User talk:Unforgiven24/Archive 1

Archive 1

Feature Films For Families Page

Could you help me find some third party references for the Feature Films For Families page please? Thank you.Wolfbite110 (talk) 21:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I tossed one more link up there, about them being sued. The only main thing left that concerns me is that the article is very biased-sounding. To improve the article, I'd advise trying to make it sound more neutral, while keeping anything you can show with third party links. I'm not saying there can't be criticism, just that you have to show that the page isn't there just to tear down the company, that's all. You're on to a good start, though. Unforgiven24 (talk) 21:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I will try that. I am not sure how neutral I can make it sound though, as I was trying to do excatly that when writing the article. The problem was all the critisizm I had heard and read about on them. There was an article about them in the local newspaper for where I live, but I could not find the article on there website. That is where I got most of the Controversies section. I did re-write it so it wasnt violating copyright though. Wolfbite110 (talk) 21:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I'm afraid Wikipedia has guidelines against that sort of thing (see WP:NPOV), so it'll have to be made to be from a neutral point of view. Having criticism isn't forbidden, it's just that the article overall has to be neutral, and if you're going to mention a claim about it, make sure you can back it up. For example, when I put on there that they had been sued, I included a link to a news article showing it. That sort of thing. Unforgiven24 (talk) 21:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I got it to what reads to me like a neutral point of view by re-writing the top and removing any un-verifiable information. It is still quite a stub of an article though.Wolfbite110 (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I just came back from there, actually. I expanded a little bit on the lawsuit, but more could probably be done with it. At the point, the best way to expand the article is to just trudge through search engines and find references. Maybe there's more detailed information on the lawsuit, for example. Or, confirm that it's the only one. You get the idea. Good work on it so far, though. I know how much it can suck to delete work one has done on an article, even if it is in the interest of being NPOV and rbacked up with references. Unforgiven24 (talk) 16:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

adoption

Hi, would you still like to be adopted? If so, feel free to message me on my talk page. Sticky Parkin 23:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem, that's what I did too:) I'm not going to make you do homework or anything lol, how it works as far as I understand it is I leave you to it, and you just message me if you need any help with anything or tips etc. :) Sticky Parkin 01:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Article

Hi - I saw your message to Sticky so I hope you don't mind me commenting - you've made a great start to that article. What you need to do now is try and find a few more references. I'll also have a look when I have a moment. --Allemandtando (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. I hate just putting a stub in the main article namespace if I can avoid it, so I was hoping to flesh it out a bit more before doing so. If you can find anything before I find it, all the better :) And thanks for the encouragement, I'm still kind of figuring some of this out, it helps to know I'm not doing it all wrong.

Unforgiven24 (talk) 17:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

no problem - I think that constructing it in your userspace is certainly the way to go - I have access to academic journals and will see if I can find anything there that will be useful. --Allemandtando (talk) 18:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

article- as Allemantando says:) The subject you've chosen is quite good (that's where most people go wrong- write about their mum or something lol). A good way to find refs is often a google news search IMHO [1] then find some refs for your statements there. Unfortunately quite often most are subscription only, which wiki people don't tend to like us to use, but you will find a few there by flicking through. Thanks for the honour of letting me take a look.:) Sticky Parkin 18:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the feedback. Allemandtando raises something I hadn't thought about - academic journals. I'm a soon-to-be-alumnus myself, so I have access still to the journals my University subscribes to, so maybe I'll have a glance. I can entirely understand preferring to link to free (as in beer) references first, but is it bad form to also link to a subscription only journal, if it's a source for something that a gratis source cannot be found for? I'd think it's better than leaving that information out altogether.

