User talk:Aolanonawanabe/Archive01

Welcome!

Hello, Aolanonawanabe/Archive01, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

---

AOL reference desk subpage

I think it's best to delete those subpages first as they currently come across as a promotional page for AOL. Would you mind adding {{speedy}} to the top of the subpages you created? Thanks. --HappyCamper 00:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

• Fine, but to be fair, wiki does plenty of promoting for AOL anyway, I mean {{AOL}} it has it's own template even--Aolanonawanabe 01:01, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
  • There's nothing left to {{speedy}}, looks like you got there first--Aolanonawanabe 01:03, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Alleged cow tipping

You want me to delete those redirects for you? --HappyCamper 01:18, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

/ok--Aolanonawanabe 01:18, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Done :-) --HappyCamper 01:22, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

War on Christmas

It's not entirely made-up, or at least not made up by us. Various pundits in the US media are getting worked up about the idea that not everyone says "Merry Christmas." Other pundits are getting worked up about the first set of pundits. So, it's probably not speediable, but I hope it gets folded into a larger (more interesting) article. As you say, this one seems to be nearly a blog for one particular user. FreplySpang (talk) 04:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

• In that case I'll try and leave that user alone for a while, although I did nominate 2 templates he/she created for deletion, along with Fetal Pain, I'm not sure how long that one was sitting there for--Aolanonawanabe 04:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Oh, and congratulations on your Rotizulating star-thingie. :) FreplySpang (talk) 04:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah, thank you, of course it would probably be more meaningful it wasn't awarded by myself, to myself (-:--Aolanonawanabe 04:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Really? I thought that was the best part! :-) FreplySpang (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Templates

I'm not really making that many...4? And anyway it's not supur of the moment stuff. I was thinking for the last week of a few templates I'd like to create for my babel, and I don't see why others shouldn't have the right to use them easily. Chooserr

According to everyone I've talked to either is acceptable so long as it is consistent. So my edits are valid as anyones. Chooserr

• No, because edit warring over something irrelevant to the content of the article is a disruption, see WP:POINT for more information--Aolanonawanabe 02:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I haven't been thrice blocked...twice. And since the second I've stopped reverting over 2 times. As a far as disrupting the article...I believe it's not. I believe when they were originally changed they disrupted the article. And to anyone viewing it for the first time it wouldn't matter which version was "current". I'm not erasing information...quite the opposite in fact. So unless you have something important to say please stay off of my talk page. Chooserr

It welcoming

I'm welcoming them. Not spaming them. So please stay off of my talk page. Thank you, Chooserr

It's not spam. The welcoming commity says that you ought to be friendly. And I remember when I started on Wikipedia, and got such notices. It's nice...friendly and makes them feel welcome. I've even been thanked, so now I will thank you to leave me alone. Chooserr

P.S. they wouldn't have made the Welcome template if it was "spam".

Please inform FCYTravis that he is spamming. Chooserr

I'm not spamming, but trying to help. I'm no longer reverting the Era format...I know that you don't care what I do. You just don't want me to do it. Chooserr

Welcoming

It's not spam. Chooserr might be welcoming more users than is typically seen in a day, but there isn't anything wrong with his/her actions as far as I can tell. --HappyCamper 01:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• He's doing exactly the same thing he was doing before his last 3 blocks, only now he's fixated on recruitment, instead of BC/BCE reverts--Aolanonawanabe 01:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

It's fine, trust me. It's not anything inappropriate. It's welcoming users, and it's a positive development. The BC/BCE reverts are an entirely different issue because it involves article content. --HappyCamper 02:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, except every two or three pages worth of {{welcome}}s, he creates a POV fork, then buries it with page after page of {{welcome}}s--Aolanonawanabe 02:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Now that might be a problem. I don't see anything in the edit history though. You might want to save these diffs then if you feel strongly about this. At the moment, there is not much else I can see that needs to be done. Maybe raise your concerns on WP:AN? Or leave a note on the userpage. --HappyCamper 02:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Like this one /Incidents#Chooserr?--Aolanonawanabe 02:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and wait to see if you get any feedback. --HappyCamper 02:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Chooserr

Can you please lay off of Chooserr a bit? There are probably several admins keeping an eye on him now—I am, at least. Our goal is to help him become a productive editor instead of a POV warrior, not to drum him off the site. Incidentally, an article about a notable subject, even if it was created for the wrong reasons and is full of POV, isn't suitable for either speedy or regular deletion—instead, you should fix it, or put a tag like {{NPOV}} on it to request it be fixed. -- SCZenz 03:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• Since he removes them, then plays his 3RR game, doesn't work, they won't stick--Aolanonawanabe 03:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It's a troll and a sockpuppet, how else am I supposed to deal with it?--Aolanonawanabe 03:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Report the 3RR violations at WP:AN/3RR. You can report excessive edit warring just short of the 3RR to me, and I'll look into it, or you can post it at WP:AN/I. If you still have time after that, you can always read up on Wikipedia:Assume good faith. -- SCZenz 03:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Assume good faith?? Why?? He's been blocked three times already, each time he forgets to log in, and keeps editing from 3 or 4 ip addresses, then accidently creates two or three new user names, after these are all blocked, he confesses, proclaims that he had no way of knowing it was against policy, then does it again the next time he's blocked--Aolanonawanabe 03:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
        • He's been blocked twice—the first time the block was suspended for most of a day and then reinstated for something that, were it not part of his parole, wouldn't have been a violation at all. He has done some screwy things, I admit—but if he really is the troll you say, your frivelous accustions are only hurting your case. -- SCZenz 03:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with SCZenz - he is not a troll just because he disagrees with you, and, additionally, he has been found to not be a sock-puppet. Please encourage him to make his articles better, rather than make snide comments. JG of Borg 03:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• I'm sure he'll tell me the same thing in a few minutes--Aolanonawanabe 03:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
• I like how the two of you are never in the same place at the same time--Aolanonawanabe 03:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I hope you weren't accusing me of being a sockpuppet... because you'd be quite obviously wrong. JG of Borg 03:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• Obviously--Aolanonawanabe 03:40, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

(Reply to my talk page:)

No problem. You were correct, also, that many of his pages lack content to allow one to derive notability from them. He's said he'll fix that, and I hope he will. I don't want to get in a war here, and I guess he does have some prior history, let's just go slow and let him develop them more.... anyways, good luck on finals! JG of Borg 04:14, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Reverting

Hi. I've been helping clean up the War on Christmas article (which still needs a lot of work), and I'd just like to ask if you could please refrain from using the revert function when there have been multiple edits, by multiple users. I know that you were just trying to remove Chooserr's commercial link, but it's considered polite not to just steamroll other, unrelated edits, in the process. It's pretty easy to remove a link manually. Thanks. -GTBacchus^(talk) 22:41, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

• Fair enough, but it must be equally easy to change External Links to External links--Aolanonawanabe 02:13, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • That's not really the point, is it? I wish you well, happy editing, perhaps I'll see you again around the Wiki. -GTBacchus^(talk) 02:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)