User talk:Qwyrxian

Daddy Warbucks

I cannot find the date on particular comic panel as Little Orphan Annie has not yet been added to a searchable database. Also the blog listed was that of a published author, but based on your request I will replace it with another source I found. I will attempt to find more but given the age of the comic I don't think we can be picky. PeRshGo (talk) 15:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh??

You just sent me a note - I have NO IDEA what you're talking about. I added a wikilink to the word Eisenhower in Rachel Maddow's article, and you accuse me of vandalism?!?! Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.10.121.193 (talk) 06:43, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

(copied from talk)

My absolute humblest apologies. I read the IP that made the previous vandalism (the one that added the word "Eisenhower") and yours adding the wikilink, and because they started the same, I thought they were the same. I am totally in the wrong here, for not reading the IP address correctly. What you did was perfectly fine, as I assume you didn't know that the Eisenhower was a remnant of earlier vandalism that a Bot mistakenly brought back. Again, I'm very sorry for mistaking you for another. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries - simple mistake. I was just a bit shocked, but after looking through the edit history, I can understand how you made the mistake. Happy editing :). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.10.121.193 (talk) 06:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Draft on fermentation for article kimchi

The vegetables are sliced, highly seasoned with ingredients such as red pepper, onion, and garlic, and fermented in brine traditionally in large earthenware jars. Dried and salted shrimp, anchovy paste, and oysters are sometimes used as additional seasonings. The fermentation process is initiated by various microorganisms originally present in the raw materials, but is gradually dominated by lactic acid bacteria. Numerous physicochemical and biological factors influence the fermentation, growth, and sequential appearance of principal microorganisms involved in the fermentation.

The early and intermediate phases of fermentation are considered crucial to the taste of kimchi. When optimally ripened, acidity increases with sourness and a unique flavor with refreshing and coolness results from ethanol and other products. During fermentation, which takes approximately one month depending on weather conditions, the kimchi jars are stored totally or partially underground in cellars or sheds built expressly for this purpose. Recently, however, kimchi refrigerators have become very popular in South Korea. This household electronic device maintains the temperature for the proper fermentation of kimchi, saving the trouble of burying kimchi jars underground.

Note from WtcMike1976

Note: this was put on my talk page by WtcMike1976 on 25 July; I just noticed and am moving here now on 2 August.

Editing Cycklic vomiting syndrome by Mike.

Hi there, iam the one that have been aditing the content of cycklic vomiting syndrome. As you know there is not to much facts around the subject yet unfortunatly so iam posting what i have been able to come over sofar. Me myself have had a severe version of the desise for 6 years after a infection and iam posting the newest information i come over from the Cycklic vomiting forums and what me and my doctor have recently diagnosed and found out (suspect) when it comes to this syndrome.

I live in sweden so iam sorry about my spelling isnt the best and iam wery thankfull that you help me edit my text.

Its abit hard for me to find my way around Wikipedia and its message funtion so i hope you take this into considiration and i wish my message reaches you as iam abit confused when it comes to finding my way around this Wikipedia functions (its so new for me).

Anyway i wish you alot of happiness and good health and 1000 thanks for helping me out with the language.

Dog meat

Hi, Qwyrxian. I removed the legality issue in Japan. Please see Talk:Dog meat#Legality. I hope you understand my edit. Thank you in advance. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 22:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I really need your help

Dear Qwyrxian , i really need your help in expanding Sohag [city page ] .

first of all , i would like to improve it step by step the publish it all after finishing it . How can i do this ??

second , sohag references isn't available very much so i don't know what to do about that problem .

third , about the wikivoyage source problem how can i keep those photos in the page ??

at last , i live in sohag so it is very important to me to expand this page ....

thanks in advance Qwyrxian Ahmadpontymageed (talk) 4:26, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I can completely understand why you would like to expand the article--it's very common for people to want to explain about their home town. Unfortunately, especially for places where English is not the native language, it can be difficult. Wikipedia is very strict (or, at least, we're supposed to be strict) about sources. One of the key pillars of Wikipedia policy is verifiability, which you can read about at WP:V. In short, that policy statement says that all information in Wikipedia articles must be verified by reliable sources. A correlation of this is that if there is are no reliable sources that document something, then the information, by definition, cannot be given. The article itself can be kept, as we can certainly verify the town's existence, but it's the interesting and detailed info you're giving that we need to source.

