User talk:Mike33/Archive 2

Little Mikey

I've worked on the article a little to make it more like an encyclopaedia article. If I have inadvertently made any factual errors, please do revert them. It was a nice first Wikipedia article. Welcome to the clan. --Dweller 10:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help me section

I found a entry Ahmad Raza on the cleanup list, thought I would help but have found that entry Ahmed Rida Khan has a much better site (however the strange spelling) There is a merger bar on his site - i have addressed him and said yes - who decides? the guy who wrote the original entry? how does it work? i wrote lots of things about the early life he doesn't have (with source) he has none. it only took me half an hour, but i hate to think that sourced work would disappear in completely unsourced work, and he keep my my sources when he couldn't be bothered to get a book or two.

Its just a question if it arises again. makes much more sense if moderators decided what was good or not. your friend Mike33 22:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at a {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} for flagging articles for merging? Politically speaking, anyone is free to merge an article. it would be good to merge sources along with the article, so care must be taken. -- ∞Wirelain 22:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not certain that i completely understood your questions. Careless editors eventually end up being watched. -- ∞Wirelain 22:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plz read thx

My Talk Page. It's ok, I even thought I deleted them for a few minutes there! --mboverload @ 09:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC) I updated --mboverload @ 10:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool Thanks for the reply and sorry about the tone, I seriously thought that you were denying all knowledge of the deletions. Thanks Heaven for the show preview option. ;-) Your friend Mike33 11:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Using Sockpuppets to vandalise Talk pages

Hi guys on the page Talk:The Frosties Kid - a user has deliberately vandalised the page by deleting other users comments out of line

He seems to be the same person

Can you research this for me please and if necessary issue him with warning about repeated vandalism. I do not wish to do it myself, as I think the boy has too much time on his hands already, and worry about further repercussions.

Kind regards, Mike Mike33 20:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try WP:SOCK, that will have the proper instructions. ~~Eagle 101 TESTACCOUNT 21:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)~~[reply]

I appologize for posting with my test account, I was working with another user with problems with a WP:VPRF bug. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 21:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archive (frosties kid)

Hi, Got your message. I totally agree the dicussion page is too long, if you don't mind could you move what's necassary.(im new to this all so not quite sure what needs archiving and what should stay). also good find with that other guardian link. Let's just hope the page gets unlocked and we can finally get back to writing the actual article! --Jum4 10:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, page is unlocked, would appreciate if I could get some help with the restructuring of the article. Thanks as always --Jum4 13:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not me.

Not sure why you placed a message on my talk page complaining about "my" box.... it isn't "my" box, I didn't place it there, and I had nothing to do with it. Check the history. wikipediatrix 15:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry terrible mistake, i don't know why I never checked [talk history]. Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa Mike33 22:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Manchester

I was just checking your your contributions. Mmmmm - I think its is quite probable that some people dispute the existence of Metropolitan Counties. The Post office certainly does. Hence, GMP, Chester Rd, Manchester. You were quick to find fault with the description of the postal address of GMP although logically Stretford is located within the borders of the Metropolitian Borough of Trafford.

Surely, not one rule for one fault and another rule for another fault. Either be consistant when editing or explain. Mike33 00:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note.

My position isn't illogical.

GMP is certainly located in the Metropolitian Borough of Trafford, but not in any area called Trafford. Boroughs only tend to be used in addresses when the town or city is the borough. Many modern borough names are tenuously linked with the region they're located in, nondescript or corny; for example: nobody would say that Blackburn Rovers FC is in 'Blackburn with Darwen'. Also, Trafford MBC officially list their own Town Hall as being in Manchester:

Trafford Town Hall

Talbot Road

Stretford

Manchester

M32 0TH

You can't dispute the existence of something that exists! If you've followed the Greater Manchester page over the months, you'd have noticed a dedicated troll who keeps editing the page to talk about the county in the past tense or attempting to undermine its existence. The Post Office uses all of the metropolitan counties in formal postal addresses with the sole exception of Greater Manchester, despite the fact that Greater Manchester is the most coherent and cohesive of all the metropolitan counties. It's existence is only controversial to a small minority; indeed, the intellectual argument has moved on, with overwhelming support from business, individuals and all of Greater Manchester's boroughs supporting the need the need for the creation of a 'Manchester City Region'. It looks like Manchester and Birmingham will be piloting this scheme. But, compare and contrast the situation with Manchester and Birmingham: Dudley and Coventry have insisted that 'Birmingham' not be included in the name of any city region because they say they want to protect their own distictive identity, resulting in the supremely corny proposal of the 'Heart of England' city region. The Greater Manchester boroughs are relaxed and see the need for Manchester's city region simply being called the Manchester city region. Cheers. 195.137.126.236 18:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Helpme

