User talk:Exploding Boy/archive6

Referencing Teika

Back in the FAC for Fujiwara no Teika, one of your objections was that it had insufficient referencing. Is it up to your standards now? --maru (talk) contribs 03:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

User:WritersCramp appears to be back

Greetings Exploding Boy, after reviewing this RfC about User:WritersCramp I thought you should be aware of this WP:ANI report concerning User:SirIsaacBrock and his new sockpuppet User:Porky Pig. Thanks. (→Netscott) 23:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Kudos

Just ran across your MOS (Harry Potter). Good Job! Hope you'll lend some time to WPP:series as summer wanes. Best regards // FrankB 06:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

toungue piercing

i think the person making the comment on toungue piercins and oral sex was pointing out that there are many differing opinions and myths and that mayeb the article should adress this Eevo 20:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

JakeW

Hello, are you somebody who's trying to introduce a little sanity in the face of JakeW? I do hope so. I have posted (under my other sign-in, AlexanderLondon) several long requests on his page asking him to tell us what his credentials are and he clearly doesn't want to admit that he doesn't have any. Hope I haven't got this all wrong... Anyway, it looks as though you're a nice counterbalance to the extremism of JakeW and "Robert the Bruce".--Oxonian2006 00:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Ashraf.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ashraf.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Hex RfA

This is the RfA of user:Hex. I believe he would make a good and unconventional admin, so I'm running around right now, trying to encourage some of the more sensible people I know of to support him. Subversive 08:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Please, just take a look at that RfA's opposition and you will understand why I am so much in favour of Hex. We need to pull together on this one, and we should tell as many others as possible. Subversive 13:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiJET

Hi there. Seeing that you're a regular contributor to the Japanese articles on Wikipedia, and also over at BigDaikon, I thought you might be interested in my idea about creating a wiki related to the JET Programme over at Wikia.com. It is just in the idea stage at the moment but I'd be interested to hear what you think. Cheers, Bobo12345 12:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

==Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyke tyke

SchmuckyTheCat 17:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Darkroom

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I've reverted the move back to darkroom. My reasons for this are that disambiguation should only be used when other articles exist and also that it easily would be considered the primary topic among any other articles using the same name. If you have some specific other examples of articles which would either require disambiguation or might challenge this article for the primary article title, please let me know - I'd be happy to discuss the matter with you. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 19:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Tea ceremony project

Voted on the Learning kanji AfD. I was wondering... can you put up an update on the tea ceremony project on the WPJ page? I've been trying to clean up old entries, but I don't want to take anything down that's still ongoing. Dekimasu 02:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Mostafa Tabatabainejad

Hi there, I've nominated this article for Transwiki discussion - I believe this article should be moved to Wikinews. Please feel free to join in the discussion linked from the article. Thanks, Bwithh 06:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On November 24, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article University of British Columbia Library, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

This article was kindly nominated by GeeJo. It earnt top billing and the pictured slot on this round of updates. Feel free to self-nom, 80%+ of our articles are self nom.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:59, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Really? I can't find it anywhere. Exploding Boy 18:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

A bit late now, but the template version is here. It was chosen for the lead, no less :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Doing something about the ridiculous date autoformatting/linking mess

Dear EB—you may be interested in putting your name to, or at least commenting on this new push to get the developers to create a parallel syntax that separates autoformatting and linking functions. IMV, it would go a long way towards fixing the untidy blueing of trivial chronological items, and would probably calm the nastiness between the anti- and pro-linking factions in the project. The proposal is to retain the existing function, to reduce the risk of objection from pro-linkers.Tony 15:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Secret Court of 1920 (Harvard)

Why is this title disambiguated? Secret Court of 1920 appears not to be taken. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 08:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Just seemed like the best title. Exploding Boy 18:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 19 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Secret Court of 1920 (Harvard), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 13:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• Great job on this article! — BRIAN0918 • 2006-12-19 17:59Z

Gastric bypass surgery Globalization

Please note comments in discussion page at this topic. Topnife 20:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Stroke_order

Hello, I added an "History of Stroke order" section, but I'm french. If you can fix my spelling, that's welcome. Yug (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC) (from the CJK stroke order project team)

Thanks for your work and clean up of the intruduction and some other sections. But, I don't agree with several modifications. For such case, I will restore the old sentences or a better medium position if need. Yug (talk) 20:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Wilkinsonandkitzinger.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Wilkinsonandkitzinger.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

FAR of Humpback Whale

Humpback Whale has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Blueboy (magazine)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Blueboy (magazine), by Tobbytobby, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Blueboy (magazine) is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Blueboy (magazine), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Blueboy (magazine) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 03:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Misleading sentence

Hello,

I striked your sentence because it appeared misleading, and that I don't want to keep false information in the talk page. If you don't want strike it, so please delete it (your self).

