User talk:NeoFreak/Archive 2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Gogo's RfA
Like I told the guys who went neutral on Gogo Dodo, I wanted to let you know that although Gogo spends a good deal of time vandal-fighting, he has indeed made many article contributions. I'm not trying to sway your vote or anything, but I just wanted to make you aware of this.
315 List of experiments from Lilo & Stitch 121 Survivor: Cook Islands 46 Survivor: Panama 37 List of Dirty Jobs episodes 30 University of California, Irvine 29 List of The Unit episodes 26 SpongeBob SquarePants 20 SpongeBob SquarePants (character) 19 Deadliest Catch 19 Patrick Star 18 The Unit 17 Irvine, California 17 Johnny Benson 14 Northgate High School (Walnut Creek, California) 13 Dirty Jobs
Here's a list of his 10 most frequently edited articles. I hope you see that Gogo is not just all vandal-fighting, and that he has actually made valued contributions to the encyclopedia. Also, I was in the same boat as Gogo when I applied for adminship. Although, I wasn't as big a vandal-fighter as he was, I can honestly say I wasn't the type of person who spent time making big edits to particular pages. Since becoming an admin, I have done a lot of admin work, and I have made many valued contributions to the encyclopedia. I may have been able to spread myself across Wikipedia after becoming an admin, and I'm not implying that Gogo will, but I just wanted to point that out. Nishkid64 00:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006
The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
You offered...I'll have to ask
Thanks for the note on my peer review request. I am an active duty Marine as well and Marine aviation history has become one of my great interests. There is one thing that has me in a bit of a quandry. The unit is "VMX-22". They were the original MV-22 Osprey squadron and were responsible for the a/c testing but are they still around? Do you know anyone that is attached to this unit? It is hard to find info on them. Any info you could provide would be great. I'll create the article, I just need some good info on them. Anything you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Cheers. --Looper5920 12:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for voting in my RfA, I passed. I appreciate your input. Please keep an eye on me(if you want) to see if a screw up. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 15:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Afd Therianthropy
Thank you for trying to clean up the jumbled mess at Therianthropy. As a possible substitute for deletion, I've added a split template and I've also been participating in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Therianthropy. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 18:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- I originally reverted the redirect at Therianthropy (subculture) only for the reasons stated on that page. I know it is flawed, but it had been there all along (since last May) and if the split went through, I didn't want people creating yet another named article from scratch. I've modified your revert to the redirect to include a comment explaining for anyone who tries to recreate the article. I hope this satisfies both our concerns. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 21:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for your input on my RfA. I understand your position and I readily agree that I am not as well-rounded as some other admins are. I've got a lot of reading, watching, and learning to do in admin areas beyond vandal fighting. I hope that my future activities on Wikipedia will change your opinion of me. Thanks again. =) -- Gogo Dodo 23:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Amusing you're from Bremerton
I know Bremerton quite well as I know quite a few people from there. I'm actually a Canadian living in Seattle and have for 6 years now. Thanks for the info and for pointing me to Wikifur. It was an enlightening experience. Have a great day! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Keenman76 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC).
OEF-HOA
Yes. As expressed by varios users in multiple articles, that is not "officially" the flag of al-Qaida. Osaboramirez 01:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
No problem. Osaboramirez 17:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Re: Your List
Since it seems I'm never actually going to get caught up on my to-do list enough to start back in on mycology and philatelic history articles, I thought I'd knuckle down and join in on the effort to deal with the assorted furry articles. I'm of mixed mind regarding them, as a category. On one hand, the articles have a systemic bias towards being uncited, unverified original-research essays. On the other hand, I think many of the topics could be appropriate articles. But I cannot imagine how long it would take to improve everything with the rigor I tried to show taur.