I noticed you added a {{helpme}} template to Talk:Scally, and I've answered it as best I could....I just thought I'd let you know. I'm sorry I couldn't help further, but I'd be happy to try. Poke me if you need anything ^^ —Keakealani _//Pokeh// 22:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i in good faith faith posted a good faith helpme on an article talk page - it was a mistike, i just wanted an outside admin to give advice about how a merger conversion is disscussed. I was on the understanding that helpme was for all sides to see and to help them - much more useful on an article talk page that telling me that we don't do that on wiki. admins should assist all parties in a dispute. I feel so stupid now. i have let the matter go, i will vote on the original proposers side. If i can only please my is this all my page is gonna be filled with? Mike33 23:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does everyone shout at guys who leave {{helpme}}in article talk pages? or is it me? is not the way of getting help to other editors givingt NVOP advice to all editors - not just on talk pages? Mike33 23:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is prefered that one only uses {{helpme}} on their user talk page, and people who help remove these templates when help is given. Ryūlóng 23:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't intend to yell at you, and honestly don't think I did. At any rate, I obviously can't help you, and rather than provide frustrated and unhelpful answers, I will let someone else help you. I strongly suggest you contact an admin directly as most of the users patrolling the helpme templates are not. —Keakealani _//Pokeh// 23:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: HELPme TAG

What on earth is this? I have never seen anything of the sort let alone remove it. For 1000 edits a day: some admin or other got pretty fascist on that with charva and locked it. To be fair the same could be done to others.--Josquius 17:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mmmm not sure, must have been a bad night for admin. I have been using wikipedia for only a few weeks. most of my contributions are in talk pages with ideas about how articles should flow. I sometimes add sources or clean up, and have created a couple of new articles. I thought admins were there to help and Jimbo encourages new users. Sometimes rules are not explicitly clear to newbies, although i know that a helpme tag cannot be placed in an article, i thought that all talk pages (article or user) were classed as the same.

As per MERGE Scally has roots long before 2004. the chav burberry boys of 2004 are not scallys, and to suggest so is relying on aspects of speech, which are created by people outside of the subgroup. They may well look alike, but in the north west, they are a perculiar subculture. If scally is to be merged with chav (and CHAV is huge already - full of useless uncited nonsense) then i would tag every single article (which you didn't do Josquius) that is mentioned in Chav For example, Neds are lads from scotland who look and act like chavs, but have a more gang related culture than 10 kids who hang about on a park wearing baseball caps. Chav is an outsider term to describe groups of youths, it is not self descriptive like Emo, Goth etc. Scally is self descriptive. No 14 year old lad is going to describe himself as a Pikey or Chav, unless he wants to feel part of the culture from the outside (personal blogs "Chavkid Kent"). A baseball cap doesn't make a scally or a ned. Thats why the article Scally needs a good clean-up, but must stand alone. Mike33 20:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it all on the relevant discussion page, too confusing over 2 chat pages and the discussion--Josquius 10:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scally

Thanks for raising this subject. Scally is, of course, a completely different term to Chav. Addhoc 13:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, User talk:86.31.236.20 has supported not merging the article, so the merge should now be prevented. Addhoc 17:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who is BigDT?

August 9th

(diff) (hist) . . Image:Chavkid.jpg‎; 18:57 . . BigDT (Talk | contribs) (+db-attack (note: chav is a racist term)) (diff) (hist) . . Image:Chavkids.jpg‎; 18:56 . . BigDT (Talk | contribs) (+db-attack (note: chav is a racist term)) (diff) (hist) . . Image:Chavkid1.jpg‎; 18:55 . . BigDT (Talk | contribs) (+db-attack (note: chav is a derrogatory term))

How to raise Afd on a List page?

Today, I came accross List_of_ethnic_slurs. I was re-directed to it by the words Paki and Coon. What I didn't expect to find there was Chav.

