User talk:Thright/Archive 1

Why do you want a barnstar? People give them in recognition of good work. If you don't do the work first they are meaningless. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess your right. If it holds any weight, I like the look of them! Thright (talk) 21:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)thright

Re:Range block

Not necessary, as it's not a recurring problem at the moment. Please note that the blocking policy stipulates that blocking is not a preventive measure. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

answered on your talk page

Re:Barnstar

Many thanks. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Barnstar

Thanks! I try! :) I also notice you are a new editor and have not received a welcome! so here's one! And dont let others get you down, just remember what you have read of the rules and follow to that. Remember (as most do not) we are all human and we all make mistakes! I know i have! :) If you need any help, please don't hesitate to ask me! I will do everything i can to help you find the information you need! :) ✬Dillard421✬ ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

thanks! glad to be here

--

Hello, Thright! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! ✬Dillard421✬ (talk • contribs) 07:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Re: CHL

Actually, you would be incorrect. Especially now, as Hockey Canada changed the rules in 2005 to help bolster midget hockey. In the CHL, 15 year olds can only play in exceptional circumstances, and each of the major-junior leagues has a cap on how many 16 year olds they can use. The WHL drafts 14 year olds out of Bantam hockey, and the Tavares case is noted as well, but in all cases, the player was 15 before he played major-junior. Resolute 14:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Would you care to explain to me your edit summary here? My comment to you was in no way biased, nor was it "wiki politically motivated" - in fact I'm not even sure what you mean by that. I am attempting to help you, , you would be better off engaging in a dialog instead of attacking others. Thanks, Gwernol 17:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

answered on your talk page

My RfA

Just want to say thank you for your last minute support in the RfA and I really do appreciate your comments. If anything it's been a huge learning experience and I hope to live up to the trust bestowed on me. If you need anything feel free to get a hold of me. Regards – Zedla (talk) 00:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, good luck getting the page deleted.

But I can promise you that admin won't accept your reason valid. See also: WP:NOT#CENSORED, it's up to you if you believe me or not, but you will see the truth when an admin reviews this. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

And believe me they will most likely lead you to WP:NOT#CENSORED. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You must have missed this section, Wikipedia is not a directory! The current form of the article is nothing less than a stub of the word.Thright (talk) 01:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)thright

It is a perfectly valid disambiguation page that links to perfectly valid articles. C1k3 (talk) 01:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect, I see that you are 22 years of age. Wait until you become older! In any cause you failed to read all wiki policies. Furthermore speech has limits, being Jewish I am sure you will understand this. Thright (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)thright

Well, I'm not sure what my age or ethnicity have to do with anything, but please do point out what Wiki policy it violates. C1k3 (talk) 01:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

1st Policy, "Reasons for deletion include but are not limited content that does not belong in an encyclopedia. It is clear that this content would not be found in encyclopdia. 2nd,Wikipedia is not a directory." The current form of the article is nothing less than a stub of the word. 2 for starters. 3rd LAW, speech has limits, one is social good. This may be more advanced for some of the users on wiki as I am sure many have not studied law. Thright (talk) 01:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)thright

You may clean up your talk page, but please leave the comments from other editors in place at Talk:Fuck (disambiguation) thanks. -- Longhair\^talk 03:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Just leave the issue alone for now, it'll all go away (I thought it did for a moment there, before you began removing comments again [1]). There's no need to escalate things any further. If you have a problem with another editor's comments about yourself, please take the matter up with those editors via their own talk pages. I'm sure an apology is forthcoming if you explain the Jack Thompson comment wasn't called for. It's a little early for any kind of dispute resolution. All of this nonsense can easily be avoided by just stopping. Let the issue slide. It might pay to take a read over Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot also for some tips on how to cool things down when issues like this erupt. Cheers. -- Longhair\^talk 03:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The issue has been dropped at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Fuck (disambiguation). I'm sure the controversy will now go away. Everybody has lost interest. Chasing comments to have them deleted is only going to flare up the fire again. Is it worth it? -- Longhair\^talk 04:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the discussion is over. Sorry if I was being mean, but I thought you didn't care, I admit I was wrong, everyone can take things the wrong way, but whatever, the discussion is over for all of us including me. There is no need to discuss further, I admit I was taking this way too seriously, and lost some sleep because of it, but doesn't matter the discussion is over. Believe me, I am a nice guy, and if I was rude, I didn't mean to. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Same here. Overall, you've done a very good job contributing to Wikipedia. Don't worry, everybody make mistakes. I really hope this doesn't deter you from contributing in the future. BTW, I'm only Jewish in ancestry; agnosticism and philosophic Satanism are where it's at for me. C1k3 (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you c1k3 and theblazikenmaster for your reply. It is funny how a topic like the one that was discussed can lead to what it did! I am glad to say that everything ended well, and I am happy to say that because of this I have met some nice wikipeople! Best wishes to both of you. Thright (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)thright

