiability, to the best of my knowledge, does not grant exemption to school alumni. While it is true that one needn't verify the notability of the subject that is already a subject of an article, I do believe that there is still a requirement to establish a reliable source that confirms that the person is question is an alum of that particular school.

I am far from the world's leading expert on policy, and if you know something I don't about this, please drop me a note letting me know so that I don't bother people again.

Thanks for your work on the project. LonelyBeacon (talk) 21:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't even thought about the issue of whether or not they went to the school. That does pose a problem them. I agree, there should be fact tags for that issue. Thanks for bringing this up. I probably never would have thought of it otherwise! --13² 21:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Bachelor TV show Racial critism

I did source it. You called it unreliable. I have to disagree with you from the perspective that it is a common consensus and/or opinoin and not original research. How do you show something that has that many potential sources? If I source one particular "blog" or "FAQ" site it would be discredited as unreliable, and I would agree, but the Google search, though not typical, in this case IS credible since it shows HUNDREDS of sources all showing the same critical opinion of the show. It is what it is, sorry if you are a fan of the show and do not want the show spoken of in such a manner, but there are ZERO minorities of note in 12 versions of the show.... and you think they would not notice that, especially in in the Obama Age? Wjmummert (KA-BOOOOM!!!!) 15:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

No. The source was entirely unreliable and completely inappropriate. Please see this article to see what a reliable source is and what it is not. A Google search is the epitome of an unreliable source, despite your personal opinions on it. If you do not agree with this or feel differently, please take it to the talk page at reliable sources. You also may want to brush up on verifiability. Wikipedia is is only interested in what can be verified with reliable sources, not what may or may not be the truth. --13² 17:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, please remain civil and assume good faith. Do not presume to know why I keep removing it. It has nothing to do with me being a fan on the show. In fact, if you had taken a look at the talk page for the article, in the most recent discussion, you would see that I replied in November with support for a criticism section. I simply want to uphold Wikipedia's quality standards and won't include it unless it is accompanied with a verifiable, reliable source. As an editor here, you should too. --13² 17:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Then I will re-add it to the article with numerous sources. And I always remain civil and I also generally assume good faith, which is why I approached you in the manner that I did. Wjmummert (KA-BOOOOM!!!!) 01:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

So long as they are reliable and verifiable, that is perfectly fine and it won't be removed by me. I felt you were dancing on the line of civility with this phrase: "sorry if you are a fan of the show and do not want the show spoken of in such a manner." Since you only pushed it, but did not outright violate it, I reminded you of the policy instead of leaving you a warning. However, you did not assume good faith with that statement, but I decided not to warn you for it since I felt you were frustrated and not malicious. --13² 02:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

17/18 Kids and Counting

According to TLC the show HAS changed its title. It has been advertising the new title for the past week. So your "reliable sources" aren't really so reliable after all, are they? Thank you for screwing up an article, one about a show you probably wish wasn't on the air because the family is much larger than you would like, just because you can. Quidam65 (talk) 16:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Please assume good faith and remain civil. I left a warning on your talk page, but I will actually address this here. I have no feelings for or against the show. I've never seen an episode. I'm more of a J&K+8 fan, myself. How you came to the assumption about my feelings toward the show, I really don't understand. If you had taken a moment to look at the page's history and the page's talk page, you will see that I hold no ill-will toward the family or the show and, indeed, I have kept it on my watchlist to protect it from vandalism and people who would like to insert criticisms about the family or the show without proper citations with reliable sources.

I get that you don't like that I changed something you were probably proud or excited to change, since you clearly felt like it was time to change it. However, by editing this encyclopedia, you acknowledge that you do not own any of the articles and, thus, have to be willing to have any and all of your edits be tweaked, changed, torn apart, or completely removed if they don't comply with current policies or guidelines. You decided to preemptively "move" the articles based on advertisements. Yes, it will change. Yes, the article will need to be moved. It will be moved, but the move needs to happen when the title is officially changed through the airing of an episode with the new name. What if TLC decided not to air it? Yes, it is extremely unlikely, but it is possible. Because of that and other reasons we need to wait until it actually airs before we make drastic changes and full-scale moves. I requested the page be protected until the change is 100% official (the episode airs) and it was granted. We will change and move the article once that episode airs. Thank you. --13² 21:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Table in 18 Kids and Counting

I figure you've got it on your watchlist, but just in case you don't, I have started a thread about the recent change you made to the table in 18 Kids and Counting. Respectfully, Andrew Kelly (talk) 03:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Me

I'm being "inflamory" for expressing my opinion. Nice to know that a person's opinion is regarded a such on this site. I didn't know swear or insult anyone, you guys did that all by yourselves. Can you say "lost cause" with that table? Probably not. 76.68.221.250 (talk) 01:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)