User:VersedFenrir/ArchivedTalk01

In 17:45, 16 July 2004 I was welcomed by Meelar.

AC

Don't worry about bothering me; you can do that whenever you like. ;)

If you're referring to Adriana Calcanhotto, I wouldn't worry about it; now that you've learned to use the preview button (some users never do, unfortunately), you won't seem "unprofessional" anymore. :) Only users with access to the database itself can remove individual edits (and like most administrators, I don't have such access). But don't worry, such things are entirely excusable for new users. Be bold and don't worry about your past mistakes! Such is the wiki way. :)

While I'm here, I should let you know that it's customary to sign your comments; you can do this by typing four tildes (~) after what you write, like this: ~~~~. That way people know who said what and when. (If you don't want to leave a timestamp, just use three tildes instead of four). Happy editing! -- Hadal 06:30, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Seatbelts

Thank you for your polite note on my talk page. I'm still confused about this article, but you and others have made me doubt myself enough that I've changed my vote to abstain. With the amount of "Keep" votes the article has, it should easily survive VfD.

I didn't actually just take the first Google hit and base my decision on that. Most Google hits are for the devices installed in cars. Of the few relevant hits, there are two sites that list the band as having formed in 2048. I'm still confused about that. Could you please explain whatever it is that I'm not getting. My head hurts thinking about this one.  :-) Some helpful information would be what year the band formed and also a list of its discography, by year.

I'm sorry that one of your first experiences here was a VfD listing. All I can say is that the information I had to go on (the www) made this band appear to be fictional. Welcome to the Wikipedia, and I hope to see you around. SWAdair | Talk 04:03, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Children of Bodom

Well, I'm only working when in moods, but yeah, I'm watching the article anyway. -- towo 11:49, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC)

---

Hi; I know this is horribly belated (my apologies!), but I've gone over the Children of Bodom article as per your request. It looks fine, aside from a few minor spelling/grammar/syntax errors which I've corrected. There was some ambiguity in the second paragraph regarding who invited whom; I think I've cleared this up. The only other thing I'd bring up is the fact that you're referring to the band memebrs by their first names. While this makes the article sound warmer (more "human", I suppose), it goes against the Manual of Style which (unless my memory fails me) states that the subject(s) of the article should be addressed either by full name or last name (it's just more "professional" that way). The MoS is a set of guidelines rather than firm rules, of course, so I didn't change the names in the article. You don't have to either, but I thought I'd mention it.

If there's anything else you need a hand with, don't hesitate to ask. I'll try not to be so slow with my reply next time! Cheers, -- Hadal 03:59, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

La Femme Nikita

Hello, I plan to do some more work on Nikita, the series, in the near future. It needs a rewrite, a lot more information could be added, and it should probably have it's own article. I you want to work on it please go ahead and we'll work on it together. I just wrote the article about Roy Dupuis yesterday, who plays Micheal in Nikita. I was very surprised there was no article about him yet. S Sepp 10:09, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

---

Hi, Just found out now how this talk page thing works. --Hypo 04:02, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Anathema

I took this discussion away from the Anathema talk page.

Anyway I kinda do feel insulted by your comments. Had you carefully research you would've seen I editted quite some portions of text for other bands, incl Death, Napalm Death, Bolt Thrower. Anyway I largely decided to step out of the Wikipedia community as I grew quite fed up with many things, largely referring to vandalism, contributions of the uninformed, lack of uniformity and edit wars. I came to the conclusion that this process doesn't work w/o a good editor. O well maybe I'll keep an eye on one or two pages - or maybe I don't.

As an aside, the statistics are perhaps redundant, but are meant to give a quick overview w/o having to read the entire bio to know if you've got the right band or if they're of interest.

Spearhead 15:57, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Quit? Over that? It's your call, but that seems like somehing too minor to quit over. If you have been meaning to quit and were waiting for "the last straw", don't pin this on me. The Statistics argument is something very on-going in the Wikipedia; as you can see, about 40% of the metal bands articles use it, the rest doesn't. I am one of those that defend that they are useless. So, as the current main editor of Anathema, I feel that I have a little more saying over this, but I am nevertheless open to argumentation. Because you see, if it's not in the Wikipedia standards, it means it's optional. On stubs it might work very well, but on full-fledged articles, it's clutter. I'm still open to talk. --Sn0wflake 19:55, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I am pasting this here for convenience: Okay, so let's evaluate what is present on the Statistics section, in four lines (from a random article):

• Genre: Death metal, Grindcore
• Country: UK
• Status: Active
• Time: 1986-

And now what is present on a simple textual description, four lines:

English, Liverpool, deloper of doom metal, founded in 1990, original name Pagan Angel.