Now, I know nearly nothing about Egypt, but, luckily, there's a whole group of people on Wikipedia who do: the WikiProject Egypt. These are all editors who have an interest in and knowledge about how to write articles about subjects related to English. I have just posted a request on one of their discussion pages, which you can see here. I'm hoping that they will have more ideas about where to go and look for sources. Stop by that page and say hello if you can; I'll be watching to see if anyone offers help.

Finally, as for the photos, what you will need to do is upload them to Wikipedia. Since those images are automatically CC-BY-SA by being on Wikivorage, you should be able to upload them with no problem. Instructions for uploading photos can be found at WP:Uploading Images. I've never added photos before, but I would certainly be happy to try to answer any questions I can. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your hard work, and persistence in finding a good image for a difficult article, I award you this barnstar. Well done. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:05, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! In terms of "sum total human effort," I think this ended up being much easier to get than you trying to surreptitiously snap shots at your local market. I never thought of trying because I assumed a copyright holder, especially someone like Sherridan who makes his living off of his creative work, wouldn't ever want to give up his copyright. I do hope we don't have to fight with (an)other user(s)about the picture, though! Qwyrxian (talk) 23:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

Here are some pictures as our way of saying thanks! A great story in pictures Chrisrus (talk) 15:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Glad you did...somehow I missed this popping up! And you're welcome.Qwyrxian (talk) 22:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Splendid job...

... reporting IP 86.137.72.31. I issued an only warning and was watching him for the past... 10 or so minutes? I decided to leave him be to do focus more on something else, then saw on my watchlist that he was reported to AIV afterwards by you. I suppose vandals don't just leave, they sometimes continue to vandalize... anyway, just saying thank you is all. Xcalizorz (talk) 09:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. To be honest, I don't even always notice when "I" report someone, because I'm using Huggle. If you haven't used it before, it's quite handy (although you need rollback rights)--when you revert something, it automatically checks for previous warnings, determines the level of warning the person is on, and, if the vandal is already at 4 warnings, auto reports the person to AIV. I was just doing vandal-fighting with Twinkle before, but when I'm at home and not behind a firewall, Huggle is super fast and easy (as long as the user is very careful to only mark very clear vandalisms). Qwyrxian (talk) 09:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I see, I see. I'll look more into that, but I'm still new here (created an account two days ago). I still believe I need more... experience on this. I mean, I find vandalism reverting fairly easy since it's common sense to tell whether an edit is obvious vandalism or not, it really is, but I think I'll stick to old school reverting, at least for the time being. Anyway, thanks for bring the Huggle detail, I'll consider using it in the future. Xcalizorz (talk) 09:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Update

Sorry, was not trying to vandalise, I thought I'd messed up the page as I'd got two tabs open in my browser and the text I'd added had accidentally been deleted by me. I'll source the references than add the content back in, especially the influence of Islam on early Wesleyan practices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.172.100 (talk) 09:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem, although please note that I didn't mark the didn't mark your edit as vandalism--I was just removing it because it was unsourced, and a very contentious claim. You're going to need some significant, reliable sources to support both of those claims. But if you have them, it's a great addition! Qwyrxian (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, new to Wikipedia so still learning. Bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.172.100 (talk) 09:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. While I'm at it, I'll teach you one more thing: on talk pages (like this one), after you write a comment, put 4 tildas, like this: ~~~~. This automatically "signs" your post so that people know who wrote it and when. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Please see...

here. That trolls been stalking my contribs and vandalizing pages with edit summaries like "rv anon vandalism". There is also an ANI thread regarding this ip jumper. Appreciate the help tho on Candace Nelson. Tommy! [message] 11:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Restaurant Notability