--Yug (talk) 11:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

There's no need to remove it. Exploding Boy 18:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Please see Stroke order talk page (soon). Yug 07:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

One question, talking about "㇀", you talk about 3 strokes (!?). In my screen, I see a Ti "㇀" = "" just one stroke. It may be a font misunderstanding. Then, if we talk about , it's a stroke, and not a character, nor a kangxi radical.

Yug (talk) 20:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Then it must be a font problem. I'm talking about the character that means "mouth" (#30 on this list). Exploding Boy 20:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh........... We got a trouble...........

Yug (talk) 20:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, several things let me think that it's your computer which have a trouble.

Moreover, I have now to strike all the sentences were I said something such "Loooooooooooookkk..... It's a TIIIIIIiiiiiiiiiii !!! = stroke" O.ô"

Which more over means you were of good faith... Yug (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Please admit that from the 2 or 3 mistakes I seen from your edits, I was able to think you had a misunderstanding of Chinese components and stroke order, and then logically assume bad faith.

Since it appear that the biggest seems to be a computer trouble, please accept partial apologizes.

--Yug (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, the character "mouth" appeared fine on my screen; maybe it's your computer that has the problem. As for the other supposed "mistakes," I don't even know what you're referring to, frankly. Exploding Boy 21:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Explain into the Stroke order talk page (one, but I think it was an other).

For the ㇀, I will copy paste it on the unicode website, and look which pic it will found. That work fine for me, try yourself (past "㇀" + search).

This, explain a bit more what I did. 2 merge ideas + totally re-writted ; 1 remove and past in the CJK strokes. (please read the section linked).

--Yug (talk) 21:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

See the link under "try yourself" （wait, I'm not sure it's an image.）

"㇀" = 31C0 (according to here). The unicode page for this caracter : open this PDF (my computer can't open pdf currently), and please say me what is 31C0 (a  ?).

Other talk in the Stroke order talk page. Yug (talk) 22:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks [1] (I understand and learn 2/3 of your corrections: thanks !)

I'm on an other computer, in my university. On my computer :

• "㇀" doesn't work, my screen show me "?". (this is an usual trouble, on old computer which don't support Unicode)
• Opening the this PDF, I see that #&31C0; is the unicode for Ti ()

This seem to confirm that I was of good faith.

Yug 14:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Croppedchan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Croppedchan.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Blueboy (band)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Blueboy (band), by 69.208.79.178, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Blueboy (band) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Blueboy (band), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Blueboy (band) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Prods

Greetings re-proder, please read Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. I've reverted your restoration of the prod tag as it has been objected to -- you could try AfD if you like... but note the article survived a previous AfD. Matthew 16:09, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Pipe Organ

Thanks for reverting.  :-) --W0lfie 15:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

RFCN

From WP:U - "Some editors on this Wikipedia will be unable to read a username written in non-Latin alphabets, such as Chinese. Non-Latin usernames are allowed, but if you have one you are encouraged to customize" - now, non latin chracters are allowed, so don't revert my close again. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop closing the request. The discussion is not over yet. Exploding Boy 23:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

It is over now. Stop adding to it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

You had asked if he could be found by entering the Latin version. Yes, he could register User:Dattebayo and redirect it to his page, but other than that, no. It shouldn't be impossible to copy/paste the name either even if the characters aren't on the keyboard. Leebo 00:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

About policy

Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. If there is a consensus that something should or should not happen, "the rules say you're wrong!" is not a valid objection. There is a consensus to allow non-latin usernames, so "But the rules say it's not allowed!" is not a valid objection. -Amarkov moo! 23:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Nevertheless, the policy states that confusing usernames are not allowed, and with good reason. According to WP:NOT, "Follow the spirit, not the letter, of any rules, policies and guidelines if you feel they conflict." The spirit of the username policy is that usernames must not be confusing. Non-latin usernames are confusing to those who cannot read them, and might impede discussion, editing, blocking and other functions. Exploding Boy 00:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