Damn, now I am left wondering wether knowing if the band is still active is all that important when you are going to read the article anyway. Do you see mine (and of pretty much ALL of the other editor's) point of view, now? --Sn0wflake 15:39, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

RCR

Thanks. I made a quick job of it. I know all those guys from way back. I was in High School band with Jim. googuse 22:52, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

Doro Pesch

Hey there. :) Do you think you could develop Doro a bit further? I am going to start work on Warlock sometime soon, but it would be nice if somebody could do some tweaking e expanding in her article. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 14:39, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'll be happy to expand Doro, as thanks to your fine work with Children of Bodom, another favourite of mine. =) -- Sy / ^(talk) 02:43, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Btw, I moved Doro Pesch to Doro (band). I also added the discography and some history to Warlock (band).-- Sy / ^(talk) 14:37, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, that might be a little confusing at first for people who don't know about Doro's career, and ultimately it would ideal for Doro Pesch to have a short personal biography and Doro (band) to talk about her musical career as a solo artist, but right now, take your time. I can get to that later. The article is more fitting of Doro (band) anyway. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 18:21, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Good point! I guess Doro (band) and Doro Pesch really do need to be sorted out properly. I'll think of something. =) -- Sy / ^(talk) 05:49, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Re: Question

Hmmm. That's a tricky question to answer. Wikipedia:User page#Ownership and editing of pages in the user space states that all user space contributions must be GFDL-compatible, just like articles. So other than stating the image's source and copyright status, its file name shouldn't matter. As for a limit to the number of images: As long as you're not planning to use your user page as a blog or personal website (as some users have tried to), and limit yourself to a reasonable number, nobody's likely to complain. It's only when it appears a user is trying to use Wikipedia as free web hosting that eyebrows start to raise. As you've found, there's no clear-cut policy on this, so I suppose you'll have to use your best judgment. Cheers, -- Hadal 14:35, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tagging articles

Please put semi-permanent templates like {{expansion}} that only are useful to editors, on talk pages (the only exception I can think of would be the different stub templates). This is to Avoid self references as much as possible and make our content more useful to third party users. Thank you. :) --mav 08:57, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. To summarise: articles needing expansion are not useful to third-parties. Having a simple useful flag on the page doesn't do any harm. --Sn0wflake 16:20, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Underdog Project

Since you made such a big deal about the image in The Underdog Project, could you please edit the article so the image fits correctly? Thanks Doidimais Brasil 01:36, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC).

Done. --Sn0wflake

Let's trim our hair in accordance with the socialist lifestyle

Thanks - Yea I saw that on the Daily Show and couldn't help but find out more and share my findings. Nrbelex 02:53, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

AJ pic

I see that you have again changed the pic to a "fair use" pic. I'm sure that you have not had the chance to reply to my posing on fair use yet so i will give you a chance. I just wanted to let you know that the pic page still shows the old site where the free pic was. please cite where you took the pic from when you get a chance. Cavebear42 23:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I sincerely don't care. If you want to rv to PD, then please do so. The image is from [1], and thus I conclude that it's strictly promotional; I have personally never had problems with such pictures. Have a nice day. --Sn0wflake 03:56, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

PS: I didn't change it again, your reversion simply wasn't processed.

Template:Band-stub

You're welcome! To be honest, I looked for an image and couldn't find one that seemed to work. If it's going to be a photograph of a band (which is about the best I can think of), it should be an undisputedly important band (I'm thinking The Beatles), but I couldn't find any that didn't become unrecognizable at that size. If you have a better idea (or better luck), then by all means, go for it. -Aranel ("Sarah") 23:37, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Re: Multi-stub

