This is an archive of past discussions with User:The Placebo Effect. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Nv8200ptalk22:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Please Help
There is an unholy mess in the Maryland article regarding a section entitled "cultural identity." Most of the editors agree that the state is a Northern one, and many facts have been posted and adequately cited to prove that fact. A Confederate sympathizer, however, is constantly going onto the article, removing cited information, and replacing it with unsourced "statistics" that steer Maryland into the Southern category. Please read the whole debate, weigh in, and please, PLEASE, help.
History21
How?
Hey, how do you get those things? The things that say This user is a male....
From:VanessaLuver4Ever User.
I know I am not the Placebo Efftect but I can help you. Those "things" are called Userboxes. THey are design so that you can quickly find out a a user without reading a lot of text. To find some userboxes for yourself go to Wikipedia:Userboxes. Once you're there find a Userbox you like and copy the the text for it into your userpage. I hope this helps!--Bubblewrapp09:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey
I just got this from ChrisGriwold, who I also seem to clash with. I'm stubborn... he's stubborn... ah well.
"These navbox templates you've been adding are under discussion at the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics#These_Infoboxes talk page. Please stop creating and adding these while we discuss them. Currently, the discussion appears to be going against their inclusion in articles, so you may want to join the discussion to present your opinion. Good luck.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)"
This includes your Avengers one you created. So dude, I guess if we want them kept we better start defending them otherwise they may do their little lets delete it and that would [CENSORED] me off!.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
If I've correctly apprehended your meaning apropos of auto-warn templates, my Help Desk reply might be of some use (I note such reply here only in view of your request for such reply); should you have any further questions or need associated help, please feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. :) Joe06:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
WP:AFD/The Political Spectrum of the left and the right in the Roman Catholic Church
Your comments there are not completely inline with WP:CIV. Even if an article has no place on wikipedia there is no need to be rude about it or the person who wrote it.Geni00:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
See [1] for more. I seek your assistance in deciding the deletion of three new, unnecessary Avatar-related articles. Thank you. Y BCZ17:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Mark Lund AfD
FYI, I have completely rewritten the Mark Lund article from external published sources. You might want to reconsider your AfD vote, since the article is no longer autobiography. Dr.frog15:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I would have
Yeah, I would have voted for FA for the Avatar article. Sorry I didn't get your message sooner. At least it made it, right!-Hairchrm23:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
i've reverted your changes to pokemon types, you cited removing a large amount of content because of WP:OR (likely due to the recent AfD). The content was descriptive in nature, mch like many "Differences in" sections. Descriptions are not OR when based off of primary resources. As of right now, there just seem to be lacking some exact references to which anime episodes are being discussed. Would you find it acceptable if i find something stating that the difference exists? -ΖαππερΝαππερBabelAlexandria16:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
I see you've been using action1=BP when adding the ArticleHistory template. The Featured Article Director User:Raul654 has said that it is sufficient to start with Refreshing Brilliant Prose. I've now removed the BP option from the template documentation (although not the template, so nothing will break). Also it seems a bit pointless to include BP if you're going to use 19 Jan 2004 as the date for both BP and RBP. If want to use BP, you can get the dates from the table at User:Feature_Historian (it's chronological, not alphabetical). For the link for RBP you can give the appropriate one of Wikipedia:Archive/Refreshing brilliant prose - People and culture, History and religion, Science or Others. --Dr pda03:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you like the tool, however you might want to slow down a little :) Of the 29 articles to which you added the template today, I found things which needed to be fixed in 11 of them. Dr pda01:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
New news, see talk page at WP:FFA - we are no longer calling RBPs FFAs. According to the folks who've been around, they were never Featured articles, so we can't call them former featured articles - instead we're calling them failed featured article candidates (FFACs). I've removed the ones we added from WP:FFA, and will go back and re-do those on the list at the talk page of WP:FFA. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I got through a lot of these, and crossed off the ones I did, but I've got to quit for a while. WP:FAR is getting really backed up, and I'm going to have pay more attention there. Thanks for all your effort, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Could you flag up with [citation needed] the things you consider to be OR or elaborate on the Hobbit talk page? I've done my best to NPOV it and remove OR statements from the section, but just the notice itself doesn't help too much! Thanks. --Davémon19:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. FYI most of them are covered in various secondary sources, but hunting them down would be quite time consuming. --Davémon20:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Two questions
1. Is it possible to have your article rating displayer list if an article is on peer review or FAR?
2. Is their a template for only ratings or do those have to be tied in to Wikiproject Templates?
It already does if it is FAR - at least it's supposed to. I will look at adding Peer Review also.