No, the spirit would be what has consensus. The consensus is for allowing non-latin usernames. Thus, the spirit of the policy does not include disallowing them. -Amarkov moo! 00:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Closure of discussions

Do not revert administrator closure of duscussions in the future - take it to a noticeboard instead. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm an administrator too. Try to be a little more polite in the future, and don't close discussions prematurely when they are still ongoing. Exploding Boy 00:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Read the policy before closing then, and if you are an administrator - then you should know not to undo an admins closure - and you should know that latin characters are allowed in the username policy. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

And you should know a couple of things too: WP:NOT clearly states that you should "Follow the spirit, not the letter, of any rules, policies and guidelines if you feel they conflict." The username in question is clearly confusing. You closed the discussion prematurely, while it was still ongoing and there was no clear consensus.

Also, I find your signature rather disruptive. It expands to nearly 4 lines in the editing window. You may wish to consider altering it. Exploding Boy 00:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

It's within guidlines. Usernames with non latin characters are allowed - WP:NOT doesn't trump policy, and specifically when policy says that usernames with non latin characters are allowed. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop using your extended signature on my talk page (per the reques that has been on this page for nearly a year). I find it very distracting.

You don't seem to be listening. Policies are not laws. There is scope for interpreting them. The spirit of the username policy is that usernames should not be confusing for other users, for obvious reasons. Exploding Boy 00:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

But that's our point too. Policies are not laws, so if something is against consensus, it should not be defended by claiming that the policy mandates it. -Amarkov moo! 00:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I see non-Latin characters as the accepted exception to the confusing name part, or it wouldn't be mentioned. Leebo 00:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Well that doesn't make any sense. I can read Japanese, but I can't read Arabic. If I came accross a user name written in Arabic I would not only have no idea what to call the user, but finding him or her would be much more difficult. Exploding Boy 05:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

copy and paste the name, also not everyone can read japaneseAustralian Jezza 08:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Strategy n⁰2

I made a new strategy, which will be in effect from tomorrow, and ended when the rewriting will be finish. Your revert policy is no more tolerate. --Yug 19:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

First of all, please don't place that template or use extravagant signatures on my talk page. Second, I don't understand what you mean. Exploding Boy

Rush => rushy. You revert hastily, deleting content. I spend hours writing 25 lines explanation, then you revert + 4 lines explanation. Really convenient for you.

Read again what I wrote, that where you lead me. That strat tomorrow (one week after you). --Yug 21:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Look, Yug, I'm not trying to delete your content. But you will need to propose changes on the talk page first if you don't want them edited. I tried to rewrite what you had written yesterday; it proved to be far too much. You took perfect sentences, and rewrote them with the same content but in poor English. You also made at least 6 edits to the page. Trying to go through each edit and pick out the content while rewriting the sentences in good English proved too complicated. I reverted to one of YOUR versions, and tried to add back the information I could find, and I made it CLEAR that that's what I had done, to avoid just this scenario. Please. Discuss your proposed changes on the talk page before editing the article. It will make things much easier for everyone. Exploding Boy 21:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I was of good faith all this week. I explain all what I do, about 3 or 4 time more than you and your reverts.

You have an unconstructive policy of revert.

You made several mistake of judgment (see what I wrote).

You reverted several time on "spelling" reason, disableling other user to correct my spelling

You (your reverts) lead me to explain all my changes, without reading the explanations

You proudly believed that 31C0 was 口, that was an unicode trouble in your computer, like I said.

You proudly kept the Unicode 16 strokes partial list.

You revert again, instead to start a RfC like I proposed

In each case, you make minor edit, minor involvement, and revert. And you let me have wide involvement in the talk page, losing large time.

You, are, not, fair. Yug (talk) 21:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I restored my image. EB : you want ask admins to block me on the reason "Yug use an image I don't like, and don't accept my reverts" ? Read again what in wrote, all is slowly explain.

Yug (talk) 21:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Since the begin, you act with me like if I was a newbie, making unfair reverts : no luck, look on Fr and commons. --Yug (talk) 21:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

You lead me to this situation : I wait a constructive proposition (like help me to correct my user:Yug/Stroke order spelling) for one full week, explaining nicely why I change this, why I change that. I even warn in the talk page my planned re-writing one week before to do it.

