Jump to content

User talk:Ironholds

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lewzair (talk | contribs) at 00:26, 10 July 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please note: while I dont mind people using style elements from my talk or userpage, i DO mind them doing so without asking. Do so and i'll come down on you like a metric unit of building material.

Feel free to leave me a message here. Dont forget to sign it by adding ~~~~ on to the end!

Puppets

Can we continue discussion on talk page because case if having too much data ?--Rjecina (talk) 01:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can consolidate the pages data and correct grammar and spelling to make it easier to read.
I will not chase puppets, but I will revert IP users which are reverting Croatia WWII articles to user Velebit versions. If you can show me administrator with will to play with suspected puppets of this user I will not start any actions but I will inform this administrator. This is good enough ?
In the end for me it is not important if they are puppets of banned user or not, but if they show respected sources that statements are NPOV. In article Srbosjek I have asked many times user Velebit for NPOV links (17 May 23 May, 17 June), but "books" has been only answers. In articles Magnum Crimen and Ivo Andrić only internet links are deleted by this user. If I am on wikipedia fanatic of something I am fanatic of Wikipedia:Verifiability and NPOV --Rjecina (talk) 01:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is 10 - 15 articles edited by user:Velebit. If we are having suspicious IP edit in article then WP:AGF is OK, but if we are having edit warring from suspicious IP or SPA account which is returning article to user:Velebit version then we are having (in my thinking) WP:DUCK. I will give short call to user:Spylab which has controled puppets of Velebit in first half of 2007--Rjecina (talk) 13:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me if there is mistake but he is suspected banned user puppet until case is solved ?--Rjecina (talk) 22:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy Robbins

You wrote:

Could you do me a favour? I always find you bring something new and useful to XfD discussions (even if it isn't always something I agree with). Would you be able to comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy Robbins? Ironholds 17:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I missed this debate, but found a cashed copy of the article. I'm not such a fan of the notability subguidelines, and prefer to stick with the core intent of WP:N, which is "Wikipedia covers things that others have already covered", which means that there must exist independent secondary sources. Also, the sources have to be reliable, thus excluding blogs, etc. So, I just look at the sources. I find four, which I'll here assume to be representative:
1. http://www.forthesound.com/Interview_Post/p2007_articleid/169
2. http://my.highschooljournalism.org/nc/wentworth/rchs/article.cfm?eid=9701&aid=146542
3. http://www.crazedhits.com/weekend-feature-jimmy-robbins/
4. http://www.last.fm/music/Jimmy+Robbins
(3 & 4 from the deleted article)

1. does it for me. Seems like an independent demonstration of notability, even if it doesn't contain commentary and isn't a secondary source. I would discount this source if someone could show that it isn't independent because the subject or his agent paid for the interview to be published. Counting against this source is the fact that at this time, only one person has commented on the interview.
2. I am quick to discount this source as not reliable. Highschool journalism sounds bloggy, and not serious. Perhaps I am biased against teenagers?
3. Also unimpressive, looking like sofisticated blogging. The fact that it is so brief and directs the reader to a myspace site definately counts against it.
4. Not particularly impressive, maybe even advertising.

So, I think I started from weak keep and progressed to delete. I think the article was advertising. It would have been worth checking the history. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2P START!

What do I have to do to remove this tag? Is citing two other places where the comic has standing good enough? Or do I have to do more? (See Talk Page) --Tustin2121 (talk) 15:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your change of heart

I'd like to give some background there, because the actual reasons for the boycott are, I hope, somewhat more sympathetic than your edit summary characterized. For a year and a half I have been coaching promising editors. One person cannot coach very many; the backlog is far bigger than I could manage. So for more than a year I've encouraged other people to pitch in.

The admin community in general deprecates training. And a good deal of the training that does happen is done badly. I've had people come to me as their second coach and reported that their first coach had been teaching them how to game RFA rather than teaching useful skills. For instance, one common tip is to break up big edits into little edits in order to pad a mainspace edit count. In real terms that's useless and gives coaching a bad name. What I do is encourage RFA hopefuls to bring at least one page to good article status: real work editing shows dedication to the encyclopedia and makes the candidate a better administrator later on--they approach situations with a better grounded perspective. And if someone wants more mainspace edits, do something useful such as vandalism reversion that actually relates to administrative tasks.

The problem is, site culture really is hostile to training. After a year of trying in various fora, with various people and approaches, I've decided a strong statement is necessary. Training works: it needs more dedicated people. Nothing short of a boycott has gotten the community's attention or gotten them to consider this seriously. Respectfully, DurovaCharge! 06:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anna

Thanks mate... It's frustrating.. i am trying to help this person out and i'm getting attacked personally... it's stupid...