Either way, KPilot is a rather small, specific app, so I don't expect to find much in the way of academic references, but the issue seems like a good one to ask about now anyway. Thanks again for all the help and discussion, it's very much appreciated Unforgiven24 (talk) 18:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

If you think a peer reviewed source, it's gold regards of it's "paid for status". --Allemandtando (talk) 18:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

true, and there's often a little snippet/ abstract at the top that people can read, or even the name KPilot in the title is sort of proof someone's considered it something to discuss. Google scholar- [2] you're sorted, it's been mentioned a fair bit, even though these google searches often seem full of 'clutter', you can spot a couple of good articles mentioned there. And google books [3]. Sticky Parkin 00:43, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

stubs

It looks like stub tags were added to the K3b article two or three years ago. This page seems to be the main one about stubs WP:STUB.

It says "Be bold in removing stub tags that are clearly no longer applicable." So it's down to the individual editor's judgement. If you feel nervous about changing an article's class, you could ask any other editors that might be watching on the article's talk page before doing so. Sticky Parkin 00:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

oooh, are you?

Oh, good luck with your move, is that a work or study venture? I live in Birmingham UK, though I did have a phase of reading about and watched some videos of the Toronto blessing , some years ago.:) Sticky Parkin 01:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, must have been someone else I was thinking of, then. It's for a job, as of the end of next week, I'm done studying (getting my B.Sc. in computer science). Unforgiven24 (talk) 06:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Sticky's a Brit, like me.

Look at our flag:

LOOK AT IT!

Oops...I forgot my medication again!

LOOK AT IT!!! BLAGGGGGH!

OK, I better go lie down...ungghhh...--Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 20:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

award of first success

		Award of First Success
		I know it wasn't an assignment I set you, but I thought you deserved this as recognition for making the article KPilot. Sticky Parkin 01:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Integrated banner for WikiProject Computer science

I have made a proposal for a integrated banner for the project here . I invite you for your valuable comments in the discussion. You are receiving this note as you are a member of the project. Thanks -- Tinu Cherian - 12:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

In reply to your message on User_talk:Tohd8BohaithuGh1

Well, sorry if my editing was disruptive to you, but as you can see from the edit history, I was simply trying to adjust the image size. I didn't realize the preview button yet. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 14:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all - I assumed that was the case. If I sounded mean or snarky, I entirely apologize. I just figured you didn't know, so would point it out. Unforgiven24 (talk) 14:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help

Keep up the good work. Cheers, JNW (talk) 15:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

AllStudentRentals.com

Hello, I am trying to write an article about the company AllStudentRentals.com, I didn't mean to spam or write an inappropriate article but I did and the page became protected. Can you help me with this? I am simply trying to write a legitimate article. Thanks in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazdeck11 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Not really, no. The same article, by several different users, was recreated nearly verbatim despite being tagged for speedy deletion under WP:CSD, and with each time a post was made to the person's talk page explaining why. Despite this, each time it was created again, without alterations or attempts to improve it. Is it any surprise that an admin (not me, but the way. I can't do it if I want to) would put an end to it?

My best advice would probably be just to read over the reasons why the article was deleted each time, and rewrite the article so that it doesn't read as an advertisement, and so that it clearly shows why it's notable enough to warrant inclusion. Once you have something to suggest using, maybe go to an admin and ask them to lift the protection on the article name. I don't know, though, I've never had to do that sort of thing.

Only just started on the ole WikiP ;)

Hey there, I've just created thinking for tuesday and just needed to put in something to see if I could. I will be changing it tonight to put in actual encyclopaedic content to get information from various sources but need to collate my information. If you can hold off deletion for a bit I'll finish it. Thanks! :) Chrishottease (talk) 13:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Really, if I don't tag it, someone else will anyway. But, there's an even better solution - if you just make an account, you can make the article in your sandbox, and generally you can do whatever you want there (see mine, for example). Just go to Your Sandbox and plop it in there, play with it, and when it's ready, move it into the main space. If it's not clear, there's wikipedia pages about it, such as this one. Hope this helps. Unforgiven24 (talk) 13:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Geo Vaughn?