You lead me to this situation because of your hastily revert policy, and you clear inability to work with other.

Accept this image one week, of Stroke-order break for both of us. Read what I wrote in this square. And next week we can restart to work on this article. --Yug (talk) 21:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

(sorry for the 8 message, that was not expected.) --Yug (talk) 22:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I stopped to put the image, which I still think is need according to the situation. So don't ask too much. Yug (talk) 15:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC) <for the 8 edits they were simply spelling corrections>

26 march, 9:18 : in the talk page, I proposed to change the introduction

diff - need to remove out-subject sentences, make sections' summaries.

10 june, : I made exactly what I said.

dif

comment by Yug : (Test : new introduction. Please help my spelling + continue to improve this.) Yug

I do what I said. Yug (talk) 16:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

1 px frame

"I fail to see, however, why this has become the primary point of contention" Luna Santin.

I see this, and I think this has become the primary point of contention because it's the only think you have to get me blocked.

In case of disagreement : WP:RfC/here.

--Yug (talk) 10:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Warabi

I removed the station info since it also appers in the Warabi, Saitama#Transportation sub-section. I think it fits more properly there. --Jonte-- 11:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought it was the Kawaguchi article for some reason. Exploding Boy 15:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Arjun Sreedharan

Hey there! Nice catch with Arjun Sreedharan, but make sure you give a reason when you place a {{speedy}} tag on an article. Coren 05:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Beg pardon?

It's no big deal, but did you mean to message the "muffle" writer? I'm just a nameless lookout for bizarre additions. I had marked hers for re-deletion, and when it was deleted she reposted again with my tag. Maybe that was it. Anyhow, good work. 68.222.39.218 05:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess so. How did you get in there? Woops. Exploding Boy 05:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

jesse bedard

my edit of jesse bedard was serios all the information in there was fact. he does play in a canadian band called insert name here could u put it back on please?

Speedy deletion question

Jay Smith Thomas was created and almost immediately speedily deleted tonight, but it was soon recreated and has since been expanded several times by several people who claim to have been alerted to the article by a group email. It has a speedy-delete tag, db-bio, and a hangon; if nothing changes overnight, I'll be going through AFD. I just wanted to know: is it suitable for speedy deletion now because it was speedily deleted and almost immediately recreated? Or is it to be treated as any other AFD article? Thanks! Nyttend 06:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't appear notable to me, but it does have the hangon tag. I've left a message on the talk page, so we'll see what they say. Exploding Boy 06:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way, the bit about the cult was a reference to Mehdi Foundation International, which I had placed on AfD. Thanks for taking care of the situation! Nyttend 13:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it was for Nyttend. Sorry about the confusion. He never did answer the question. Dhaut 15:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for helping to watch the whole process today. I normally work with uncontroversial matters, such as townships in Ohio, and I definitely am not accustomed to dealing with stuff like the Thomas article. I guess the way it's turned out is a good example of how Wikipedia is supposed to work :-) Nyttend 21:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Judge Judy Quotes

Just wondering your thoughts on the Judge Judy Quotes. My gut feeling is that all are removed. They used to have a huge section of quotes but since WikiQuote has all her sayings, and the individual page for Judy has sayings, is this part of the page really necessary? Thoughts please Coolmark18 16:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC).

Fine with me. It's too much like a trivia section anyway. Exploding Boy 20:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Claire Chazal

In france, she is very famous. I was going to expand the article. How came there is an article on Patrick Poivre d'Arvor and not Claire Chazal? Claire Chazal is on the list of french journalists.[2]

Sorry for the UD edit, thanx

Geographic names

As one of the editors who collaborated in our convention on geographic names, I would appreciate it if you would not quote it out of context, as you have been doing on Talk:Iwo Jima. All our naming conventions are based on the principle that we use the name to which our English-speaking readership is most accustomed. We do not use local official names, except for places in which English usage is not clear; mostly such obscure places as Groß-Gerau in Germany.

