User talk:Alan16/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Novels

Welcome to novels and to these two posts. Any idea yet on what you would be bringing to the roles. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the response. You might like to have a look round some of the new members on the main project, and the task forces and look to "Inviting prospective members" & "Welcoming new members" parts of the role. Have a look at the "Outreach page" for details of welcoming templates that you can use. Also there are some invite templates there as well. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

If you want more to do have a look at the Newsletter information at the same page - this is on ice at present needing someone to give it some time. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Yahoo Answers

And you are...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetemotion987 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I am a user who has made constructive edits. You are a user who has not.[1][2][3] Don't try and turn this into some sort of fight - there will only be one outcome. Alan16 ^talk 19:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Malazan Races

I think only three would be better. Founding Races(Eres- Imass, Jaghut- Jhag, Assail, K'chain, and Thel Akai- Thelomen Toblakai), Human (all of them), Tiste (Andii, Edur, and Liosan). Races of the Malazan Book of the Fallen will be the basis of the information. You could probably put all of Tiste characters in the Malazan Book of the Fallen in the new Tiste Races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen. Warrens, Holds, and Realms in the Malazan Book of the Fallen series and Geography would probably be split up between Tiste Races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series, Founding Races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series, and Human Races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series. Not sure on the titles- long but appropriate. Krmarshall (talk) 02:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out for them then. Krmarshall (talk) 15:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

If you have a link for the deletion page. I'll support it. Been real busy lately; sorry for the inactivity. Krmarshall (talk) 03:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

apology

Hey, sorry for being a jackass. I get ornery sometimes. Hope you didn't take it too personally. kwami (talk) 00:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - March 2009

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Foriegn Races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series

I don't know how likely it would be as a search term (if someone can spell Malazan...). I'll restore it since you believe it would be and you probably have more experience with that subject. ... discospinster _talk 01:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Userboxes

As if I didn't already have too many! Oh well, I'm sure I could safely add just a few more yet... ScotsmanRS (talk) 21:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Your user page has certainly become a lot funnier!

I think you will find two errors:

• The phrase is "believe you me", no "and"
• ScotsmanRS is male! I can prove it!

ScotsmanRS (talk) 22:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Acquaintance links to imaginary friends?! I don't know whether to be flattered, disturbed, or greatly saddened. Oh well, I'll ask my real friends what they think. ScotsmanRS (talk) 01:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: User:212.219.203.242

Hi. I can see from the IP's contributions that not much of the activity has actually been constructive. However, we usually don't block IPs indefinitely unless they are being used as open proxies or by banned users evading their previous blocks. This particular IP is being used by crafty people who stop vandalising soon after they are warned, and then don't start up again until a day or so later (in fact, the IP hasn't even been blocked once yet). However, I will be keeping an eye on that IP now that you have alerted me to it. Who knows, there may be a short but effective block in its future. ... discospinster _talk 23:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Erikson pic

I can't believe you stole my page banners. Just stay away from my edit notice. That's patented.

As a warning, I hate image use stuff, but it's possible you might get crap over Erikson's picture still (and your usage rational, though pretty amusing, may still give you trouble). If you re-contact the image author (Pat from Pat's Fantasy Hotlist?) and ask for a release under the GFDL, the image could be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons and thus be used for all wiki projects as well as avoiding all fair use and other image use problems. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 11:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Insufficient, I demand attribution. And wikidollars, redeemable for wikiproducts like votes during AFD discussions. I didn't upload it, I CREATED it. Like God.

Naw, I don't care. I just like to gloat when my stuff gets picked up by other people.

If the author released it under GFDL, you should really state that on the image page and check with OTRS if it's sufficient, then upload to Commons. Really, if you've got an explicit GFDL, that trumps every other consideration, you don't need to rationalize it at all.

I've moved the races pages per MOS:CAPS by the way (Races to races); also, it might be an idea to change the "foreign races" to "invading races". Also updated the {{MBF}} template.

Will you be correcting the redirects to all the "races" pages? WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 11:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

'Kay, note that I've already done a bit (the Races to races is already done). Check out MOS:CAPS and MOS:TITLE for how page names should be arranged. The image stuff doesn't need to be fixed, but by releasing it under GFLD explicitly and uploading to commons, you're helping out the non-English wikiprojects. Also, I'll be making some changes to the Foreign page, so gimme a sec to complete it. they're only partial, I don't have time for a comprehensive re-work but you can see what I'm getting at. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 12:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If it's GFDL, you don't have to re-upload it. Tag it with {{GFDL}} and find an admin with a commons account. State that it's GFDL and ask if they could upload it to commons for you. Doens't even need to be an admin, just someone with a commons account. I have one, but I hate image use.