Hey what is the reason for deleting my article on Geo Vaughn? There was nothing wrong with it, and it was a work in progress that was created less than an hour ago... The Middle Man NYC (talk) 02:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

If it's a work in progress, it's much better to make it in your sandbox, and get it ready for the main namespace there. At least get it to a well formed stub status. Also, it would help to rewrite parts of it to sound less like an advertisement, which I believe is what got it tagged in the first place. Adding articles to wikipedia is fine, don't take this as me trying to drive you away, just make sure what you contribute is ready to be contributed. Unforgiven24 (talk) 02:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Michael Marc Rosenberg Deletion

Hello, My name is Dr. Jeffery Tizzlebee and I believe that the page of Mikey Rosenberg should not be included under the category of speedy deletion. My reason being is that the North American Trials Series(NATS) is one of the most prestigious competitions in all of bike trials, and not only did he get first in his category, but he also created the Belle Isle Bike Trials competition. The Belle Isle Bike Trials competition is growing into another large event for bike trials riders, and is held annually. I believe that the founder/ expert bike rider of a large competition is to be noted in pages such as wikipedia.

   Thank you for your time and consideration,
        
       Sincerely, Dr. Jeffery Tizzlebee

The article has since been deleted (meaning an administrator saw it and agreed - please realize that why I may have flagged it, I don't have the ability to delete or undelete articles), so I can't go and look at the article itself, but odds are it either was tagged for looking too much like and advertisement, or not showing notability. Either one of those is covered in the WP:CSD.

All is not lost though - you're welcome to recreate the article, altered to fit the guidelines. Just make sure it's written so as to be objective and neutral, and make sure the topic is notable. A great way to do this is to use third-party references and links (such as news articles, things like that) to show that it is of importance.

Also, not that you seem to have, but don't take it personally. I'd love to see your article get added and worked on, just make sure it has a good start before adding it, that's all. Unforgiven24 (talk) 02:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Diana Blaine

give me a second will you... i have just started to write this article a few seconds ago... Canadian (talk) 14:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

If you're still putting together the article, use the WP:SANDBOX, or (even better) your own Sandbox. Get it ready there, and then move it to the main namespace when it's all set. Unforgiven24 (talk) 14:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I was surprised that a person so scandalous as her did not have a wikipedia page. and thanks for the compliments ... or (how about a barnstar)?? Canadian (talk) 17:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Flacara Moreni

I'm working to improve the article. I've already posted some weblinks and i'm searching for more info including a weblink about their participation in the UEFA Cup.Horror Punk Ed (talk) 14:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's already been deleted. The easiest way to go about it though, is to just use your Sandbox to create the article. Create it there, and once it's ready and doesn't meet the Criteria for speedy deletion, then move it to the main namespace. More on sandboxes. Unforgiven24 (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It already has links and sources why delete it?? For recreation? Sometimes i think that admins are just playing with other peoples work. See the links read first than you'll see that what the article is saying is FACT!

Horror Punk Ed (talk) 15:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It generally doesn't take long for the admins to get to it, that's entirely true. Firstly, though, it's not a matter of truth in your article. I don't see the notification on your talk page, but there should have been on there explaining what the reason for tagging it under WP:CSD was. As I've already mentioned, just create it in your Sandbox, and work on it there. Once it's ready, move it. It's much better that way, and you can even invite others to have a look and help get it ready. Heck, if it'll help show that I'm not just saying this to get rid of you, let me know when you start it by putting a link to it here, and I'll personally come have a look give you a hand.

Lastly, please don't take it personally. I don't tag articles because of who created them, things like that. We both have a common goal here - improving Wikipedia. While I understand being annoyed and frustrated at having your work deleted, there's no reason to treat it as a personal insult, or to just give up on it there. Unforgiven24 (talk) 15:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry,I know it wasn't a personal attack, just sometimes rightfull editors and contributors to wikipedia like me are more of a target than vandals and other kind of bad users of wikipedia. I'll try to keep on working to improve all my contributions to Wikipedia...Giving up is not my style :-)...Horror Punk Ed (talk) 16:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, we're all just human. I'm sure good articles have probably been tagged before by mistake, or things like that. In any case, I'm glad you're not giving up, and let me know when you have that article in your sandbox. Unforgiven24 (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Mouse Hand Warmer Deletion