If you want a change in our policies, it would take consensus to change them; you are of course free to begin organizing such consensus. But insisting that they now say what they do not is not a promising way to start. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Yajikita.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Yajikita.jpg. 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 insure 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 fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. ShakespeareFan00 20:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Fellatio

Thanks for stepping in to clear out the cruft. I just wanted to let you know that I put placeholders where each comment used to be; with the poster's username/IP, the date/time, and that it was removed by you. The reason I did it was in one place, the fact that the comments were missing it made me look like I was responding incredulously to San Diablo, which wasn't the case. I also put a placeholder where I removed a comment (this one, it came after your cleanup.) If the placeholders are problematic, please let me know. Thank you! Joie de Vivre ^T 04:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Was getting tired of seeing all that. Exploding Boy 05:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

peter toms

this annoys me that u deleted this article. i know for a fact that peter toms is an australian icon. if ur not australian and do not listen to classical music, you do not understand the amount of influence he has had within orchestral groups. Although you may not see the truth in this article, it is in reality a fact and i was simply starting a page to address his work in Sydney. I do personally know him, and the jokes were merely highighthing his personality. Give this page a chance, Peter Toms has made life better for everyone around him.

barry mcginn

can you please undelete the article? barry mcginn is one of ireland's most famous rap artists. please do this ,as i need to add more content to it too.

hey, barry mcginn was a work in progress. i wasn't finished adding references and the like. Undelete it please. Boardtowns 19:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I read those pages and i think I think it does conform. Barry had a top 3 album in Ireland and a top 5 single too. I don't know how to undelete though. Boardtowns 19:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

thanks. Boardtowns 19:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Grandfield Lutheran Church Sheyenne, North Dakota

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Grandfield Lutheran Church Sheyenne, North Dakota. I do not think that Grandfield Lutheran Church Sheyenne, North Dakota fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because the reason given was 'notability" which is not a reason for speedy deletion. I have placed a cleanup template on the article. If you think it should be deleted, perhaps (in Turkish) or WP:AFD would be a better route. I request that you consider not re-tagging Grandfield Lutheran Church Sheyenne, North Dakota for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk) 19:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yup, same here on Efrat Abramov. Addhoc 19:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The criteria include "Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content." And speedy deletion tags may not be removed by the page creator. Please don't do it again. Exploding Boy 19:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but I'm not the page creator. Addhoc 19:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. Thought you were. Exploding Boy 19:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

(After edit conflict) Please check the history. Addhoc was not the creator of Efrat Abramov, anymore than I was of Grandfield Lutheran Church Sheyenne, North Dakota. Biographical articles are, of couse, subject to deletion for failure to assert significance or importance, but IMO "host of the daily BIP channel show "Mahadoora Mugbelet"" and chief script writer for YES cable drama television series taken together are at least a claim that this is a notable TV personanality in Isreal. Whether this would pass an AfD is of course another matter, surely better sources are needed at the least. But I don't think the current version warrents an A7 speedy delete. DES ^(talk) 19:55, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Iwo Jima

I'm a little confused. It seems earlier in the disputes, you were in favour of 'moving' the page. Now you're not? GoodDay 00:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, to Iōtō. Exploding Boy 00:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I could never accept the article being moved to a Japanese title (I couldn't accept those 'cubes'). GoodDay 00:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for cleaning up Talk:Debito Arudou, you beat me to it by about one minute. I noticed the rule just after posting. Tualha (Talk) 00:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

He never actually changed anything that time, though.

He apparently added a space but it had no bearing on the article itself. HalfShadow 22:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

You may have missed this. Exploding Boy 22:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:DICK

Yes, I was one of those, on reflection (in WT:U). I just thought I'd make it clearer for you since I'm not sure you've noticed my apology there. Cheers, and keep up the good work! NikoSilver 11:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I did see it. Sorry I didn't reply, and thanks. Exploding Boy 16:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Tawniz

There's really no recourse for such blatant and potentially libelous vandalism. The user has also been warned before for other activities on their talk page. If you disagree, feel free to reduce their block time (indefinite != forever) but make sure you watch their contributions over the next several days. — BRIAN0918 • 2007-06-28 18:58Z

my sig.

I must have accidentaly modified it to not link...I'll fix it as soon as I can. Thanks for the tip.