I've noticed people doing this too. Personally I think it's rather excessive; articles should have as little meta data in them as possible. In the case of Jupe, I believe the best solution is to cleave the two definitions into separate articles. If not that, then perhaps replace the two stub notices with a generic {{stub}} tag and manually include links to Category:Computer stubs and Category:Fashion stubs at the bottom. That way, even though the article contains stubby information on two topics, users searching for either fashion or computer stubs to improve will be able to find it. Does that sound reasonable? -- Hadal 03:27, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A very bad move. The multi-stubbing is encouraged, as it serves a useful purpose. A generic "stub" tag will put an article into aone single large category (so large that it is seriously harming Wikipedia's servers), to be lost among other stubs on every conceivable subject. The subcategory stub tags are necessary to be able to (a) reduce the servers' workload, and (b) keep track of where the stubs are. By necessity, a proportion of articles fall into two categories - either they are on two separate subjects or on a subject that overlaps into two areas. Double-tagging them is the best way of ensuring that the stubs can be found easily by editors working on subjects that are related to them. If you wish to comment on this practice, I suggest you do so at WP:WSS, where it has been debated at length. Grutness|^hello? 23:47, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Truelove Eyre

Nooooo. Please don't abstain. Yes, some of the points that Squibix were valid, but I have rewritten those sections and removed yet more of the unfounded assertions. The eight references that DS found appear to be independent of each other at least back to 1900, if not earlier. If it is a hoax or a conspiracy, then it's a very old one, and certainly nothing to do with the Eyre Empire nonsense. The article as it stands now is well supported by its references. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 20:36, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I respect your decision, but I am getting rather frustrated by the opions expressed by people who clearly haven't taken a good look at the evidence, and who are basing their comments on the now irrelevant fact that the editor who start this article also wrote another article, which turned out to be completely spurious. They have't bothered to fairly assess the work that I have done to get this article on a sound footing. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 00:42, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! GeorgeStepanek\^talk 01:19, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Philosophy of Chemistry

I received your note and appreciate the sentiment. Also, I appreciate the fact that the article in its early form was pretty much of a mess, and your skepticism, along with some others, as to whether it could be made into a real encyclopedia article was a valuable spur to those of us who thought it could be. That's how wiki is supposed to work! Doesn't it feel good when it does work out right? --Christofurio 21:15, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Jupe

Hi Snowflake - you wrote: Could you please read the HTML comment right at the top of the article before you start editing next time? I don't mean it in a bad way, but the comment is there and it's quite clear.

... and is against stub sorting policy. If the article belongs in two stub categories, it gets either two stub messages, or is classified as a disambiguation page and gets none. In this case, it is actuually two short articles, each of which could be extended separately (and each of which can, in this way, have its individual stub template removed). I have reverted the file to the two stubs and removed the HTML message, since, as pointed out, this is not the way stubs are sorted. As to the article already being in both stub categories (which the HTML message stated), it was not. It is now, thanks to the two stub subcategory messages. Please do not change this... I don't want to have to revert it again. See also the comments at User_talk:Sn0wflake#Re:_Multi-stub, above. Grutness|^hello? 23:43, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

replied. PS: I don't want to have to revert it again; please don't use that fucking tone with me. I'm not some vandal. Thanks. --Sn0wflake 03:16, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi again - You wrote:My bad for forgetting that the rules of the Wikipedia actively incentivate article cluttering (a general critic; nothing against you).

It's not an active incentive for article cluttering, it's a deliberate policy to stop Wikipedia crashing. The more articles a template is used on, the more damage it does to the servers. By adding Template: stub to the article, you added the most used template in Wikipedia (estimated to be on some 15,000 articles). The sheer number of articles with this stub is one of the primary reasons why this category is being split up. The other is to make it easier for editors to find stubs. Grutness|^hello? 04:38, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) PS - I apologise if you thought I was treating you like a vandal (although my tone was far less offensive than your response above). If you hadn't done something that looked like vandalism, I wouldn't have. Next time, do something more useful, like splitting the article into the two separate articles it deserves, rather than reverting an article that was being edited correctly.

Sure. That certainly looked like vandalism. Any fool can see that. I will make sure to do more productive things in the future, such as writing novel-lenght replies. Have a nice day. --Sn0wflake 03:27, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Heavy Metal genrebox

I have reverted the heavy metal genrebox back to cyan. Silver is already used for electronica.

Wikipedia's color guidlines for music genres is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music genres. If you want to make changes to it, please discuss them at the talk page.