I revised the mouse hand warmer page you deleted. Please contact me if you find it still not right. I'd rather edit it and not rewrite it. Today is my first time publishing on Wikipedia. I thought we were supposed to document our references to avoid copyright issues. I did NOT intend to be accused of advertising. I was not aware how to document the facts without naming resources. In the update I did not state references in fear of being accused of advertising again. I want to upload images. I'll wait until I receive clearance for them. Thanks, MouseHandWarmer (talk) 22:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't so much that you linked to their (or your) site, it was that the entire article had a very advertising tone to it, which the links just amplified. It's frustrating, I know, but when an article is short and about a relatively unknown product, and probably created by that company or creators, it's very important to be sure the article doesn't come off as trying to sell anything, just independently discuss it. The current article sounds better, but still could use some improvement in that regard.

Best of luck on wikipedia. Unforgiven24 (talk) 22:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey, I saw that you did the New Page Patrol for my article on Beulah Federal Credit Union. I just wanted to say "Thanks!" for giving that little piece to okay to stay on Wikipedia. Cheers! Ecoleetage (talk) 01:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, no problem, I suppose. To be honest, I briefly considered tagging it for notability ({{notability}}, not the WP:CSD kind), but there's three links there, and so on, so meh. Good luck with the article on wikipedia, though. I'd give you the usual thing I give others on here, "we have a common goal" and "please don't hate me because I deleted your article", but after a glance at your user page, I'm guessing you've been far longer than I have, so I'll can it ;) Unforgiven24 (talk) 01:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Ecoleetage (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks

Oooh, I see you've got into tagging etc, some parts of it can be addictive. It's also sometimes very amusing to see the articles people try and put on here.:) Sticky Parkin 12:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

good work- have some biccies:) Sticky Parkin 12:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It is dangerously addictive. I may have to quit my job. Unforgiven24 (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

AIDS

Hi,

are you willing to help me, work together, on this article? I'd love that. Kaaskop6666 (talk) 19:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Peritus Thagirion

Hi,

Why did you erase the article about the rockband Peritus Thagirion? The bandmembers became very sad when they heard that the article was erased. I just want a good reason to tell them, because I don't know what to say to them. Nima91 (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

A small clarification - I didn't delete it, I just tagged it for deletion. It also had to be confirmed by an administrator, who then actually deleted it. I don't have the article in front of me (obviously), but most likely it was tagged for speedy deletion for not asserting notability. There's a few ways that a band can be defined as "notable", which can be found here. Unforgiven24 (talk) 17:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, okey, I guess it's logical. Thanks for responding! :) But still, it means a lot for these musicians, why couldn't the article stay on Wikipedia? I mean, it's not disturbing in anyway. But thanks anyway! Nima91 (talk) 10:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, they're not my rules, they're just what Wikipedia is about. If they had no guidelines at all, wikipedia would be overflowing with articles about random people's dog and the band they were in as a kid that actually ever met once. Somewhere they have to draw the line, and the link above is where they decided to draw it.

Don't treat it like a lifetime ban or something though - there's no reason at all you can't make the page in your sandbox and work on it there, and when you can show notability, then move it to the main namespace. Just before doing so, make sure that it meets the guidelines above. If you're not sure, just ask an editor that's been around a little while. The easiest rule of thumb though, is when they've released two albums. Unforgiven24 (talk) 15:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm, okey, yeah I understand. Thanks alot man, I can contact you after we have released our debutalbum :D take care! Nima91 (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Their Darkest Hour: People Tested to the Extreme in WWII

Hi; I don't quite understand why you added "primarysources". Wikipedia policy is that content be verifiable. As far as I can see, everything currently in the article is easily verifiable from the book itself. Looie496 (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Because the second half of that tag mentions third party sources. The idea is to have sources independent of the subject establishing notability, giving information, and so on. Unforgiven24 (talk) 21:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

IQS

Hello. I have changed the article around to try and prevent it from sounding like an advert. Please take a look and tell me if you have any more suggestions. Thanks. Mfields20 (talk) 09:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

newpage patrolling

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project.