Thanks for adding the recently delisted article to the Features and admins for this weeks Signpost. Hopefully it should be distributed very soon once collation is complete. Extranet(Talk | Contribs)06:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Why don't you try going through and archiving the talk page instead? It'd be much more productive. I agree, the conversation was something that should never have started, but since it did, I'd rather not delete it. WP:TALK actually says nothing about deleting material, except for your own, and recommends archiving when length is an issue. It would be one thing if it were pure vandalism, or outright personal attacks, but it's not. It's just a wayward conversation. Archiving it would be fine, deletion is not going to fly. FrozenPurpleCube21:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Personally I think no one would have had a problem with it. Nontheless, I have done as you asked and will nip any of these future conversations in the bud. The Placebo Effect21:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Lists
Why have you moved List of academic disciplines and several other lists into the Wikipedia namespace without any warning or discussion? I see nothing in the policies and guidelines concerning list articles (WP:LIST et al) that supports this move. -- Rbellin|Talk21:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Please note that mass renames without discussion are not a good idea since, in case people end up not agreeing with you, somebody has to do a lot of work moving things back.
Also, when you move things you need to check for double redirects.
I will get to talking there eventually. Right now I am disscussing the samt thing at the other articles I did that to and I don't want to have to debates at once. The Placebo Effect13:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Placebo, I objected to your moves and moved them back, stating my reasons in the moves' summary fields. Please do not move them again without building consensus on the talk pages. Thank you. The Transhumanist04:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia has over 8,000 lists. Hundreds of those are lists of lists. Do you intend to move them all to the Wikipedia namespace? Please do not. The Transhumanist04:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
wel, when I was going through addign the article history template when it was first being rolled out, i found it hard because some pages had the archives neamed weirdly, others had comments 3 months after it was pulled. It doesn't matter much now since the bot is doing most of the updaing. At least I could do the basic move to /archiveX and update article history. The Placebo Effect12:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that, I forgot about it this week as I have been called in for extra work and was unable to collate it. If I need you to do it again, I will ask you, but I am sure I will get back to it next week. Many thanks, Extranet(Talk | Contribs)23:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Avatar Airbender, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oo756521:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the questions, you answer them yourself. And if you have any questions, just feel free to ask me. My schedule IRL is very hectic, so I'm currently not free to even write articles. Nevertheless, admin coaching will still go on as usual. Terence13:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I saw that you helped get Wii to its feature status -- congrats! I wanted to see if you might be willing to help contribute to a Wii-only project just launched over at Wikia. Please see http://wii.wikia.com/ -- the place needs a good admin so a little hard work might go a long way! 76.175.49.8900:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello again there. As I have just returned from a great and well-earned vacation, I probably can't collate this week's Features and admins. Could you possibly do this for me this week please? I'm a bit tired and probably won't be able to do it. If not, I can try to do it myself. Thanks in advance, Extranet(Talk | Contribs)06:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I have several hours of classes coming up, so I don't think I'll be able to cover the closure as it happens. Point it out to the other Signpost regulars and see who can add to it. It's fairly simple what to do: just add a quotation from the bureaucrat's closing comment, which he will probably make somewhere or other, as I did with RFA/Moralis. If whoever does this wishes to claim "co-author" status on the article, that's fine with me. YechielMan21:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:B-Class Lists, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
G6 housekeeping. Duplicate of Category:B-Class List articles and just bound to create confusion. In any case has been empty since its creation.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Category:B-Class Lists|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
Thank you for this recent episode list revert. Even if we can't get to a point where everyone agrees I hope we can to a point where everyone can respect each others positions. --Gmaxwell15:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost admins
I am deeply disappointed that the editors of Signpost have shunned me by not including note of my successful RfA. Only joking, I suspect the problem was that my RfA closed on the same day as Signpost was released (last Monday evening, the 30th) and so didn't make it into either issue. Just might be something to watch out for when compiling the list in future. What time does Signpost come out by the way? Adambro18:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
"It was decided early on that it would do templates like that or FAC." What? If it was decided early on, why not go ahead and add it? Diez221:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I undid you closing of the Afd and the redirect. You're not allowed to speedy-close Afd discussions as a non-admin, especially not against consensus. Also, what is to keep Jimblack from just undoing the redirect? It's a non-consensus decision so there's nothing holding him back from doing so.--Atlan (talk) 22:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
After looking more closely, I noticed that it wasn't you that did the redirect, just the closing of the Afd. The redirect was done after I Afd'ed the article and before you closed the Afd, and it subsequently removed the Afd notice. So what happened here? Did you just assume I botched the Afd and never put a notice on the article? Or did you assume I nominated the article while it was a redirect? Anyway, I find this turn of events very curious.--Atlan (talk) 23:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, it says right here that you went against policy:
Non-administrators may not "speedy-close" deletion discussions. They must either express their view that the debate should be "speedy-closed" in the normal procedure, or wait until the discussion has run the full AfD period to close it as a "keep" if there is a consensus to do so.