Andros 1337 01:21, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. --Sn0wflake 03:30, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

University of Nottingham

I am curious as to why you reverted my changes on the University of Nottingham page. Speaking as a current student of the institution, there are six faculties: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/general/schools.phtml

There are 30,000 students at the University: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/planning/statistics/summary.htm

I'm open to criticism and, as I'm pretty new to Wiki, pretty wet behind the ears too! As I'm not a registered user just yet, the name's John! -- 195.157.190.74

I am terribly sorry for this incident. I have replied on the Talk page of your IP. --Sn0wflake 01:44, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Edit Summary

I am starting to use edit summaries now as I have just discovered them. When i used to edit articles I just took no notice and didn't even notice it was there. However recently I have begun to use them. May I ask where you problems finding what I had done in an article or articles? - (Erebus555 16:11, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC))

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Thanks!

Thanks for the note, it's always nice to have people notice the work you do, I really enjoy working on this project. It's interesting to see a large group of strangers work together and get something real done in a (fairly ;) civil manner. Glad to be a part of it! Rx StrangeLove 21:12, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Shaman

Hi snowflake, i've reverted your edits to Shaman; the vast majority of people are looking for Shamanism, not the band, and regardless, the band already has an entry - Shaaman (band). (which has an explain relevance tag, btw, you might wanna fix it up.) thanks. --Heah 21:12, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

oh, i also put a disambig link to the band on top of the shamanism page. --Heah 21:16, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Fixed and tidyed everything. Thanks for the politeness. --Sn0wflake 23:39, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

of course! i figure this place works much better if people actually talk to each other . . . --Heah 09:18, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Britannica

Heya, could you add the {{1911}} tag to articles that incorporate large parts of text from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica? Thanks in advance. --Weyes 02:34, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

I overlooked it once. Thank you nevertheless. --Sn0wflake 02:39, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

I apologise if it came across as telling you off, it wasn't intended as such, merely a suggestion. I corrected the mistake, but it seemed prudent to also inform you. "… Teach a man to fish …" and all that. --W(t) 02:45, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

Mother-in-law joke

Hi, Sn0flake! I disagreed with your speedy deletion nomination of this article, so I put it on the Votes for deletion page instead. The debate is at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Mother-in-law joke. Sjakkalle 07:32, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Stub pages centralisation

Hi Snowflake - I like the look of the new draft for the stub project - I've gone through it and tidied up one or two sentences here and there, and added a little bit. Mainly very minor stuff; the only real changes I made were in the unrevised section, plus the addition of one sentence in Creating and categorising stubs - "If an article overlaps two potential categories, two different stub templates may be used, but using more than two is strongly discouraged." Have a look and see what you think. Grutness...wha? 04:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

User_talk:Sam_Spade#Heavy_metal_template

You certainly were offensive. Firstly you reverted nothing, have you had a look at the template history? Compare our two versions. Your change of colors was hardly a revert. It was a minor edit of my complete rewrite of an abysmal template. As far as my extremely minor (and amazingly easy to correct) mistake w Heavy metal vrs. heavy metal music... I am hardly scandalized. Start sending me a (fat) paycheck, and maybe I'll get a bit more choked up about minor errors such as that. As far as your ideas on colors, that was an arbitrary descision by a single editor, and hardly irrevocable. I suggest next time you be a bit more amiable to the person who comes in and corrects your work. Thank you for fixing that inwiki link btw, and I hope you have a nice day. Sam Spade 10:41, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

In hindsite I think i got a bit overly pissed off in the above. The thing is, I spent a very long time working on that template, and did a very good job IMO. Sam Spade 15:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Quite an answer for a terse comment. If you can't work on a group project, I suggest you create your own Wiki. That template was most certainly not my work, if that wasn't clear enough. --Sn0wflake 19:59, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I've been here since 2003, and have made over 20,000 edits (#43 in total edits), so I'm unconvinced that I can't work on a group project. Cheers, Sam Spade 12:20, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

My apology

Stubs in my "subpages" - yes, sorry, I tend to forget that "stub" is now much more than just a message. (How does this page get away with having one?) Robin Patterson 05:58, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Later - noting your reply; you didn't sound too business-like; perfectly polite and valid request. And as for my mention of your page - right this instant I can still see below this editing-box the following:

Templates used on this page:

Template:Stub

Template:Band-stub --Robin Patterson 20:07, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Uwe Kils

Hallo Mark - thank you - keep up with your fine work - best greetings. --Uwe 68.46.71.104 03:39, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Find and fix a stub

This page and Wikipedia:Stub contain different information and redirecting would lose the info which is there now. Please don't revert again until we've discussed the reasons for redirecting on the talk page. Mgm|^(talk) 16:13, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