A formalized vote has begun regarding notability and your input is desired, thank you :) - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Nickel Children

None of those awards listed in the poster is notable, and I can't seem to verify that it won them anyway. (Also, I cringe at the phrase "award winning." It's just so overused to the point of meaninglessness.) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 11:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't sure; I can see how the may not satisfy notability in that case. I still think it asserted notability enough to not be speedied (and then the "article creators" get a few more days to try to find useful sources). Well, if you could report your findings on the pages AfD page, I'd appreciate it. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:55, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I elaborated my findings. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 12:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Wandering Jew

I just put in a temporary protection request - hopefully that will fix the vandalism problem soon. Cheers Clovis Sangrail (talk) 13:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I think you beat me to it by about 30 seconds; one of the Users stated on his/her talk page "Dynamic IP, I'll be at it all night long." Will have to keep watching and see if his/her attention spreads across multiple pages. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The IPs seem to be from all over the world, so I thought it was a blog stirring trouble. They'll get bored eventually... Clovis Sangrail (talk) 13:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

One at least has started to spread... [[1]] Clovis Sangrail (talk) 13:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I think they don't realize just how easy it is to keep up as long as there's enough people using Huggle. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:55, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Rajkot

I corrected those names after looking at Gujarat tourism's website. http://www.gujarattourism.com/showpage.aspx?contentid=166&webpartid=1017&lang=English —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pennstate4ever (talk • contribs) 04:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

That is a commercial site, and not considered reliable information--see WP:RS, wikipedia's policy on Reliable Sources. Also, I note that you copied information directly from that page onto wikipedia. This is a direct violation of WP:COPYVIO, which states that we never include copyrighted material on WP. I have added a second speedy deletion tag to the Rajkot article, accordingly. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify, it's an official tourism website from the state government of Gujarat and not just a commercial site. I also have changed the language so let me know if I need to change anything else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pennstate4ever (talk • contribs) 04:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

No it's not. They claim to be "official", but if you read [2], you can see it's a private corporation representing the interesting of tourism related businesses. It has no connection with the government of Gujarat. I see that the copy-violation was fixed, so the speedy deletion notice was removed, which is fine. I am still on the fence as to whether that article meets WP:GNG, but I'll wait and think that over. Also, whenever you leave a comment on a talk page (like this one or one from an article), at the end of your comment, please "sign" by adding 4 tildas, like this: ~~~~. Thanks. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page. utcursch | talk 05:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC) You're welcome! Qwyrxian (talk) 13:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Kevin Hart

Thanks so much for taking this one up. I got embroiled in it a couple of years ago, but gave it up eventually as it was becoming difficult to sort out the wheat from the chaff and I just ran out of puff. Sterry2607 (talk) 13:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome...I don't know how I happened upon it in the first place; I vaguely recall Hart making legal threats, which peaked my interest :). It both helps and hurts that I know literally nothing about him, his poetry, over, really, anything about contemporary poetry at all.Qwyrxian (talk) 13:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

You should not whole revert by part

See WP:FIXED, Nothing on Wikipedia is in stone. No POV pushing. No original research. We can only discuss by WP:RS sources.660gd4qo (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Again, you're citing essays, not policy. It is widely accepted that, for controversial pages (e.g., pages about disputed places, about ethnicity debates like the Balkans, about the Middle East, etc.) should be handled with extra care. WP:BRD cannot be applied in this case. Please not that Oda Mari and I are not saying you can't edit the page, but merely that the best way to go about it is to start discussion on the talk page first, except in cases where there are clear policy violations (like long-term uncited information). Doing otherwise leads to edit warring and page protection, which gets us nowhere. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