Solar Sunstorm

18:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

ApeNet

I respect you, you've been here a long time, but surely ApeNet has neither claims to notability nor satisfies WP:WEB? If it weren't for your seniority, I would have tagged it for speedy deletion. Corvus cornix 23:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

It's linked from several pages and mentioned in several of our articles, with red links, which is why I started it. Exploding Boy 23:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see notability, though. It needs independent third party refs. Corvus cornix 23:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Ubertar

Thanks for responding to that user. I ended up edit-conflicting with you on that page. Acalamari 17:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hilton page

Hi, I strongly disagree with you. The Hilton and Libby cases are very much related. Both events occurred within a short period of time and are high profile cases. There was a huge uproar over Paris' supposed special treatment-- people were upset that she was being treated as "above the law". Libby was convicted of felony counts of obstruction of justice and perjury, yet was given special treatment and treated as "above the law". For this to occur right after the controversy about Hilton is ironic, and notable. I only added a single line. It was a statement of fact, and while you may not personally see the relevance, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I don't think my addition should be deleted just because you disagree over its relevance. As these issues fade, so will the relevance of that line, so why not compromise and leave it up for a week or two, then take it down. User:Ubertar 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

What I wrote were not "musings" as you put it. My post consisted of two facts, which are relevant, for more than just that the two had legal issues. The connection is that:

1. both Paris and Libby were recently convicted of crimes and requested pardons.

2. Paris was accused by large portions of the public of getting "special treatment". These accusations were likely a factor in her being sent back to jail. Libby has been accused of receiving special treatment by many legal scholars and politians.

(http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/washington/03libby.html?pagewanted=2

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, called the commutation “disgraceful.”

“Libby’s conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War,” Mr. Reid said. “Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone.”

Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, acknowledged that the president had acted within his powers. But Mr. Leahy said: “Accountability has been in short supply in the Bush administration, and this commutation fits that pattern. It is emblematic of a White House that sees itself as being above the law.” )

3. These events occurred within weeks of each other, unlike the Martha Stewart example you cited. With the uproar about Hilton's supposed light treatment and the issues it raised fresh in people's minds, Libby's commuted sentence is particularly relevant because it deals with many of the same issues. The fact that Libby's sentence was reduced while Hilton's was not could be seen as highly ironic due to the seriousness of Libby's felony conviction. Since these events happened at essentially the same time, they reflect the state of our times, and as such, are intertwined. User:Ubertar (usigned)

both Paris and Libby were recently convicted of crimes and requested pardons.

Different crimes, different requests, from different authorities.

Paris was accused by large portions of the public of getting "special treatment". These accusations were likely a factor in her being sent back to jail. Libby has been accused of receiving special treatment by many legal scholars and politians.

Unlikely. It's called judicial discretion. Libby's situation is unrelated to Paris'.

These events occurred within weeks of each other, unlike the Martha Stewart example you cited.

That still doesn't make them related or relevant to one another.

With the uproar about Hilton's supposed light treatment and the issues it raised fresh in people's minds, Libby's commuted sentence is particularly relevant because it deals with many of the same issues.

No, as you point out yourself above, the issue with Libby's sentence is the Bush administration. No one has ever suggested that Bush interfered in Hilton's sentence.

The fact that Libby's sentence was reduced while Hilton's was not could be seen as highly ironic due to the seriousness of Libby's felony conviction. Since these events happened at essentially the same time, they reflect the state of our times, and as such, are intertwined.

Again you seem to be missing the point that their sentences and crimes are completely unrelated. It might be relevant to add something about Nicole Richie's sentencing to the Paris Hilton page, maybe, since the crimes were similar and the two are friends. Even then, it's unlikely such an addition would be permitted to stay in the article. In this case, however, the two are clearly unrelated. In Paris Hilton's case, the issue was whether or not she deserved 23 days' imprisonment for her crimes; in her opinion, she didn't. In the opinion of the presiding judge, however, she did. Case closed. Very simple.

In Libby Scooter's case, the issue is whether or not the president acted inappropriately in commuting his sentence. Completely different issue. Totally unrelated.