After reading your message on SimonP's talk page, I understand your motives. Please make sure all the info from this page is presserved in the other article before redirecting again. Mgm|^(talk) 16:17, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

In case you find something is out of place, feel free to edit the article. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 16:40, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Re: Opeth

Hi. Regarding your recent edit to Opeth, I'm wondering why you felt the statistics section cluttered the article. Cheers—Trevor Caira 22:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello there. Yes, the Statistic section is, as I see it, the worst idea on the Wikipedia. It merely repeats what is said on the lead section, only in a less informative way. Yesterday I went through all of the articles on List of Death Metal bands eliminating the Statistic section (and merging whatever useful information I found into the lead section) and fixing the articles in the best way I could, since they were mostly on a bad shape. Do you feel the Statistics section is useful? Only one editor has told me that in the entirety of my time here, but I do respect all points of view. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 23:13, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

I see your point. Good work, and thanks—Trevor Caira 16:36, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Stubs

Hi Snowflake - you wrote: With the help of your tireless work on the WP:WSS project, we have finally reached the elusive goal of getting rid of generic stubs. It has been a pleasure working with you for these past months. I would also like to formally apologise for anything I said to you in the past. That lies, most certainly, in the past, but I would like that to make that completely clear. Cheers!

I think we all got a bit heated at times - it was a very big task - and I too apologise for any harsh words there may have been on my part. The main part of the task is done now with Category:stub being virtually empty, but there is still more to do. It's been great - if hard - work over the past few months, and you and others have done immense amounts at getting the stubs sorted as far as they have been. I look forward to working with you again! :) Grutness...wha? 02:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Subject Matter Expert/Temp

Hi. Could you please explain why you removed the stub template from this page? I found your edit summary "Please do not use the stub template on User pages.)" a little cryptic. This is not a user page; it is a new article waiting for the copyvio at Subject Matter Expert to be cleared up. Are you suggesting that this won't be a stub after it's moved? Thanks. Bovlb 03:20, 2005 May 31 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Thanks for reminding

Noticed that you'd removed the stub template from User:Sundar/Srinath Srinivasa with a friendly note. I forgot to remove the stub template when I moved it from article namespace to my user space. Thanks. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 03:59, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome, no problem at all. --Sn0wflake 14:45, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Heyas

Heyas, I've seen you've been randomly popping up a lot on my watchlist for some reason so I thought I'd say hello. Hope your editing is going well. Let me know if you ever need any help! Have a nice day! -SocratesJedi | Talk 04:09, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Replied, thank you very much. --Sn0wflake 14:45, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Krill

Hallo Sn0flake! can you please take a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates#Antarctic krill, maybe help with some editing/formatting/vote - best greetings --Uwe Kils 20:34, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Hallo Mark! thank you for the fast response and help - the featuring is not so important for us, but the help in editing and language - keep up with your fine work for wikipedia --Uwe Kils 01:50, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you everybody

I would like to express my thanks to everybody helping in the nomination of Antarctic krill. I think 3 1/2 supports and a long long discussion are an unexpected and great outcome for a critter so remote and unknown - you should see how little and poor Antarctic krill is represented in Encarta and Britannica - this is the best reviewed and resourced general article of krill we know of - it is impossible to fullfill all wishes at the same time - this is what we did with our all product peer review stamp to qualify this stage of the article for academic exercises, especially for our dreams of a Virtual university within Wikiversity - good luck to you all Uwe Kils 21:48, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Sn0wflake 14:45, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A question

Hi Sn0wflake - have you ever thought of becoming an admin? I'm willing to nominate you if you like... Grutness...wha? 23:41, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. Now all you've got to do is go over to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Sn0wflake and accept and answer... oh, you know the drill :) Grutness...wha? 00:35, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Many thanks for your support for my RfA nomination, I appreciate it! Schissel : bowl listen 02:20, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome and congratulations on your great work on the Wikipedia. --Sn0wflake 02:23, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for supporting me on my RfA. It's always nice to get some positive feedback. I hope I can put my new abilities to some good use. -- grm_wnr Esc 17:35, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you for supporting my RFA. Guettarda 00:15, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll fiddle with the page. Guettarda 00:30, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

For some reason (article size?) I can't add edits at adminship page, but...