It was not essay. North east asia history foundation is a Academic institute. not essay. also, if you do not like North east asia history foundation, then you should add tag, or edit specific part. not whole sale revert by part. 660gd4qo (talk) 00:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I wasn't clear--I mean that WP:FIXED is an essay. As the page itself says, it is merely the viewpoint of one or more editors, and may or may not reflect consensus. That's the same thing I was talking about your use of Wikipedia:Don't revert due to "no consensus". Essays cannot be used as firm guidance in any aspect of dispute resolution, as the community has not approved them as official policy or guidelines. So what I'm saying is that the official talk page message stating that this topic is controversial, and thus changes should be done through the talk page first, not through aggressive changing of the text. I'm not saying that your additions don't belong, just that we need to tread lightly as we make revisions.Qwyrxian (talk) 00:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I already said, you should not whole revert by part. You shoud point out which content is wrong. and all cites backed up by relaible WP:RS, unlike your original research. 660gd4qo (talk) 00:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

You currently missusing wikipdia guideline. You just don't like its edit. POV problem. 660gd4qo (talk) 00:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

But it's not a guideline, it's an essay. Essays, by definition, are not guidelines, and do not necessarily reflect consensus. You are allowed to cite essays as much as you like, but no one else has to accept them as binding. For example, I could site WP:BRD--per that essay, you're allowed to make bold changes, then we can revert them with clear edit summaries, then it's your responsibility to take it to the talk page and discuss your proposed changes. Notice we now have 2 essays contradicting one another. The fact that neither is policy means that neither "wins." What does "win" is the note at the top of the page that since this article is controversial, changes must be discussed on talk first.

Do I have a POV? Yes, of course I do, just as you and everyone else does. Does it effect my editing? I try not to let it do so. What I'm objecting to here is not your edits, but your method for making very significant changes to a very controversial topic. I really think it will be much better if we talk about this on the Talk page first. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

My User Page

I haven't logged in for a while and when I logged on, all of my sub pages were gone. I read what you sent me and I believe that you, or someone you can possibly linked me to, deleted them. Could you possibly fill me in on this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakens88 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

One moment, I'll look into it. Okay, I recall this from about 1 month ago. At that time, I left you a message on your user talk page, stating that I believed you were incorrectly using your userpage. Per WP:UP, userpages are to be used primarily for Wikipedia related purposes, not for promotional reasons, as a free web host, etc. People are allowed to have a little bit (like, a few sentences) of info about their "real life," but not multiple pages like you had. The only other legitimate use of userspace is as a "Sandbox," which means that you can create drafts of pages you later intend to move to mainspace; that doesn't apply here, however, as none of those pages could ever be moved to mainspace for a variety of reasons (the biggest ones being WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:N). So, I asked that you consider removing the information yourself. However, after that point I took no further action, and, to be honest, forgot about the issue, since you stopped editing at that point.

Yesterday, administrator DragonflySixtyseven deleted your pages. I don't know what made him aware of those pages (I didn't inform him of your pages), but, if he believed that they were in violation of policy, he was perfectly within his rights to do so. At this point, your best is to ask that admin, which I see you have done at his talk page. He will, I assume, come along at some point with a response for you. In the meantime, I recommend that you go read WP:UP, which is the Wikipedia policy on proper use of user pages. I think that if you'll read it carefully, you'll see that the deleted pages are explicitly not allowed. Furthermore, your comment on DragonflySixtyseven's talk page makes me think you're not understanding the purpose of Wikipedia. That is, Wikipedia is a place for information about people who are already notable'. It is not a place for people to promote themselves in order to become notable. People being "interested in you" is not a valid reason to have a Wikipedia main page; rather, in order to be in the encyclopedia, you have to have already been discussed in reliable sources (magazines, journals, etc.). Finally, you may want to take a look at WP:OUT, which has a great list of other websites that do allow you to host exactly the kind of information that you had here. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Link

Hi! I am confused why the leading chemical engineering magazine can not be a reference source for users. Could you please advise on a better way for me to provide the link on chemical engineering subject areas so that it will not be removed?