AnnaJGrant (talk) 06:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anna

I was wondering, i see some people have cool colours with their usernames, are those only admins that get that cool thing or can regular users make their names look cool as well? (Like when signing posts/edits the user name is different than just a black link.)

Well one person is not going to stop me from helping out the wiki, the fight goes on!!!!

AnnaJGrant (talk) 06:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well i hope this worked, if not oh well lol, but yeah i would love to get one designed for me... something with blues purples and reds... anyways, i dont spend all of my time here, i just spend about an hour or so... have never really thought of anything to make an article about so never have, just spending time finding people that vandalize and reverting it. or New users and new pages that are just non sense and tagging them..

Anyways if you want to contact me over MSN let me know and i'll send ya my addy so we can talk more, its always nice to meet new people.

cheers,

AnnaJGrant (talk) 06:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok, well anyways, it's Boten_Anna@live.com, i'm online most of the time and if i'm not im either at class or doing studies... hope to talk to you soon.

AnnaJGrant (talk) 06:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, Thanks for letting me know. Hope to see you online sometime soon again. Anyways I'm off and ill talk to you later.

AnnaJGrant (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me.

Damn, how did this manage to slip by for so long? This subtle vandalism is the worst possible kind. At least when you have a page move vandal or some blatantly vandalistic account, it can be dealt with directly. This can't. Glad we caught it now. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 06:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, bro. I left word on the AN about it. The little darlings were busy at Shawnee Mission School District as well with unnoticed changes. Better late than never. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Worse, a legit user just rolled back the speedy. Gonna have a word with him.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea. It really does qualify as pure vandalism. Thanks! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The feeling is mutual. The really hilarious part is that a well-meaning user has put it up on AfD anyway in good faith. WP:SNOW, anyone?  :)

PMDrive1061 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

LOL! Gee, it's times like this that make me glad I gave back the mop and bucket. I can't wait to see how this progresses. This could be one for the "Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense" pages if those were still around. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.[reply]

Julia Creek Dunnart

This was a wrong postitive. Gestation age of 12 minutes? Holy crap! --Pjacobi (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Stephens

Hi. There's notability assertions in there. Please take it to AfD. --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

my page

thanks. ĤéĺĺвοЎ (talk) 13:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

one question

How do I put a background on my userpage like that green one you have on yours?

Please respond on my talk page. Thanks, Iloveheadbangingmusic (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...thanks. Iloveheadbangingmusic (talk) 20:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of criminal acts?

I thought I saw a guideline for notability of criminal acts but I can't remember where. Do you know where it is? RJFJR (talk) 21:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I spend a lot of time on cleanup by month and I keep running into articles on people who committed some crime and I'd like to prod them but couldn't remember where the statement on notability of crimes was. RJFJR (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thadson

Hi, Thanks for the unbelievably fast answer to my adopt a user request. I just put it up seconds ago. I have some questions and am a bit frustrated.

First let me show you a page I wrote and need help with. (I will try to expand it in the future.) Atilla, a short coat

I wrote the article to clear up the misconception that the name Attila and the noun atilla is one and the same. However the latest note from Uthanc says: "(moved Atilla to Atilla (clothing): Surely the Hun is the primary subject being searched for"

So if you search for atilla, it is always linked to Attila the Hun.

I could be wrong, but I feel this is ignorance. atilla IS NOT attila

It is like saying that the article named alexander should be directly linked to Alexander the Great because "Surely the Great is the primary subject being searched". In this case, I believe properly, if you search alexander, you get the "name" and not "Alexander the Great".

Or with another theoretical example, lets say we search for "son", and we always get linked to "sun" as the "object in the sky is surely the one that everyone searches for..."

As a side note, first and most, I believe Attila is a name. Attila the Hun on the other hand should be a "notable Attilas".

But this is beyond my point, which is again that atilla should not be mixed up with attila what so ever.

I also noticed that atilla is used (in my opinion) improperly in the article Operation Atilla, a Turkish military operation , where it should be written Attila not Atilla as the book http://www.amazon.com/Attila-74-Cyprus-Michael-Cacoyannis/dp/B00004STH0 and the wikipedia article

See also: Military operations during the Invasion of Cyprus (1974) and Cyprus dispute

shows.

Maybe I'm wrong, and then I'm just in need of some straightening up.

In any case, is it the policy of wikipedia, to set importance priorities between unrelated articles and in effect hide information (or make it harder to find)?

If you think, you could answer my occasional questions, i would appreciate being your adoptee.