... no hard feelings at all, I think I understand your position. Just wanted to make sure I covered all the bases. Peace, BrandonYusufToropov 00:29, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hey

Sorry about that... have fixed :-) Good luck with the RFA! - Ta bu shi da yu 03:33, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sn0wflake

We didn't mean to be confusing with our comments at our vote at WP:RFA. There are a few Users that we follow for a refreshing and interesting perspective (which helps us with our own NPOV). Your work here is good sets a good example. We're confident of your success in this nomination and your upcoming administrative duties. Cheers, hydnjo talk 22:57, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and congratulations. You Administrator you. Our warmest regards, hydnjo talk 01:47, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wake Me Up Before You Go Go

Hi - I noticed that you've just deleted someone's article on the Wham! song Wake Me Up Before You Go Go ... I had spotted this seconds before and noticed that it contained zero content, and so was just about to rewrite it, but then it went. A (probably stupid) question: because I know it has been deleted, do I now have to list this on Votes for Undeletion or can I go ahead and make the edits I was going to make without doing that? - SP-KP 28 June 2005 19:17 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

RfA Thanks

Thank you for your support in my recent RfA nomination. I appreciate the vote of confidence you have provided me. --Allen3 ^talk July 1, 2005 14:25 (UTC)

Hey

That's really great, it's great to have people that dedicate time to writing large and informative articles on bands, especially heavy metal bands. -- Exsequor

Wikibooks: Secret of Mana

Hi,

I've just started a wikibook, concerning Secret of Mana. Maybe you want to join in? Shanul 7 July 2005 16:02 (UTC)

Great! Shanul 7 July 2005 16:36 (UTC)

Deletion

Why did you delete Penny Brown? It's a notable hoax that has been mentioned on Snopes. --WikiFan04^{ß 16:09, 10 Jul 2005 (CDT)}

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Journalist

• RE:Mariah carey article

I appreciate the fact that you did not attack me the way some users did (Im not calling any names). Anyway, the only thing I did was remove the reference tag and the references because I was under the impression that we had all come to the consensus that it was not needed. For my mistake, I really apologise. That was all I did. The word 'impeccable' at her vocal profile was POV and I take that back but I still dont know how 'expansive' can be described as POV as many are arguing. Also, someone added something about her singing up to C8 and hitting an E2 in 'Whenever you call'. I changed it, but someone put it back on so now her profile is saying thst she can sing from E2-C8 (thats 5 octaves and about 5 notes). Im not gonna change it; i was told not to edit the article remember? Extraordinary Machine presented a link that showed my recent edits and it made it seemed like I deliberately tried to destroy the thing. An entire paragraph is there that looks like I deleted it or something, but I did not. As stated, I apologise for making an honest mistake. I provided a link where ref can be found,(Mariah carey archive), but no one followed it. Journalist 21:18, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I hope to have been of help. -- Sn0wflake

Thanks!

I appreciate your note on my talk page. I'm sure you'll agree that sometimes it can get hot in here, but believe me, I try to keep my cool whenever possible. It's just hard to do this when somebody says things like "Why don't you fools stop getting your panties in a bunch over nothing and let the article be!" (in reference to the Mariah Carey article). Extraordinary Machine 23:08, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I hope to have been of help. -- Sn0wflake

CSD

Hi there! I am writing a short essay on the present CSD proposal and the reactions to it, because I think it shows some interesting thoughts that preside in the WikiCommunity, and such an essay may be an interesting article for the Signpost, or a useful read for anyone who wishes to propose anything in the future. Anyway I wanted to ask you about your comment, "There is absolutely no sense in basing a policy on a guideline". Could you please explain a bit what you mean? We have in the past created policy out of some other guidelines, e.g. the 3RR policy which used to be a guideline. Or did you mean that a policy page should not refer to a guideline page for its decisions? I can certainly understand (and sometimes agree with) people opposing an idea because of improper procedure, but if that is the case I would like to write that into the essay so that better procedures will be used in the future. Thanks for your time! Radiant_>|< 13:01, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

• Okay, thanks for explaining that. Of course a rule is only as strong as its weakest link. What would you suggest to be done about it? E.g. mark the guideline as policy instead, or copy/paste it into the policy? This is not necessarily about this particular case, but it is quite possible at some point in the future that someone will want to promote a guideline to policy status. Yours, Radiant_>|< 11:52, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Thanks!

