User talk:Themfromspace/Archive 6

Graffiti4Hire

Twinkle misfired and didn't finish the afd page. If you want to add your rationale now, you can. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Doing that now! ThemFromSpace 21:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with that, I'm not sure why twinkle has been acting goofy lately. ThemFromSpace 21:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

MegalithicIreland

Hi - I just received a notice that my edits are considered spam? Please help - I had added some links to pages that I thought would be contributory to the sites noted. Then they were reverted. I posted to the talk page of the person who reverted my edits and was told she had no objections to the links. I am simply undoing these. I am not associated with the links I am adding, just an enthusiast of the subject and thought my contributions were worthy. Please help.

Hi, please look over our external links guidelines, specifically the section on links to avoid. Doing nothing but adding external links to one specific site is considered spamming, especially when most if not all of the links are not appropriate. This clutters up the articles and creates a cleanup headache, so please stop. ThemFromSpace 01:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

re: Arthur Balfour

I replaced a long defamatory quote about the character of Arthur Balfour with a shorter, more neutral summary. I was surprised to see my change undone with the comment: POV. I suppose this means "Point of View". The problem is, the original passage was very much Point of View, a very unbalanced quote making Arthur Balfour out to be some monster of hypocrisy and callousness. I don't think this fits in the character of Wikipedia that you describe in the page where you describe your own principles in editing.

JohannesHuber (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

inre Bloody Island (documentary)

As the issue of possible notabiliy for an academic film paralells the same issues of notability for an academic text, it seems that greater issue might end up be resolved elsewhere. But what I actually recommend is that with my blessings you feel free to revert my contributions back to how it looked when you first nominated,[1] and then compare the text as contibuted by the supposedly paid SPA to the text at Filmmakers.com,[2] where you'll see the word-for-word copyvio in the plot section and the reception section. Yes, I try to save what I can...and a stub might actually be workable if later determined notable to academia... but this one can go. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I should have noticed the copyvio earlier. I usually try to check for that with these types of articles. I'll leave the article as it currently stands, but you're welcome to revert if you don't want your additions to remain. ThemFromSpace 04:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I had thought of reverting myself, but then noticed that it had been edited by others after my own work. However, I did bring my concerns inre copyvio up at the AFD and have reversed my earlier stance. It might be useful for the future to consider borrowing the text from Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Academic books and modifying it to cover similar cases toward academic films, in essence expanding and clarifying the criteria at WP:NF... since it is set for films used in teaching films or film history (noting the caveat about a film needing to be "taught" at Universities with major film programs) and now-a-days films are used to teach in many subjects away from film subjects... just as are academic texts... and academic films will never have the same sort of coverage as might their mainstream brethren, just as for the same reasons an academic text will not have the coverage of a best seller. Food for thought. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Koichi Tohei external link edits

Thanks, I get the point of your edit. However a relevant link to www.ki-society.com would be useful for both the Ki-Aikido article and Koichi Tohei article. This site has a lot of valuable and accurate information about Ki Aikido and Koichi Tohei and is more valid than say the Aikido Journal link. Perhaps there should be a link on the Ki-Aikido page to the Ki Society site page for Ki-Aikido (http://www.ki-society.com/english/renew/aikidokai_001.html) and a corresponding one for Koichi Tohei. This would be relevant to each page. Kind regards Tegatana (talk) 13:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Does the link add any encyclopedic material in a way that can't be written into the text of the article? If you think so feel free to add it in to the Ki-Aikido article. ThemFromSpace 17:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:ANI#Is_User:Thebooze_a_spam_account.3F

Hi. Wikipedia:ANI#Is_User:Thebooze_a_spam_account.3F was closed with the understanding that you were going to talk to them about their spamming. Have you done so? Corvus cornix_talk 18:54, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that was an odd directive. The one who should have done the original talking was you, since you first discovered his edits. I'll go leave a message now. ThemFromSpace 20:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Corvus cornix_talk 20:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: External links cleanup

Hello, thank you for clarifying that. Hugahoody (talk) 20:09, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Spam block category

Hello! I've replied at my talk page. Please let me know if you find any more such categories that I removed yesterday. Thanks. HeyMid (contribs) 10:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Harrisburg

Thank you very much for so promptly sorting out Harrisburg. Easy when you know these things, less so when you are an alien! :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 10:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem! ThemFromSpace 10:34, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

edit accident

While editing the COIN page regarding Ciplex, I accidently broke your sig. Since I don't want any more flame, could you please fix it? Phearson (talk) 05:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done ThemFromSpace 07:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Twitter links