Reply

I have replied again to my user page, and removed the Jack Thompson comment myself from that talk page. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L5 Tediz Strong)} 03:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Extending an RfA

In WP:RFA#About RfA, under "Decision process" (last paragraph), it says:

In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats extend RfAs beyond seven days or restart the nomination so as to make consensus clearer.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Biruitorul's RfA

For not owing a car? Dc76\^talk 00:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

No, the user should have made a judgement call and thought,"if I owned a car what would I do?" As an admin, do you want a user saying, "I don't know so then I will run away?" It may be harsh, but this question is one of the best to determine leadership and managerial skills. The answer given was the one of the worst I ever heard. I would not hire this user if this was a job interview, and therefore this user will not be given my support. Sorry if this is strong, but I believe it is inthe best interest of wiki.Thright (talk) 00:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)thright

If this was a "test-question", I understand your vote. However, I'm afraid you did not think that some people can have personal sensibility with it. Nice when you can have a car at 16... You won't ever understand... Dc76\^talk 01:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess your right, but then again show me this user has the skills and I will change my vote.Thright (talk) 01:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)thright

RfA - Discospinster

Thank you so much for your participation in my RfA. I hope to be able to gain your confidence in my new duties. ... discospinster _talk 23:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Funny joke! Although I wasn't sure if you were saying that the University blows, or that the band Queen blow. If it's the latter... ... discospinster _talk 18:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Singnet rangeblock

Yes, I was thinking the same thing. Shall we? Daniel Case (talk) 07:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you do it or should I? Daniel Case (talk) 08:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I did 165.21.144.0/20 (based on the rangeblock calculator) for 24 hours. We'll see how it goes. Daniel Case (talk) 08:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Toddst1

Hi Thright, thanks for supporting my RfA, which passed with 42 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutrals. Special thanks goes to my nominator, Kakofonous. I'm pleased that the Wikipedia community has trusted me with the mop and I take it very seriously. Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Graditude (aka Thanks!)

Thanks for awarding me the RickK Anti-Vandalism barnstar on my userpage. I might have not responded when you awarded it to me because I was taking a break from reverting vandalism. Every Wikipedian needs a break once in a while. But anyways, thanks for that barnstar! SchfiftyThree 21:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your participation!

Hello, and thanks for your participation in my recent RFA! The final result was 61/0/3, so I've been issued the mop. Thanks again for taking the time to leave a comment! —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 08:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I see you're new too

I see that in fact you are a newer user than I. But I do appreciate your willingness to try to be helpful! The fact that I have edited the same-sex marriage article in the past does not indicate that I have some particular interest in it -- it is one of many dozens of unrelated pages on my watchlist. Just a reminder -- please remember to sign your posts. :) Zahnrad (talk) 08:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

answered on your talk pageThright (talk) 08:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Your advice to User:Zahnrad

Hi Thright - I just wanted to let you know that your advice to User:Zahnrad here is, in my view, incorrect. Self-made graphics are perfectly welcome on Wikipedia - indeed, for copyright reasons, they're often the only images we can use. You are correct that all information in the graphic must be verifiable, but it's certainly not true that self-made images violate Wikipedia policy. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

thank you! I should have been clearer. I was refering to the info!!! Thanks for the reply.Thright (talk) 08:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Recognition of gay unions in Greece‎

I won't be tagging that page or deleting it. Your tag claimed that it met the speedy deletion criteria "WP: events that have not taken place" which is clearly not one of the criteria for speedy deletion. Now you are claiming it has "no meaningful content", but only because you removed legitimate content from the article. This is clearly a subject that can be covered in a Wikipedia article. I don't believe there are grounds for deleting this article. If you believe otherwise, please open a AfD discussion. CSD is not the correct method to use for this particular article. I will restore the content you removed. You are free to dispute the content on the talk page, but please don't simply remove it. Gwernol 08:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

incorrect....wp:soapboxThright (talk) 08:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC) also added comment on your talk page.

Edits to Same-sex marriage

I'm still not quite sure what your objection is. Was one of them that the colors of green on the map were not different enough? Also, which specific part of WP:SOAP are the maps in conflict with? As far as I've noticed, they are indicating the legal status of same-sex marriage in various countries, not advocating any particular view. And although this may not have been your objection, I'm pretty sure that the "Source" field for pictures is merely to indicate where the file came from, not what information supports its content. I am not necessarily saying that the maps should not be deleted because of inadequate sourcing (it would seem the tables would have to go along with them). I am, however, saying that the edit is not uncontroversial, and I'm not totally clear on your position -- I would however like to understand it.