Thanks for the input regarding the stub tag at the Sam Seder article. I'll remove the stub tag. =) Also, thanks for cleaning up the sentence structure and wording. I didn't like how it looked myself, but wasn't sure what would be an improvement. It looks better now. ZachsMind 11:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Articles on Bands

While I can see hat most years in discographies may be redundantly wikied, it is not always the case. The biography part does not always list the years. In any case, I do not feel stronlgy at all about this (less work on my part in any case).
On the other matter, the only band that I did change the lineup was Edguy where for some reason it listed their birthdays as well, which is something I haven't seen in any other band article and in any case belongs in the artist personal article rather than on the band page.
I think the best way to go about this is to have an blank band page to serve as a baseline and guide for new members. --DB0 14:16, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Stevey7788's RFA

I am not quite sure I understand your comment (and since this is more personal clarification than anything, I thought your talk page would be the best place to ask.) Are you saying that we should not have admins who find such things offensive? Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 21:10, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

I now understand exactly what you were saying but still stand by my vote and nomination. Also, it did seem that two of the five oppose votes (SPUI and yours "per SPUI") were on the basis of that general attitude, if not the edits them selves. Thank you for taking the time to clarify this for me! Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 21:30, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hello Sn0wflake, you really didn't say anything bad at all. Thanks for being concerned about what you were writing and sharing your opinion with others, which is what I really appreciated about you. Thank you again for participating in my RfA. — Stevey7788 (talk) 00:35, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

{{WPSS-cat}}

I'm sorry if I have misunderstood the proper use of {{WPSS-cat}}). I thought its mention had been accidentally removed during recent valdalism and repair of Wikipedia:Stub. I now see you removed it delibrately. Please explain to me how you think the template ought to be used. Thank you DES 22:33, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

See this talk page. I should see a response there. DES 22:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mark - the purpose of the template is to simply state that the category was created by the stub sorting wikiproject, and any creation of new subcategories for it should be cleared with WP:WSS before being made. It's just an attempt to stop the proliferation of useless stub templates and categories that cause so much extra work for the project. (Oh, and thanks for your comment re AR-geo-stub. Tobias Conradi is being a royal pain, carrying his argument for the redirect onto several different talk pages) Grutness...wha? 01:12, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Edguy

Many thanks for wikifying the article. --jakobpr 11:29, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

thanks again for welcoming me, and I hope that I will soon get acquainted with the usual formats of the English Wikipedia. Normally I'm writing in the German Wikipedia (I'm from Austria), and there are some differences between the usual formats of both sites. --jakobpr 12:33, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Your deletion is overkill

• 08:26, July 22, 2005 Sn0wflake deleted "BlockView" (content was: 'BlockView is an A9.com service that provides a Yellow Page-like directory with window-shopping images.{{stub}}' (and the only contributor was 'Toytoy'))

I created this stub at about 06:20 and you killed it 2 hours later. What were you doing? And you even said "and the only contributor was 'Toytoy'". Well, do you expect other people to contribute this article in a matter of 2 hours?

BlockView is a real thing. It was mentioned in the A9.com article. If everything goes well, it'll be a very useful service (while you're deleting this article, I was testing it). Can you restrain your urge to delete? Can you do some fact-checking? -- Toytoy 17:14, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

Thanks for the help

You are welcome :) --Witkacy 07:45, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Neopets Gameplay - Sect Stub

I guess you were right in changing cvg back to sect, but now I am beginning to wonder if it is even a stub anymore. Should we move Gameplay to its own article to avoid further lengthening the Neopets article? --Ryan 08:02, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake

RfC: Boothy443

I think he deserves an appearance there by now, and as the target of his edit summary attacks, I thought I'd ask if you'll comment. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Boothy443. Hedley 14:55, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this up. -- Sn0wflake

Fucking Amal

The UK and Australia also used the "Show Me Love" title, as far as I know.

Also, most people in the UK, the USA, and Australia speak English. Most people in Sweden speak Swedish. Therefore, the English Wikipedia uses the English title. WhisperToMe 15:22, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

I'll use RFC...

"As far as I am aware, the Wikipedia has no rules, and is based solely on consensus. In this case, out of all the people who have expressed an opinion on the matter, only one has stated that "Show Me Love" is the ideal title. "

1. There are rules that are derived from consensus, and...

2. Two people, not one, expressed preference for "Show Me Love"

Edit: Listed it in requested moves... WhisperToMe 19:18, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Replied -- Sn0wflake