I like lists, lists are cool, if I want to read lists. 215kb is a serious list and has many. many editors.

The first paragraph starts to describe "ethnic" and wiki-links to the sociological Ethnic groups. Yet the page redifines Ethnicity in proposterous ways. It is just an invite for neologism and made at school.

I want to Afd the article (it has previously gone through Afd) and if it survives needs major deletions and clarity about what ethnic is. If I had found that my neighbour had called me a Munich (A derogatory term for a supporter of my football club), I could well have gone to my local police and used it under the racial and ethnic abuse laws, relying on Wikipedia.

Afd, seems the only way of cutting the size of the article and ITS SCOPE. Hundreds of editors battling it out on a talk page would last months not days. This is a list page, not a pure article.

I have never raised an Afd before and the system, particulary with previously raised Afds is confusing. But after being daily on Wikipedia, for the last 6 weeks i need to know, and the WP:AFD is very unhelpful. please help and please don't send me to another WP page that presumes that i can open 20 windows at once. Mike33 16:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on fixing ti up for you.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 16:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the tag on the article. You may now follow the redlink "this article's entry" to the AfD page. There you will want to type {{subst:afd2|pg=List of ethnic slurs|text=YOUR REASON FOR NOMINATING GOES HERE~~~~}}. When you look at the AfD tag on the article, you will see a very small link in the lower right that says "log." Click on that link and add {{subst:afd3|pg=List of ethnic slurs (2nd nomination)}} to the bottom of the page it links to. In the future when making a a second nomination, you should use {{subst:afd|2}}. If you have any more questions, please leave me a message on my talk page.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 17:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine except for two things. First, you aren't neutral. A nomination for deletion means you think it should be deleted. I would just remove the word neutral. Second, you forgot the second step of listing it in the log. I can do it fro you if you'd like. I'll be on for a few more minutes.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 18:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saved Sect

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your comment on my userpage about The Saved Sect and User:Secretlondon.

"I did read your version, but it was almost cut and paste from the original Sunday Times report"

Just to clarify, this wasn't my contribution. I contribute quite a bit to wikipedia - and have done some minor edits on this article, but it was actually User:Veej who contributed this bit (see [1])

I just asked Secretlondon as I was interested to understand his logic. Being a beaurocrat I guess he knows more about WP policies than I do. Only if he fails to respond will I push it further. AndrewRT 20:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic Slurs

I responded to you at the article for deletion, but the overall answer is sort of "neither" WilyD 12:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination does talk about the difficulty in editing the article - which was a point I felt needed addressing. If you feel I wasn't verbose enough in my explanation - you may be right - but it'd be the first time I've been accused of such a thing. Sorry. WilyD 13:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that two editors "dittoed" me, I'm not sure my sentiment was as vague as you found it. Whilst it is almost certainly the case that I could've been more precise, it ain't my natural inclination to write long essays about articles that are obvious keeps. I'm not sure it'd be possible for me to adopt a verbal style that would never confuse anyone. For what it's worth, articles for deletion is a discussion, not a vote - if it is the case that my arguments are poorly reasoned or incomprehensible, then they'll be discounted anyhow. In general, I would expect (although it may be foolish of me) for anyone reading my comments to be familiar with the rational for deletion - so I'm not sure it's all that beneficial to reiterate them in my discussion. Short and sweet can also be too short or rot your teeth - and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough for you - but I would worry that rehashing too much will just clutter up the discussion. WilyD 13:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never meant to imply that article for deletion was a vote, I was only setting the stage for the argument I intended to make. As for my use of italics, I was attempting to paraphrase the nomination as I read it. Of course I may have misread it, these things happen. WilyD 16:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - AfD is rarely a chummy place - sorry for the confusion. WilyD 16:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I've accepted your case at the Mediation Cabal... sorry for the delay in response. Check out the case page for my reply. --The Prophet Wizard of the Cray on Cake 16:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ethnic slurs (2nd nomination)

Mike, I am disappointed by the fact that you didn't even try to settle your qualms about the article on its talkpage. Filing a deletion request only detracts time and attention that could have been spent working on the article itself. Would it be possible for you to outline your ideas on the article's talkpage? I would be willing to close the AfD afterward. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 23:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POINT. That was not the right way to get your point across. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]