I generally don't mark them patrolled if I'm unsure if they meet [[WP:CSD|CSD] or things like that, that's all. Is this a bad idea? Unforgiven24 (talk) 02:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey!

Byeitical (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Fair use rationale for Image:Songza_playing.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Songza_playing.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 00:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Patrolling

Can you explain to me what you do when you mark an article as patrolled? Did you even read St joan of arc school to notice that the whole thing is nonsense? Corvus cornix_talk 22:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Meh, you've got me there. I generally think I do fine, but that one I don't have an excuse for. Funny, I always figured that being human and whatnot, I'd eventually mistakenly tag an article for deletion or something, and that'd be my first "whoops, sorry, you're right". Instead, it's the reverse. Figures.

Anyway, my apologies, and thank you for cleaning up my mess. Unforgiven24 (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I came across as huffy there, I'm just having a discussion over on WP:ANI in which I discuss my view that patrolling is usually worse for Wikipedia than not having it. Corvus cornix_talk 22:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

You may have, very slightly, but given the blatant mistake, I can't say I wouldn't either. Either way, no hard feelings, I didn't take offense.

As for whether it hurts not, it's probably a good question. I haven't read up on the debate, but I can imagine good arguments for both. I'll have to have a look later. Still, with the sheer amount of obvious nonsense and vandalism that comes in, I'd imagine that something like patrolling would have to be done, even if it's not exactly in the current form. Unforgiven24 (talk) 22:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

As an aside, I'm greatly impressed by your skilled aplication of WP:CSD policy and ability to, as I call it 'delete bollox from the wiki', Unforgiven. I don't think, looking at your contribs and the amount of unsuitable articles you tag which get deleted, people can say that your application of speedy tags is not a boon. (Ive no opinion about patrolling in general as I don't know enough about it, but just wanted to say how impressed I am with what you personally do.) :) Sticky Parkin 02:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Aw shucks. I knew I kept you around for a reason. ;) Unforgiven24 (talk) 14:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix

Thanks for the fix on the C-2 1000 m event at the 1960 Summer Olympics. I really appreciate it. Chris (talk) 14:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all ;) - Unforgiven24 (talk) 14:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: talk page

No problem! Huggle has a separate symbol that it shows in its queue when someone makes an edit with the summary "Replaced content with....", and when I see it on a talk page of someone who I know is an established user, I don't even bother waiting for the page to load. Cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Bitkoo

I replaced your {{subst:Advert}} tag with a {{db-spam}} tag. When the page is an advertisement, written by the subject of the article itself, it is clearly spam.WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Dead loretta has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\bmyspace\.com' (link(s): http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=30158531) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 21:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: User Page Revert

Re your message: You're welcome. I'm not automated, though some people have claimed that I am. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

American dietology

Hi, I took the db-repost tag off of American dietology because there hadn't been an AfD discussion. But I did tag it for AfD, along with all of the other related articles. Corvus cornix_talk 06:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

My mistake - I either misread or mis-remembered, and thought repost also applied to csd'ed articles. Sorry about that, and thanks for cleaning up after me. - Unforgiven24 (talk) 06:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Tag-slapping

Hello! I'd like to point out that adding lots of maintenance tags to an article within three minutes after it's creation (like here) is probably not very constructive. See WP:BITE for more info regarding this. Also, you might want to consider this: try "new page patrolling" from the last page of the unpatrolled list instead of the first! That way, you'll be sure that the article will have had one month to prove it's worth, and you'll make sure less CSD-worthy articles slip through the cracks! Plrk (talk) 20:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello To You Too!

:)=)

If you need any comic relief or help, I'm your person, Unnie...? Sticky calls me Eddie. What about you?--Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 18:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

For a shortened form? "Unfy" works sort of. Sounds dumb to me, but not much you can do with "Unforgiven". Or you could just call me "Mike". - Unforgiven24 (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Conspire

Thanks kindly for fixing my laxness on Conspire, it's much appreciated. As said, the article will be fleshed out soon.