Aside from that, I think that the approach some would prefer in such a disagreement is to leave the content intact while the discussion is ongoing (I imagine other people are likely to add their views). It's up to you whether you (or someone other than me, I guess) if you restore the content, but I think it might be a good idea -- if only so people can more easily see what the discussion is about. Zahnrad (talk) 08:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

fair point. I'm not interest in pushing this at the momment. There are bigger issues around here. In any event, I respect your interpersonal skills! BlessingsThright (talk) 08:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Original Barnstar

Thanks! As you can undoubtedly see, that's my first barnstar. It's always gratifying when a discussion stays civil. Zahnrad (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

it is!Thright (talk) 09:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

RE

Have responded on Scientizzle‎'s talk, there seems to have been a misunderstanding, your free to delete content of your own talk, but it's usually better and more kind to keep it, but do whatever you wish though. Note: it's impossible to ask a user to stay of your talk page. The Dominator (talk) 20:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, there seemed to be a misunderstanding. Thats what happens with computers, we lost the human element. Sorry, if I caused you any stressThright (talk) 20:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, no hard feelings. The Dominator (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

None :) have a good day, blessingsThright (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision on SSBs

I'm not sure what made the difference, but I'm glad that this version can keep the peace. Cheers. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 21:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey ho...

Thanks for your message. I suppose that blanking CAT:CSD is one way of hiding your mistakes, but a remarkably quick way of having lots of people notice them. In the same way, administrators deleting WP:ANI have a fool-proof method of hiding all complaints about them without anyone noticing... Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 08:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

they really should learnThright (talk) 17:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop removing valid content

Stop removing valid content and then making as speedy for having no valid content. If you want the references improved use the {{refimprove}} tag. If you simply think the article shouldn't exist at all then take it to AFD. You appear to be trying to cause disruptions on many pages. -Djsasso (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop removing valid content and then making as speedy for having no valid content. If you want the references improved use the {{refimprove}} tag. If you simply think the article shouldn't exist at all then take it to AFD. You appear to be trying to cause disruptions on many pages. -Djsasso (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Where is this info? "Buckman began his Minnetonka football career starting at placekicker as a sophomore in 2003. Buckman was the first-team all-conference and all-state selection at Minnetonka High School during both his junior and senior seasons as a placekicker. Buckman was named the 2004 first-team Nike all-american placekicker as well as a Tom Lemming all-american. Buckman was 18-21 on field goals with a long of 47 yards, and 92% of his kickoffs went for touchbacks out of the endzone. Buckman was ranked as the #1 kicker in the nation by multiple recruiting services. Buckman was an official nominee for the 2006 U.S. Army All-American Bowl as well as a 2005 Street & Smith's Senior to Watch. He was also a two-year all-conference selection in lacrosse as a defensemen.[1]" Can you find it? I can't. Are you just pushing the rollback button and not looking at the comments? Are you open for recall?Thright (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

what you refer to 'disruptions' other users refer to correcting errors... see the difference?Thright (talk) 17:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I find it extremely disruptive, read WP:CSD if it doesn't meet on of the criteria then it's not a speedy deletion candidate. If you want an article to be deleted use WP:AfD if the speedy deletion is contested by multiple users. The Dominator (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

for those who cannot read, "No context. Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article." and dominator, you have been warned for trolling. Please stop. Thank youThright (talk) 17:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Only because you deleted the content, and that applies only to articles that have almost zero content, let's say up to ten words. And I suggest you don't make personal attacks. The Dominator (talk) 17:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Quite honestly it appears that you are trying to remove information that you don't like. You are readding speedy tags after someone has contested them which is not how things are done. Once something is contested you take it to WP:AFD. You have removed content a few times before trying to speedy an article for having no content. If you have removed all the content, then you cannot delete for having little or no content, so thus you are failing to meet that qualification for speedy. -Djsasso (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

stop beating a dead horse and move on! I asked several minitues ago to agree to disagree.Thright (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

???

Not sure what you're talking about. I remember editing an article where you have edited, you accidently deleted the sources, categories and defaultsort so I restored them. The Dominator (talk) 17:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

time will tell!Thright (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate speedy requests

Please stop abusing the speedy deletion. You are persistently tagging articles for speedy deletion using reasons that are not one of the specified criteria for speedy deletion. The CSD mechanism is only to be used for the specific, narrowly defined criteria set out by policy. For other cases where an article does not meet policy but the reason is not covered by the Speedy criteria, please use the proposed deletion process instead. Thanks, Gwernol 17:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Since you insist, for example: [2] Gwernol 17:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Djsasso I thought we agreed to disagree? WHy do you need the last word? IF you understood wiki policy, you would know that unsourced info SHOULD be deleted. Look at the users who edited the page, only purpose accounts with edits only to that page. WHere is the info???? Deleting the page makes it sdp, This is CLEAR COMMON SENSE!!! In any case, agree to disagree and move onThright (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

"Agree to disagree" doesn't really solve the problem now, does it? The Dominator (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Dominik92 - stop trolling, last warningThright (talk) 17:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Why have you placed this here? It has no relevance to the point I made to you. I am not Djsasso, so why are you replying to him in this conversation instead of in the existing conversation with him above? And calling Dominik92 a troll is neither civil nor in any way accurate. Gwernol 17:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The Dominator (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at user talk:Redrocket, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. The Dominator (talk) 18:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)