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandviewmedia (talk • contribs) 14:01, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Doug Williams

hi i was wondering if you could just delete the whole page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_williams_RsR_Guitar im just not good enough at wikipedia yet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doughbk (talk • contribs) 14:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

I can request that it be speedily deleted per your request as primary/sole author. However, don't feel bad--it has absolutely nothing to do with your skill at Wikipedia. Even the "best" wikipedian could do nothing to make that article survive, because the person the article is about does not meet the notability guidelines. Some day, perhaps, that Williams and/or his band will be notable enough for an article, and if they are, we'll certainly want one here. Please don't give up on Wikipedia--it's not too hard. At the top of your talk page there's some good links to help you get started writing and editing articles. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it appears to have already been done. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Solar System edit/ acceptance/undo

I am so slow at checking for vandalism when checking under Pending Changes that someone else always seems to get there first. Anyway, I accepted diff only to find you then (at the same time?) reverted it as vandalism. Which of us was right? Thincat (talk) 15:31, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

My opinion is that the included link is spam. The same user has added similar links to Jungle and one other I forget. Per WP:EL, we only want the best, highest quality external links, and advertisements should never be included; it's slightly possible that the editor is actually adding it in good faith, thinking it "helps" readers, but it seems far more likely it's being added for advertising/page promotion purposes.

As a side note, the only reason I and some other people are so fast is that we're using Huggle, which is a semi-automated tool that pulls up suspicious edits quickly, as diffs, and lets people revert and warn the user in a single click. It even checks the user's talk page for other warnings, and, if it identifies 4 or more pre-existing warnings, it will auto-report the person to WP:AIV. You need to have rollback privileges to use it, but as soon as I got it I shot up in vandal watching speed by a factor of 5 to 10...you just have to be really careful when you use it, simply because it's so fast it's easy to get over-anxious and make mistakes. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Well I can quite understand that the link might reasonably be considered WP:SPAM and (if the editor has a conflict of interest) they should request on the talk page, as you have quite righly advised at User_talk:PJS102. However, your comment said vandalism diff and I think it comes nowhere close to vandalism. So, it is your comment, not your reversion, that I question. Thincat (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:VANDAL, spam is a form of vandalism (it's the fourth one down on WP:VANDTYPES). Given that the link was to a commercial site (again, that's debatable, but it sure fits the bill for me), and I had just reverted the editor (with a good faith undo, rather than a vandalism warning) for the same site with a different topic, I felt it was fairly clearly spam, and that the editor's goal was to drive traffic to the website, not to provide "information" to wikipedia readers. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, we just have an editorial difference and that is fine. I think the site and the link are relevant and acceptable but you think it is spam vandalism. Anyway, the most important matter, communicating with the editor, you did even at your lightning speed so I thank you for that. Happy Huggling! Thincat (talk) 16:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacred Code (2nd nomination)

Was it the same author who recreated it after it was being sent to incubation earlier today? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

It was User: Nicoladegiovanni who recreated the article the time that I saw it. I don't know if it was the exact same username that previously created it, but earlier today 3 different usernames were confirmed as socks of Nicoladegiovanni (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nicoladegiovanni), so I suspect they're all the same person. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Yup... the same user who created the original. See: diff A pity, too... as all he needed was some patience, as the original IS now in the incubator, and when it does return, it will be worthy of the project, puppets notwithstanding. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Dog meat

Hi, Qwyrxian. I am not sure why you deleted a description.[3] It seems to be based on the following sources:

• Kim, Rakhyun E. (2008). "Dog Meat in Korea: A Socio-Legal Challenge" (PDF). Animal Law Review. 14 (2): 231.
• "Dog Meat to Be Subject to Livestock Rules". The Chosun Ilbo. Mar. 24, 2008. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
• Son, Bong-Seok (Mar. 28, 2008). (in Korean). The Chosun Ilbo http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art_view.html?artid=200803281211152&code=940100. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Missing or empty |title= (help); Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)

Thank you. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 03:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that! What happened is actually that I was re-reading the Korea section of Dog meat in order to respond to a comment on Talk:Korean cuisine. In doing so, I noticed that one of the citations was an opinion article, which we shouldn't use to source facts. Then, when I came back to Dog meat to make the change, I misread and deleted the wrong sentence. I've corrected it, re-adding the properly cited sentence and removing the one cited to the Korea Times opinion piece. Thanks again--I went too fast for my own good. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Looking at you closely