Note that you're creating pages and pasting to them - you should be using the "move" tab at the top of the page. Moving the page moves the page history as well as the text, and creates a redirect. Not a huge deal, don't worry about it. I'll try flagging down a passing admin to fix it. Also have a gander at this set of diffs. I'm trying to give each section title a unique name to allow linking, and reduce the overall number. Not done yet though. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 12:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Note also that I've removed the "attribution" from the notice at the top of the page. I appreciate it, but it made me feel like an egoist . The malazan pages overall are a big mess - lots of redirects, links to pages and sections that don't exist, way too many duplications in content (coatracks and content forks), just a general mess. If you're looking for a way to become more familiar with wikipedia, sorting out these pages would probably be a good start. And that means I don't have to. Feel free to ask questions, I've a lot of opinions and I love excuses to use them. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 12:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Undent. No credit on the banner, it's just a table with some funny background stuff going on. Please feel free to ask questions, I like answering them. You may also be interested in this essay, it's for new editors and it might help. Also be aware of the {{helpme}} template; if you have a question and you'd like a quick response, this will almost certainly provide it. You are most welcome, of course, to ask me, but I think we live in different time zones. Another good resource is WP:NOVEL and WP:NOVFAN, wikiprojects for novels and a sub-project for fantasy respectively. I've moved out of editing a lot of the fiction wikipages for the most part because I can't reconcile my love of the books with my normal take on the policies on notability, but I usually know enough about different areas to help out. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 14:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If you're interested in fixing the redirects to various pages, there are now a lot of double-redirects to the multitude of pages created. If you use the what links here feature (found in the toolbox section of the left column of wiki-specific stuff, leading to a page like this) you can see what links where. Note that for the Invading races page, there are still a lot of redirects; almost all of them actually. If you're looking for a cheap way to up your edit count or just interested in the work, this is something that should be addressed (though don't correct any pages that aren't in mainspace, such as talk pages, archives, etc). Popups can be helpful, turning a tedious job into a one-click edit. There's only one disadvantage, you can't do stuff like this - by adding #NAME you can link to any section NAME, which can be helpful. Something I like to do, because I'm pedantic, obsessive, and have an unhealthy obsession with my edit count (32,144 including this one). Really, the entire Malazan part of the wiki needs to be thoroughly re-worked, but I just never make the time (I was really disappointed with The Bonehunters and my interest has diminished since, though Toll the Hounds was much more enjoable). Do you have a pic of ICE as well? That page needs an infobox and a picture. Looks naked. But, like, ugly fat middle-aged man naked. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 14:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alan16. You have new messages at Ged UK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GedUK  21:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Founding races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Founding races from the Malazan Book of the Fallen series, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unsourced, notability not indicated.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Jeandré, 2009-04-05t13:21z 13:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alan16. You have new messages at Ged UK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GedUK  20:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Yahoo! Answers AfD

Hey, can you go ahead and blank the AfD page for Yahoo! Answers and request speedy deletion on it? I'm going to remove the AfD template from Yahoo! Answers as pure vandalism and warn the IP editor. I think this is a cut and dry case of vandalism and should be treated that way, rather than worry about the AfD rules. Thanks! KhalfaniKhaldun 20:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Your comment

The term traditionally uses the word "knickers", which might be considered non-sex specific, unlike "panties" which are specifically feminine. Can I suggest you mind your own business and let khalfani khaldun respond as he sees appropriate. The fact that I identify as female by the use of the name "Amanda" has drawn several such sexually slanted comments from people who identify as male and young. You, not being female, are probably unaware that females who contribute to wiki and identify their gender, are from time to time subject to gender-specific put-downs. It is ignorant, inappropriate and dare I say immature, (at the risk of appearing ageist). Just hope that neither of you ever get one of your balls in a twist, the severity of which makes twisted knickers a minor inconvenience. Amandajm (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Alan, since you have drawn my attention to your personal page, I must say that the great school, the education system, the good grades and the advantage of having two parents and a sister do not seem to have taught you how to recognise when someone is attempting to give a disagreement a slightly more humourous twist. You have launched into smart-comeback debate mode, with the "I'm an atheist and might choose to get offended" nonsense, to prove to me that I really have no right of objection to a comment that someone else made, and that you were sufficiently infantile as to repeat. Perhaps you might learn to recognise when someone (with both education and life experience, a retired college lecturer and mother of four adults) has the right to object to a somewhat sexist comment. Being able to recognise error and respond cordially is a valuable asset. What have you achieved, except to be doubly insulting and to give me the impression that you have an awful lot of growing up to do? Amandajm (talk) 03:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

If you do not wish to retain this rather unpleasant comment on your page, I will not be offended if you delete it.