My personal philosophy is much less deletionist than yours, but I believe in nothing if not compromise, and I'd axe the totally unverifiable stuff with as much haste as the next editor. I'm still slowly working on fixes to therianthropy and the much more expansive shapeshifting (probably after I fix the monstrously needy centaur), but I'm open to pitch in elsewhere, too. Have an area or category in mind to start? Serpent's Choice 10:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- That sounds great. I'm glad to have a second opinion as I can be overly dismissive of things at times. My first thought was to try and tackle the mess of comics. I don't know if it would be better to just keep the list or add a page for major comics or nuke them all. I figure notable comics can stand on their own two feet without being tagged as a "furry comic" and included in the list.
- On another note I too have a love for mycology (although mainly Psilocybes). Maybe I can give you a hand on your target articles. I was hoping to start work on some mycology but it was so far down my immediate list that this provides me a good incentive to start. NeoFreak 12:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- In my mind, the list is mostly harmless, and even the minor works that don't rate articles can probably be documented enough to earn themselves a redlink. For example, Associated Student Bodies will probably be deleted via the prodding, but some minimal references from the San Diego Comic Con and its influence on Circles (comic book) do exist. Regardless, the list is the least of the concerns, in my mind. To get started, any comic book that never saw national distribution by Diamond Comic Distributors's Previews would have to be very well attested to even convince me for a shot at inclusion. I'll see what of that I can prod in the next day or so.
- As for the mycology articles, I had hoped to set up the tree of taxonomy articles for Basidiomycetes and Ascomycetes, but it turns out my 1998 and 2002 reference books are now considered entirely obsolete. Eventually I'll get around to interlibrary loaning myself the 2003-2006 works to get it done, but ... some Wikihousecleaning before I start detailing cup fungi clades won't hurt the project or my sanity. Serpent's Choice 13:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
"Egyptians" AFD
The result was keep because there was a clear consensus to keep the article despite the edit warring. However, the POV and truthfulness issues will need to be resolved in a RfC, given how bad the edit warring is. There isn't really much more advice I can give, and the RfC will allow the editors working on the article to get outside advice on what to do. If the edit warring continues, revert to a good version and request protection on WP:RFPP. --Coredesat 20:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Thoughts on AfD
I'm thinking of working on an explanation of how and why I vote keep/delete/merge etc on WP:SCISSORS. Good idea or bad? --ElaragirlTalk|Count 14:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Spoiler
Major spoilers have been removed from that particular article as a matter of course, because it has no spoiler warning. If you want to add a spoiler warning to the article, feel free, though I think it's more useful as a basic reference if we keep it as a list of names and basic facts. Brendan Moody 20:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Clarification About Robert Priddy
NeoFreak, you voted to keep the Robert Priddy article because you said it was notable enough for a stub [1]. After intense debate on the talk page, no one has been able to point out even one single reputable or reliable reference that makes mention to Robert Priddy. Pjacobi suggested I file another AFD [2], although I have been determined to be too close to the dispute. Since Priddy is not mentioned in any reliable or reputable references, this presents a problem because various users are trying to attribute information to Priddy that cannot be sourced to reliable or reputable references. What exactly makes Priddy notable and what information can be included about him on his wiki-page, in your opinion? SSS108 talk-email 22:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006
The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the deletion of comment on the Otherkin page
Hello.
I do recognize my error in selecting "minor change" when posting my clarification of otherkin on the page.
It's an extremely small paragraph that very barely touches what otherkin is. Again, I do recognize my error in the classification of my update, but why did you see fit to erase it entirely?
As an otherkin myself, I have a considerable amount of insight into the nature of the belief. The page needs heavy revision, especially so that it's more obvious how it's distinct from therianthropy.
It is my intention to repost a clarification on the page, but in interest of avoiding an edit war, I'd prefer to discuss it with you so that any post might be made without being erased.
Thank you.
RubyCona 17:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC) Khana of the Dragons
I understand, but...
I understand you reverting my removal at Elara's talk page, but seeing as how she's not around to defend herself I believe it was acceptable to delete incivility and a personal attack. I won't remove it again until you reply, of course; no need to get into an edit war over this. DoomsDay349 22:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)