So could you please show me your version of the policy that shows you are allowed to speedy close the Afd? Really, what you're saying doesn't make any sense. It means anyone can bypass the Afd process, simply by turning the article into a redirect. --Atlan (talk) 06:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's no big deal. It was easily sorted out so let's keep it at that, alright? Happy editing. --Atlan (talk) 20:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost features and admins section
Hi there. I was reading the Signpost and noticed that you pipe the names of featured pictures, but give the full name (including "image" and "jpg") for defeatured pics. It's not important, really, but I was wondering if there was a reason for this? Carcharoth14:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Features and admins
Hello again! If you are wanting to do it again this week, thats fine. I am really busy in real life so it might be a good idea to do it again for me. I'd like to thank you for all your help with the Signpost. It's really appreciated and as a token, I am awarding you this barnstar. Have a nice day and many thanks, Extranet(Talk | Contribs)04:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Could you please direct me to where it states that fair use images are not allowed on user pages? Is there any other alternative that you could possibly suggest? Other users also use that user box and hence I'd like to ensure that there's a picture in it. Also, for someone who started working since March of this year, you've done a lot. Keep up the good work. Zuracech lordum23:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is the best resource for detailed summaries of episodes. It is fantastic to see how well laid out the setup is in terms of infoboxes, actors, characters, and templates. The amount of information that would be contained in a single article combining all episodes would pale in comparison to the detail available now. It would be sad to lose all the information that many editors worked hard to write and describe. On a similar note, I do think it would be great to have a page for every episode of every tv show ever created. Wikipedia is growing fast, and I think it would be great to have a website that has all that information since it is not available in other places (especially not in such an organized and detailed fashion). Supertigerman22:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, but indeed I do think that an encyclopedia should contain literally everything. Wikipedia is already becoming the most comprehensive account on the web in other topics, so I think it would be ok for it to be the best TV information website in the world too. Just my 2 cents. Supertigerman22:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Sure, thanks for your offer. Just a lot of things going around in real life at the moment and I didn't think that I could take it anymore. I'll change a few pages and notify Ral315 now. Thanks again, — Etalkbots02:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Features and admins
Thanks for filling in the slot for E. If you have any real-life problems in the future, I wouldn't mind doing the story and will gladly back you up. Singularity21:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, was hoping you could help me out. I've tried leaving a few notes on Ral315's talk page, but he doesn't seem to see them. I'm an ex-journalism major (switched to poly sci), but I know a fair bit about news style. I'd like to know how I can get involved in writing for the Signpost. Would you mind dropping me a line back on my talk page when you get a chance? Thanks! GlassCobra21:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
One. Although SmackBot combined with me would also pass that mark - and I don't know about other projects, or cross project totals. RichFarmbrough, 08:20 29 September2007 (GMT).
The Last airbender
Hello, Placebo. I have removed the speedy tags you placed on the various new Airbender episode articles, as television episodes are not speediable under CSD A7. If you still wish the articles deleted, consider a PROD or an AFD. And please don't subst your speedy templates. Happy editing. Someguy122106:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I should talk, but you have two typos on your RfA. Accept, not except. See your answer to number four, as it appears to have a typo there, too, if that's what you meant. Bearian20:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Avatar
(For the symbols representing Water, Earth, Fire and Air see also: Oracle Bone Script)
Keep it in, symbols in table will come, look up the Chinese character article, you see for example that oracle bone sign for water is clearly present in the Avatar symbols for water :) Don't delete everything, even it is not strange to you. It will be fixed I'm reverting now in case you're offline. Mallerd23:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree that there should be a production history, but what the page had, can not be considered one, it was simply random facts about the episode that had nothing to do with the actual production. When information on the production process of the episode comes to light, then by all means I will even help with its construction. However, I say it again, that section was just a trivia section with a different name. See WP:TRIV for what qualifies a section as a trivia section. And thank you for being civil about this and not engaging in an edit war, I wish I had approached it this way myself. RauJ1603:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:The Placebo Effect. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