Also, if you think you use too many userboxes, you should check MY userpage ;)

Catch ya 'round. Horst.Burkhardt (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Hah, you win. And don't mention it. :) Unforgiven24 (talk) 20:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Any ideas for things you'd like to do on Wikipedia?

Do you have any ideas for other things you'd like to do on wikipedia, or areas in which you don't feel as confident of what to do, that I might be able to help you with? (Ask me anything except improving Userpages beyond the level of mine, or using automated tools :) )Sticky Parkin 19:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Feeling bored, Sticky? ;)

Not especially. It's a busy time for me for the next couple of months (moving), but I was considering just going through and trying to make significant improvements to KDE-related articles, since the KDE Wikiproject already has many of them listed anyway, as well as some of the ones I have an interest in that may not have many people looking after them (like Steampunk Magazine, for example). I ought to read on the WP:MOS as well.

I'm always open to advice, tips, and criticism, though - by all means, please feel free. - Unforgiven24 (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Tuxraider reloaded -my best mate, might like to join you in editing such articles or some radio ones if you want someone to chat to about the articles and improve those articles with, as he's into similar stuff. Feel free to message him on his talk when you start tinkering or feel like a chat about those articles.

Im not particularly more bored than usual lol, I asked because I was thinking of graduating you from adoption:-

		The Adoptee Graduation Barnstar
		Unforgiven has outflanked me with his skill and practically inerrant edits with automated tools, in particular. I found his request for adotion after he'd been on wikipedia for quite a while, and I'd go so far as to say he never needed adopting. I'm pleased to see him become such an active Wikipedian, easily.Sticky Parkin 21:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

If you disagree and feel you still need adoption, I will un-graduate you. But I also offer comprehensive aftercare for my adoptees. Most of them I imagine will need long term therapy and medication after the experience.:) They're all welcome to continue to ask my opinion etc or advice on anything if they have any probs/questions. Sticky Parkin 21:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• Tosses hat into the air.* Thanks Sticky ;) Unforgiven24 (talk) 21:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a box to swap for the 'adopted' one on your userpage, if you want it.:) wierd grammar in it perhaps though lol.:) Sticky Parkin 17:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

An AfD on a KDE item you might be interested in

I thought you might like to form an opinion one way or another on this one Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KSnapshot. Sticky Parkin 22:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You're the best, Sticky ;)

Of course, mere days after graduating, I now have a question - how can I keep up on this sort of thing? Unforgiven24 (talk)

Sorry- just spotted this. You could just look over what's up on AfD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Current_discussions, I find it quite enjoyable in a sometimes infuriating way lol, or Wikiproject KDE or other wikiprojects might sometimes mention AfDs of interest. If you happen to spot one that might be interesting to a wikiproject you're involved in, you could mention it there (neutrally of course) for others. But I tend to just check what's up at AfD quite often to find the latest heated debates.:). Sticky Parkin 00:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Daanesh Ahmed

Please delete the page entitled 'Daanesh Ahmed'. It is nothing but silly nonsense and is rather insulting to the person in question. Please have it deleted at once. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingy012 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

If you'll notice on your talk page, I've tagged it for deletion already. Being that I'm a mere editor and not an administrator, I can't delete the article, just tag it to suggest it be deleted. As of now, it's already gone. Unforgiven24 (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:MikeOutside.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:MikeOutside.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 03:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Why delete?

My article for imaplestory was speedy deleted. I was going to finish it later because i cant remember that well. Can you tell me the exact reason for doing this??????Kittycat0143 (talk) 19:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm just going on your talk page notification and my memory, but it seems it was first tagged (by someone else) for lacking in context, and shortly afterwards when you recreated it, I tagged it as an advertisement. Firstly, if I was wrong or misinterpreted it, I do apologize, please don't take it personally. The best way to create an article though, when it's not ready to be actually in the encyclopedia, is to just use your Sandbox to create the article. Create it there, and once it's ready and doesn't meet the Criteria for speedy deletion, then move it to the main namespace. More on sandboxes.