Thadson (talk) 22:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hey thanks for saving that article

thank you --TheGreenGorilla (talk) 01:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Bearian (talk) 01:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

got your message thank you

) i surely will... --TheGreenGorilla (talk) 01:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

morning

morning iron. --TheGreenGorilla (talk) 10:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Roman Emperors born in Serbia (19)

"New user" has created this article. I have moved article to List of Roman Emperors born on territory of today Serbia but now we are having 2 article because he has restored old. Somebody is needed to solve this problem --Rjecina (talk) 23:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know, but article need to be moved, and I do not want to start new discussion or edit warring because for me it is not important enough (and it is not a vandal but nationalistic good faith edit).--Rjecina (talk) 23:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In my thinking new name is wrong because they are not born in Serbia but on today territory of Serbia which is very different--Rjecina (talk) 23:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It has been bad faith edit [2]--Rjecina (talk) 03:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Careful

Re this edit - be careful with the tone you use with new editors. Many productive Wikipedians started out using the encyclopedia inappropriately, and we need to give them time to learn. Try to be a little less harsh in your first few messages to inexperienced editors - explain what our policies are, and why they are that way - instead of just saying "stop creating inappropriate pages" and then telling them it's "too late". (ESkog)(Talk) 00:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion - Athene(movieLOL)

If you plan on speedily deleting the page I am working on at least reply to my defense of [the article]. - Etan (talk) 00:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ironholds, if a user removes the CSD tag and them add sources to the article, you should reexamine it, and then, either restore the CSD tag, or tag the article for the problems it still has, or nominate for AFD, or do nothing (if the article has actually improved so much that it's no longer speedable). Usually, you should never just roll back to the version that had the tag. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak ?!

Bah, humbug - you students....! :-) CultureDrone (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Scripts

Regarding your comment on my C scripts. They are not actually running on wikipedia, so I see no reason why they cannot be treated as any other text. Also, since I use Wikipedia as a temporary storage for them (I am currently switching between three computers on a more than daily basis, and intend to remove them when I am stable, in two weeks), they are somewhat important. If I must remove them, could you suggest a free site that would allow me to store my scripts? Thank you! - Freakytiki34 (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pollywood

I noticed you tried speedying one of the Pollywood articles. I thought you might be interested in seeing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badar Munir.--CyberGhostface (talk) 02:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calippo

Hi Pal, just a quick question, a while back we created a page about Calippos, then it was deleted. I remember seeing your name on the article when it was up for debate, I was just wondering if you could let me know what was wrong with it, so I can learn for future reference.

Cheers fella!


p.s. I noticed you refered to The Sky Moves Sideways as your favourite album, Snap! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calypsoloverman (talk • contribs) 08:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Italian irredentism

2 Croatian users do not allow me to edit the article Italian irredentism. Read my comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.167.236 (talk) 23:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Calippo

First, you requested deletion under WP:CSD#A1, then when the article was expanded under WP:CSD#G3; then the article was deleted under WP:CSD#G1. I'm not sure if it would be appropriate to paste the article here, given that it was mostly just spam and/or random ramblings; however, paraphrasing, it was an unsourced sentence full of peacock words, then a quote with a ref to a completely unreliable and untraceable source, one sentence of definition ("Calippo's are Ice Cream products sold in the United Kingdom by popular Ice Cream manufacturer Walls.", still with peacock words in), a sentence about when the Wikipedia page was created, a reference to the author of the quote above (possibly also the creator of the article, I don't know but that's common in articles with that nature), and an unsubstantiated claim which looks like typical vandalism. So the article was in a pretty deletable state.

However, I think it's quite possible that its subject is notable, but rewriting the article from scratch is probably the best course of action. --ais523 18:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

User User_talk:Kriss123

Hi User_talk:Kriss123 has created another meaningless page and I note you have issued a last warning. Just an FYI. BustOut (talk) 11:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mass of redirects...

Thanks for notifying me - I won't put so many redirects to new pages from now on. Any guidelines on what sorts of redirects to put to new pages?? Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD debate InterModule

could you have a look at the AfD debate for the recently tagged page InterModule? I asked u a question... Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ironholds, about you telling mee... about the A-eff-dee...

Yesterday you said that (the article InterModule) should have some media coverage/awards etc. in general to become notable, but I'd like to ask you (not proving you wrong here), but have a look at script.aculo.us, that one doesn't list any awards/ coverage, etc. why is that article notable?? Juggernaut0102 (talk) 10:57, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wait..

as i said, from now on I won't create so many redirects, but for this article, it's not like I'm going to undo the redirects already there... so exactly how does putting my library in the list of Comparison of Frameworks have anything to do with adding redirects to my page? Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ahem

read the above message... Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just recived a notice that I removed something from my page: Lewzair I am deleting misinformation. I was using a nother profile as a template for mines and changing the information to to suit my article

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ironholds&oldid=224694936"