Alan, thank you for your gracious response. Amandajm (talk) 11:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy Murray

I hope you realize that you broke the three-revert rule on the article. Since the warring as momentarily stopped, I'd like to you to pause and consider your future actions. If you continue down this road, I'd have to report you. In fact, I won't be surprised if an administrator notices your actions and blocks you anyway. Stop the edit warring even if you disagree with the edits made. Stick to the discussion page while resolving disputes. ^LeaveSleaves 04:57, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Gonna pop in here and mention that the rule was not broken. Alan had 3 reverts on Andy Murray today total. And by today, I mean the last 24 hours. It isn't unkind, though, to point out that he was on the verge of breaking it, so I'm sure he'll thank you for the warning. KhalfaniKhaldun 05:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so the rule wasn't technically broken. But that's not the point here. ^LeaveSleaves 05:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

• I just wanted to let you know that I was very impressed at the way you handled yourself with Tennis expert. Ohconfucius (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC) PS In case you did not realise, there is an RfC about his behavior.

So I was wrong about the speculation thing! Anyways, I think the infobox ranking shouldn't be updated till next week. It is standard practice that the infobox is updated after ATP formally announces the ranking, which would be on May 11. ^LeaveSleaves 17:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Spoilers

See WP:SPOILER, you're right. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 23:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

There are a lot of shortcuts WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 23:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

cool off?

Hey, can I (kindly) recommend taking a deep breath before going back here? Things were said on both sides, but.. please, find your happy place? tedder (talk) 01:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

As an FYI, stuff like towns, schools, permanent locations and things like that, in my experience they do a run-around of WP:N and usually get to keep pages as long as they actually exist. I hate it, it's dumb, but it's the reality of wikipedia. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 01:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alan16. You have new messages at Tedder's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

tedder (talk) 01:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alan16. You have new messages at Ged UK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GedUK  07:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

No vandalism was intended. Even you admitted it could be a true (it is true). Anyway, the article looks ok without it so it's fine with me. User F203 (talk) 18:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello Alan

Oh Dear!.... I have just rushed in where the proverbial angels fear to tread.... and have tactlessly upset three editors.... or perhaps it's only two. The third one must be on holidays because I'm sure he would have bitten my head off if he wasn't .... I have left myself a message on my talk page, to not be so rash in the future. I was rather heavy handed and perhaps one might say a little tactless. It seems to be something to do with the human condition. Just thought it might encourage you to know. :-) Amandajm (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Well on the strength of that, I think that I'll write and article on Hannah's Bridge Public School where I went for one term as a ten-year-old. Unfortunately Hannah's Bridge closed down when one family moved from the district. It no longer had the required number of 12 students for a Teacher-in-Charge school. The remaining children then had to make the bus trip along the hot dusty road into Coolah.

Amandajm (talk) 02:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Help

Article semi-protected for one week (there has been persistent unsourced speculation for a while now). Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding [4]:

I think your missing the point of the block. To me anyway, the user was blocked due to continuous vandalism (including breaking the 3RR twice in one day) and uncivil behaviour towards other editors. Alan16 ^talk 02:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

This is an IP editor who presumably saw a news report, came here to change the info, and was met with arcane wikispeak and threats. The edits were not vandalism. Are you sure you really want to invoke 3RR for the IP editor? Gimmetrow 02:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

"Arcane wikispeak"? After his initial edit, he was told that the infobox was for Murray's current information. He continued to change anyway a further dozen times at least. How often would he have to do it for you to consider it vandalism Gimmetrow? At a certain point assuming good faith just becomes stupid. Why would you not invoke 3RR? Even if he had only broken it once it would clearly show a user unwilling to listen, but breaking it twice in a day? Come on, you can't seriously believe that it was an error in judgement. Alan16 ^talk 02:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

The info is currently reported. It doesn't seem unreasonable that someone might want to change it. It's not vandalism - the IP wasn't changing the rating to 999, for instance. At the time the block was applied, the article was locked, so there was no need. Finally, you may be subject to 3RR yourself. Gimmetrow 02:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

The information is not current. Murray has never achieved a ranking higher than World No. 4 to date. Come Monday that will change, but not until. And it is vandalism. When you have been warned by numerous editors not to change something, yet continue to do so over a dozen times it is vandalism. Also, there is a hidden message saying "do not change to 3 until 11 May" which he will have seen when he deleted it whilst vandalising. And I do not feel I broke the 3RR. But if you think so, do something about it, doesn't just make semi-threatening comments. Alan16 ^talk 02:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I said the information is currently reported. Can you not see that someone unfamiliar with wikirules might find the BBC article a sufficiently strong basis for changing info like this? That's not vandalism. Sure the IP was warned and kept it up, and that's disruptive, but disruptive editing isn't necessarily what's meant by vandalism. I have no desire to have anyone else blocked over this, so don't be threatened. I'm just pointing out that this issue got blown up far more than it needed to be. This issue was solved by locking the article because of the edit warring. Gimmetrow 02:54, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

• I agree with Gimmetrow; the IP's edits were not blatant vandalism. And since the page is now semi-protected, no further blocks are necessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5