Finally, for the last time, please sign your posts by typing four tildes (~) at the end of your last sentence, like this: ~~~~. Exploding Boy 18:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Block of 72.12.144.185

I shortened your block of this user because we normally don't block IP addresses indefinitely (except in the case of open proxies). IP addresses can change owners from time to time. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 21:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Exploding Boy 05:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Category move

You left this move request at WP:RM, but RM doesn't handle renaming categories. I'm moving the text of your request over here as a courtesy, since it was likely to be edited out entirely. Please take it up at CFD, as suggested... Dekimasuよ! 03:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Category:Tattoos → Category:Tattooing —(Category talk:Tattoos|Discuss]])— Not all the articles in the category concern actual tattoos. New name will conform to WP:NAME —Exploding Boy 19:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
  • This is a matter for Categories for discussion. Bencherlite^Talk 00:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

And thanks. Exploding Boy 05:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Pro/anti/pedophilia

Hey--you may have already figured this out, but the reason there's so much pro-pedophile activism material in the pedophile entry is that the whole pro-pedophile activism entry was merged into the pedophile entry. Then the redirect was reverted, so the whole pro-pedophile activism entry was returned to its original page, thus causing a complete reduplication of the material. -Jmh123 06:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Righto. Time to remove it then. Exploding Boy 06:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Good work--looks like you're beginning to get things in hand. -Jmh123 07:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Confused again? SqueakBox simply wants to merge pro- and anti-pedophile activism into pedophilia, as he did a few days ago out of process, followed by edit-warring and all manner of confusion. The material you removed from the pedophile article has been returned, and editing continues. The redirect he wants is a redirect from pro- and anti-pedophile activism into pedophilia. He wants to propose an AfD because the pro-pedophile entry was "unmerged" and now exists again in both Pro-pedophile activism and pedophile. -Jmh123 17:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I get it. The Pedophila article has now been protected. Exploding Boy 17:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. The duplicated material should probably be removed so that it isn't present in both articles. -Jmh123 18:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been. Exploding Boy 18:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Righto. -Jmh123 18:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit

to the Citations missing template. What's the deal? Exploding Boy 06:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a discontent with cleanup and citation requests without written reason (see Category:Unreasonable nagging templates). Templates not requiring a link to a written explanation on the talk page promotes an ugly template littering that is hard to deal with properly because there's no explanation on what's to be improved. F.ex. how in the universe is Alice in Wonderland going to be cited? My act is a deliberate provocation, so if it attracts observers, fine!! But on the other hand, I prefer discussing before confrontation, generally. Rursus 07:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I really have no idea what you're talking about. Would it not be simpler to just add a link to the template (if that is indeed what you mean) than to create a potentially offensive and almost certain to be rapidly deleted category? Exploding Boy 07:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, no. First of all: I got your attention. My experience on Wikipedia is that it's a hard time getting anyones attention att all. Now, if anyone adds a cleanup or citation request, someone is going to have to make the cleanups and the citations (or else the articles will look like detestable patchworks of template lists). That person (often me) has to figure out what's wrong, which is easy if the requests are accompanied with a written explanation, or if it is placed near the text that is bad, f.ex. placing the request in a section, or using a very specific cleanup templates, such as {{fact}} after the sentence that is considered dubious. Again: how in universe is anyone going to find more citations to Alice in Wonderland? Is the problem intelligible? Rursus 07:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, I have no idea what you're trying to do. I've just looked at the template again, and see no problems with it. You're either going to have to be a lot clearer or... Or, I don't know. I really have no idea what you want. Exploding Boy 07:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

With the risk of being rude (according to my culture): what I wish, is a modification of the template, so that it, like the {{cleanup}} template, requires a link to a certain section of the talk page where the problem of the article is described in detail. That is how more serious templates, such as merger requests are treated here on Wikipedia (if you didn't know that already?). If you really read Category:Unreasonable nagging templates, it would have been clear to you by now? Rursus 07:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Well again, would it not be simpler to add such a link to the template? Exploding Boy 07:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, it might have been an error of mine. (BTW it's OK to delete my "category", I'll going to do another less offensive, such as "templates requiring proper talk links") However, I have a hard time finding it used. It should then be obligatory, such as {{{1}}} without any defaults. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 07:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Category link removed from template. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 07:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Your edit has been reverted

Not sure if you have Walt Disney World Monorail System on your watch list, but your edit to remove the coloured text from the article [3] was reverted [4] as soon as HeadMouse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)`s latest block expired earlier today. --Kralizec! (talk) 20:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

afd

I have now stated my reasons for wanting to see PPA deleted based on notability policy and not on any dispute, please see the talk page. Were my afd to be rejected yours would unquestionably be the next best solution and this is what I wanted and was proposing until Xavier (I think) proposed the wider merging. I am not at all sure the pro pedophile activist movement has enough notability to warrant its own article but does have enough to warrant mention in pedophile (a greatly shortened section) but that some Pro-pedophile activist groups and individuals do have notability fior their own articles and in these 2 places we can include all that is needed about this very marginal political group. We dont have a cannabis activism article or an Earth activism article (but we do have the earth Liberation Front etc. We do have an animal rights activism article, the Animal liberation movement but animal rights are considerably more notable than pedophile activism is, SqueakBox 00:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