I'm getting impressed by your edits, especially with BLP, I could train you if you want for adminship in the near future, like 2 or 3 months from now. Just do some article writing, and it's good. Secret ^account 14:25, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Why thank you for your very kind words, and offer. I know that I'm pretty new to actively editing Wikipedia. While my account stretches back to 2008, I only had about 50 edits before May of this year. But now that I've started doing this seriously, I can't believe I didn't start this ages ago (well, as many "ages" as the project has existed, I suppose). I know I still have quite a bit to learn before I'd even consider adminship--I still find myself inquiring about basic questions here and there. On the other hand, I know that I'm very good (he says arrogantly) at picking up formal systems, and feel very comfortable working with language within the boundaries of the project. I also have already developed some very strong opinions about how to interpret policies, which you may have seen at one noticeboard or AfD or another.

I know that if I ever do feel comfortable enough to start down the path to adminship, I have two major things holding me back. One is that I am much more of a "re-writer" than a "writer." I have done some hard work with sources on a few articles, but I'd be willing to wager that the odds of my ever creating a new article are quite low. In part, this is because the content areas I'm most interested in are not ones that lend themselves to new articles (I don't go in for the continually expanding zones, like entertainment, or underdeveloped zones, like non-Western areas like India). But even more so it's because I have much more interest in editing existing articles; working on disputed issues; monitoring vandalism, linking, and POV additions; even making major changes to existing articles to pull them in line with policy. Having seen a few RfAs, especially recent ones, it appears that some voters are adamant, however, that article creation experience is nearly a pre-requisite for adminship. If that's the case...well...I don't need the mop and bucket that much. The other problem I can potentially see myself facing is that I'm not shy about expressing my interpretations of policy. As I lean very strongly towards immediatist, along with strict interpretations of WP:BLP and WP:NOT), this could potentially put me at odds with other admins (although I don't actually know for certain where the typical admin lies on the meta-scale). If that means I won't be judged qualified to be an admin, that's also fine for me, because I think I'm more useful to the project following my principles (always subject to change, of course) then I am bending on them just to get admin tools.

So...tl/dr: Thanks! And an interesting offer I may pursue in the future, even though there may be "hang-ups". Qwyrxian (talk) 14:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• Your strict interpetation is the same as mine. Secret ^account 23:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

MMA Article Fatalities

Hi there - you recently undid one of my edits on Mixed martial arts. I regarding counting fatalities in MMA. The article in question refers to "there have only been three documented cases of deaths after a sanctioned MMA event", which is incorrect. There have only been 2 fatalities after a sanctioned MMA event, and I changed the article to reflect that. I also provided a reference showing that the event in question was unregulated. This change was discussed months ago in the "Three deaths" section on the talk page. Given all these details, would you consider undoing your undo? FrancisC (talk) 06:43, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

hm...i see your point. I started looking at articles linked, but I'm out of time at the moment. I've gone ahead and self-reverted, as I believe you may be correct. I'll check back in later. I think it would help if you posted your full explanation on the talk page so that others can discuss as well. Thanks for the very polite message and explanation here! Qwyrxian (talk) 07:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

That's pretty much all there is :) There's a bit already there on the talk page, if you want to the continue the discussion there.FrancisC (talk) 10:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Nando's

Hi Qwyrxian, I got this message from you earlier: Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Nando's. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Starting at level 2 warning, because I believe you are the same editor as the IP address that was adding the exact same links despite being warned that it is against policy. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The links in question have been on the Nando's wiki page for almost a year now so I do not understand why they are now being considered a problem given that thousands of people probably view this page a day and none have addressed this previously? Please advise. All the links I (re)added to the wiki page provide information that I feel Nando's customers will value and are directly related to the article; in no way constituting vandalism. Thanks Jc sed8d (talk) 05:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)