Looking for something that was here? Check the archive.

I edit from a location in Eastern Standard Time (UTC-4) and have an erratic schedule. I will try to never disappear in the middle of a conversation, but it might happen occasionally. If I do disappear, don't worry, I'll get back to you as soon as I'm able to. If I disappear after 04:00 UTC do not expect to hear from me for at least 10 hours.

Thanks for your understanding, Sven

Q4 2010

Listing articles for deletion

Hi Sven. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I appreciate your efforts. In some of the articles you have recently listed for deletion, you metioned that they were small. These articles can be tagged with a stub template. You also mentioned some as unsourced. These can be tagged with a citation template. You have also mentioned merging in some AfDs. These articles can be tagged with a merge template. These reasons are not sufficient to list an article for deletion per our deltion policy. Could you please be more careful of this in the future? Thanks. Also, It is not appropriate to remove references from articles during an AfD, as you did here, as they may be used to verify information other than notability or added during the course of improving an article during its AfD. Thank you. - Hydroxonium (talk) 17:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarifications. I was actually listing them for AfD because they fell in the rare category in WP:N where something can be sourced but is not notable. I saw these as episodic type content in a named series of documentaries. The practice in television series is to have a listing of episodes with short descriptions, and pages only for a few select episodes. I saw that the listing page already existed and wanted to delete what were, at the time, one line pages with identical content to that of the summaries. In the future I will be clearer. Sven Manguard _Talk 17:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

dynamic content

Hi, Sven. I just happened to notice your comment re User:Snottywong/sig and was pointing you at my user page which uses the same sort of techniques to make the page render different content under various conditions. If you like SW's techniques, you'll love mine. His sig has to fit in 256 characters, while my user page does about 30kb of that sort of thing. I thought you'd be interested. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:08, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I got that after the first post. Sorry if I seemed angry, I was just stunned-confused. Thanks for showing me. I am a liberal arts type of guy, advanced coding isn't my forte. I can give you a good prediction on the future of post Kim Jung Il inter-Korean relations but if it isn't really basic HTML or Wordpress I can't code for a website. If the code to make the color of the shadow change dropped in my lap I'd use it, but short of that I'm utterly hopeless. BTW you have the weirdest collection of information in a userspace I have ever seen. "I am a sock" is a new one. Kudos. Sven Manguard _Talk 04:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; and I saw your 'nevermind' just after I posted here. This sort of thing is seriously non-trivial, for a wiki. S.Korea took a hard look at Germany's reunification and are balking at the huge costs... and, of course, the north still has a bit of kick left in it. I think that China will eventually push for a mellower North, and things will sort peacefully. I'd be interested in your take. I am a sock — Wikipedia's only street-legal sock, actually. It's all old stuff, though so don't worry about it. I've been here for a very long time ;) I do a lot of code; I also have done a lot of other things, like design the lighting for an excellent^{(said the reviews;)} production of Cabaret. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:33, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Cracking the Quran Code

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Cracking the Quran Code. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 19:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior

It was ridiculous to single my IP address out, given that I was only asking questions based on the allegations in the article. My editing history is irrelevant. Now that the talk page is deleted (once again) there is absolutely no context. 69.140.102.40 (talk) 03:54, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily for you, all involved parties get ANI notices, and no one looks at one as being bad at all. I "singled you out" because your first post in a month's time was controversial and in a location that a casual surfer would be unlikely to find. It was suspicious. I mentioned it as such, as there seem to be a lot of low usage accounts buzzing around this article. This raises the possibility of a WP:CANVASSING incident. If you're innocent, nothing will come of this. Sven Manguard _Talk 04:12, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re:Meatpuppetry on WP:Articles for deletion/Soccer Matrix

You may also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mandolinface. Do you think this ought to go to ANI as well? 2 says you, says two 04:56, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No need. Sock will deal with it just fine. This is a clear WP:DUCK situation. Sven Manguard _Talk 04:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We apologize

We simply felt wookieinheat had an agenda and were adding only what we found. We will no longer use or bother with the Salisbury family or any other person on wikipedia. We have no idea what is truth and what isnt such as what we read and put down. Thank you and we are done with editing ever again on wikipedia. Salisbury was found notable and we thought he was now we dont know about vogue not being real or even the newspaper articles. So that is it. Thank you.