See my edits to that talk page. Exploding Boy 00:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Irangay teens.jpg

Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion#July_6. It is the second entry. I started removing the image too early by mistake. I will roll back everything. -Sorry Nv8200p talk 02:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Exploding Boy 02:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Don't really know the ropes yet. Wont happen again

DrewnWiki

Removal of Secure Card Dealer

How is the post for Secure Card Dealer blatant advertising when it did no more than explain what the company does? I noticed posts for other companies out there, why are those not advertisements?

Thank you

For catching my poorly executed captions. -- Banjeboi 14:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

You're right

Sorry about letting my emotions get away from me on the fare strike article.

But I have a concern. The other antagonist on that page has been using people's real, legal names when they don't do so themselves. Is there a wiki policy about that? And is there any way to have them removed?

Thanks,

Ed.

Username Barry Obama

• ほんと？たぶん日本にもんだいじゃない、でもアメリカでもんだいがある。That was his nickname in HS/College. Practicing my　日本語。JCutter (talk) 06:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Just my opinion of course, but when I see the username Barry Obama the reference to the US president is clear, but I don't see confusion about whether it might be him. Exploding Boy (talk) 14:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Wakarimashita. JCutter (talk) 22:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments from InaMaka

No. I'm not going to change anything that I have wrote and I am not going to apologize for anything that I have written. I have not violated any civility rules and you, that mean you, exploding boy, you need to stop removing whole pieces of information. Also, I have been in long, long, long discussions with many, many a Wikipedian that has attempted to use intimidation to get me to back down from a point of view and I have not back down and your constant comments on my talk page will not change that.--InaMaka (talk) 11:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I am not acting uncivil. I am just stating my opinion on how the articles should be edited and you simply do not agree with my opinion. I will not apologize and I will not back down. If place the nasty, fascist, narrow-minded, unnecessary, hate-filled comments of Hilton back into: (1) Carrie Prejean, Miss USA, or Perez Hilton then I will remove them as a violation of BLP. It is as simple as that.--InaMaka (talk) 23:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, let's go over this again. In sum, you want me to shut up because you don't agree with my opinion. Next, if the nasty, hate-filled comments of Hilton are repeated in Wikipedia then that will be a violation of the BLP and as such I will have no choice but to remove them.--InaMaka (talk) 23:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not have to do anything that you demand. I will not apologize for what I have stated. I have stated my point over and over again. Hilton's hate speech will not be repeated on Wikipedia without it being a violation of BLP. And I will do my job as an editor and remove it. Also, your comment that I have not been civil is not true. You are wrong. Your comment that I have engaged in personal attacks is also not true. You are wrong. I put a stop to the repetition of Hilton's fascist, hate-filled vindictive and now your making false, derogatory claims that I have been engaging in uncivil behavior. Please stop engaging in this false behavior. By the way, the proper grammar is "uncivil" not "incivil".--InaMaka (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I guess we have to review the facts again. Hilton's remarks are nasty, mean, narrow-minded, fascist, stupid, vulgar, inappropriate, moronic, childish, and most of all not encyclopedic and a personal attack and as such their is no reason to repeat his comments word for word on ANY Wikipedia article. If I see these comments I will do my duty as a Wikipedia editor and remove them and rewrite the section without the nasty, moronic comments. Also, I never, ever engaged in any uncivil behavior. You are simply making things up and you need to review WP:CIVIL--InaMaka (talk) 00:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You stop it. I never wanted to talk to you anyway. I will remove ALL of Hilton's nasty, fascist, moronic comments that are repeated in Wikipedia as a violation of BLP.--98.196.128.133 (talk) 00:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

User:CadenS and User:Exploding Boy dialog

I'm leaving the same comment on both your talk pages. Stop the drama. I'm not taking a position on content about Carrie Prejean, or on who's right and who's wrong at this point, but this overreacting behavior is unacceptable. If you both can't discuss content in a civil way, then just leave each other alone. Enough said. — Becksguy (talk) 01:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)