This way, you can work on it over time if needed, and get it ready before putting it on the "real thing". Unforgiven24 (talk) 20:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Just a question...

Are you this dude? It's just your names are similar and I normally put 510 at the end of my things I join, so i thought...you get the pic.--Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 20:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hah, no. I've never seen that before. Interesting, though. Unforgiven24 (talk) 21:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The 104th Season of the Chicago White Sox

A tag has been placed on The 104th Season of the Chicago White Sox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

I have merged the above page with 2005 Chicago White Sox season. Page should have been titled "105th season" anyway. -Dewelar (talk) 00:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Liam Armstrong

Hello, I am here to ask why my article that i am creating is up for speedy deletion. I have put the underconstruction bar up but you still chose to delete it.

I was going away for a couple of hours and I saw that you wanted to delete my article. So if you could give me more time, I could edit it to make it satisfactory.

Thank you. --Thekingcrak (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to assume you're referring to the article Liam Armstrong. The notice posted should fairly clearly explain the reasons, but in short, the article made no attempt to show why Mr. Armstrong is at all notable for inclusion. Quoting the first of three lines, for example: "Liam Armstrong is a very cool guy. He is extremely attractive, everyone likes him.". It might be under construction, but if that's the starting place, I don't see much reason to bother, to be blunt.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but articles about people that don't meet Notability guidelines just aren't needed. If I've made a mistake and Mr. Armstrong does in fact meet these guidelines, there's two ways to prevent this from happening again (I'm not at all the only person out there new page patrolling):

1. Use your sandbox to write the page first, then move it to the main namespace.

2. At least start the article in a way that it meets the guidelines right away. This just makes sense - start with the good stuff, and add the details later, if we can't convince you to use your sandbox.

Hope this helps, and if it doesn't, feel free to say so and I'll try to explain more. Unforgiven24 ^Talk|_Contribs 17:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Whoa! Thanks!

I was just starting to ref/cite the links I'd used as a first draft for references in my first cut at an article on Equality Utah, and you sped through the fixes before I could get there. Thank you so much for your help! --Joe Decker (talk) 17:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all. I was just watching the new pages, and sometimes while doing that I'll just go after low-hanging fruit. I don't like just sitting there tagging things for speedy deletion, it feels like I'm just being a barrier, rather than helping, so I try to jump in when a new article needs some quick work. Thanks for the thanks, it's nice to know it was noticed ;) - Unforgiven24 ^Talk|_Contribs 17:35, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Xmas, Master. Unforgiven

A merry and slightly demonic Christmas to you

Have this somewhat evil looking Santa. Enjoy the festive season.:) Sticky Parkin 23:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

A7 vs G10

Hey there Unforgiven. The other day you nominated an article for CSD per A7. It was about a person who was described as "exessive promiscuity and nude photos that have been spread across the web. Currently residing in the suburbs of montclair, she attends montclair high school as a sophmore in the class of 2011. Widely known and respected by her male peers who most likely love her for her "endowments". This would have been better nominated G10---attack page. The reason why I mention it is because there is a stronger push to get G10 articles off the web than A7. If it is attack page, we need to know about it ASAP and get rid of it immediately. (G10 and G11 are two priority CSD tags.)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 07:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I somewhat remember the article - you're right, "attack page" would have been more descriptive. I'll keep it in mind. Thanks for saying so - I didn't realize different CSD categories were treated with differing amounts of urgency (although, that does make sense - just never thought about it, I suppose). - Unforgiven24 ^Talk|_Contribs 19:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed that some admins will only handle certain types of CSD tags. There are people who will never open an A7, because they don't feel comfortable in that area. But G10 and G11 are two types that most admins will open because of their potential flamitory/legal concerns.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 20:01, 27 December 2008 (UTC)