Themfromspace, I notice you have been removing Twitter links from many BLPs, citing WP:EL. You may not be aware that that policy explicitly exempts links to sites controlled by article subjects from the general discouragement against social networking sites, and thus that their removal on that ground is quite inappropriate. Twitter accounts are often the best sources of current and personal information about an article subject, and in many cases are irreplaceable resources in that respect. To hammer this home, take your recent removal from Stephen Fry, who is almost primarily known for his Twitter persona at this point. Please revert your removals forthwith, thanks. Skomorokh 19:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

You are free to reinsert any links that may meet WP:EL, but being under a subject's control is not an excemption from these guidelines. If a subject is notable due to Twitter than a link there is appropriate but we shouldn't include twitter links as official websites if better ones are out there. We don't link to every website under a subject's control, only the ones that work best for us. I have been keeping Twitter links when no better link is supplied, but when a Twitter link and an official link are both present the Twitter gets the axe. See also the recent discussion on WT:EL about these links. I hope you understand my point here and why most of these links are not appropriate. ThemFromSpace 19:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Highland View Academy

User:WikiManOne has been banned from editing the Wikipedia. Not just blocked, but banned. We do not delete high schools. All high schools in as far as they actually exist, are considered de facto notable, and have been for over three years.
Primary (elementary) and middle schools are, by contrast, not notable. However, we do not delete them either, please see WP:WPSCH for details on the standard merge and redirect procedure that has also been adopted and practiced for tens of thousands of schools. If you have any questions, you are most welcome to raise them on the WP:WPSCH talk page, or even directly on my talk page. --Kudpung (talk) 18:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Um, what was the point of this message? If it was to bring up a disagreement on policy then you didn't have to do so, since I realise consensus is currently against the deletion of high schools. I do hope this changes in the future. Any high school that does not, after a thourough investigation, meet either WP:N or WP:ORG should not have an article and I will !vote accordingly on AfDs if nonnotable high schools are brought to attention. Our inclusion practise for high schools is far too lax.

Also, WikiProjects do not supercede community consensus. The schools WikiProject is a group (but not the only one) that seeks to to override community consensus by setting up its own guidelines and precedents. Its good to have WikiProjects to organize editors that are interested in subject areas, but they should not set up binding content guidelines for their articles. The proper place to discuss high schools is not WP:WPSCH but rather community-wide discussion and policy pages, such as WP:N, WP:ORG, or at AfDs. ThemFromSpace 19:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

List

Hi! I saw you were involved with a previous nomination for deletion of List of suicides in fiction, and felt you should be informed of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of suicides in fiction (3rd nomination). Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

External links

Good to have someone else to work on that part of the backlog with! Mrh30 (talk) 10:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

ACR

Hi. Could you please respond here. Thanks in advance. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 14:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

National Competitiveness Report of Armenia

Hi. Earlier in 2009 you tagged National Competitiveness Report of Armenia with "advert", "coi" and "cleanup". Could you please visit the page now and check if the tags may be removed. Thanks. -- Ashot  ^(talk) 06:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Ups, just noticed that have asked you the same earlier, but there was no response... :( Hope you will respond this time. Best, -- Ashot  ^(talk) 06:36, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

If you have a minute...

Since you are one of the regulars at WP:ELN, I'd really appreciate your views on the two websites being discussed at WP:ELN#Paraphilic infantilism. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh... not this again :| ThemFromSpace 08:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks^^

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.227.22 (talk) 01:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Survey about wikipedia-vollunteering

Hi,

I am a student og Human resources and Lifelong learning from the Czech republic. I have been studying in Sweden in Linköping as an Erasmus student for one year.

I am making for one of my course a small survey about wikipedia volunteers.

Can I ask you some questions? It would be great if you answer them for me and if you can write me, where you are from and what you are doing!

QUESTIONS:

1) Why did you start with editing wikipedia articles?

2) How many articles have you edited?

3) What are your expectations and motives to edit articles on wikipedia?

3) How would you define online volunteerism?

4) Do you support another platform as an online volunteer?

Thank you very much for you answers! I am appreciating it so much. My e-mail is: Michala.beer@yahoo.com

Have a nice day! Michala

(Michala6633 (talk) 09:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC))

Reworking ELNO on Official Links

Hi,

As an editor who was involved with the recent ELNO discussion, "Spam links becoming standard practice,"[3] I am inviting you to comment on the proposal to rework the definition of "Official Link".[4]

Regards, ELNO Checking (talk) 17:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

William Tell Overture

I was merely following licensing instructions of someone from a WT:FSC discussion. I don't understand the rationale. Look back at the archive just before I posted this file under this license.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok. I thought about this quite a bit and I have to oppose the nomination, I'm sorry. My feelings about the license are on the FSC talkpage. ThemFromSpace 14:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

ArbPol

I've read what you say accompanying your vote and would like you to re-consider. I've laid out some of my reasons here on the ArbPol talk page. Thanks in advance for your time,  Roger Davies ^talk 22:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)