User talk:Faithlessthewonderboy/Archive 17

Boats!

Boats!, an article which you declined a speedy, has been listed for deletion. If you would like to participate in this deletion discussion, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boats!. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Useight

No, there was no point, I just wanted to make a pun based off of your signature. hbdragon88 (talk) 08:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Gotcha. I thought so, but the wording made it seem like maybe there was something else. Since there isn't, I think maybe you either misread what I wrote or mistyped what you wanted to say (i.e. starting off with "No,..." doesn't make much sense as a response to my post). Then again maybe it's 3.00 a.m. and I'm over-analyzing things. That's probably it. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 08:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Re-reading it, it does seem awkwardly worded. it was more of the spur of the moment thing. I did really laugh out loud when you wrote, "Um...okay." though. hbdragon88 (talk) 08:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I aim to please. :-) faithless (^speak) 08:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar'd!

Thanks! – Alex43223 ^{T | C | E} 09:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Fb team Flora Paide

Why has this template been deleted? This was not a test page; the template belongs to Meistriliiga 2009 and will be used for the league table and results box in a style similar to Premier League 2008-09. Can you please restore it? Thank you, Hockey-holic (talk) 11:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. faithless (^speak) 11:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Clare of Montefalco

I was wondering what led you to this revert. I think that the anon edit was both in good faith and basically right. Anyway, you might like to contribute to the discussion on Talk:Clare of Montefalco. Cheers! Ian Spackman (talk) 15:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

The edit may have been in good faith, and it may even have some merit to it. The reason I reverted it was simply that it was a contested removal of sourced material, which is never a good thing. The material certainly needs to be rewritten, but outright deletion is not what's called for, IMHO. The IP cited NPOV to defend his/her deletion, but that's not a valid reason to remove sourced content - it's a reason to rewrite it. I'll weigh in on the talk page as you suggest. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 19:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I think the dispute is going to be resolved rather easily and rather amicably, incidentally. There turned out to be an absolutely desperate problem with the references, though: namely that the Catholic Encyclopedia article sourced by them makes no reference at all to Clare’s relics! Personally I would like to see a version of the section restored, with proper sourcing and with an appropriate tone. I think that will happen. Best wishes, Ian Spackman (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Stowmarket high school

why was the example of students at this school removed it is an informative and important part of the article please revert it. it was not a test —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.16.144 (talk) 21:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Please visit Wikipedia's welcome page. It should help familiarize you with our encyclopedia. This isn't the place to write stories about your friends. faithless (^speak) 21:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Mariska Hargitay

I'm unclear why my post is deleted. I have a legitimate discussion topic related to the person whom the article is about. Please explain. I am not posting to the article. I am posting to the discussion page which I thought would be appropriate.66.26.86.231 (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe you're being serious. Your post seems awfully troll-ish, and violates our biographies of living persons policy. faithless (^speak) 22:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply. I am serious. Is this topic still taboo? See List of transgender people. Do all of these articles violate the biographies of living persons policy? Respectfully, Aaron 66.26.86.231 (talk) 22:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

No topic is taboo - however, Hargitay has been famous her entire life (due to her mother) and is a mother herself. It's difficult to believe that anyone could think that she is not a woman. faithless (^speak) 22:50, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Could i get that reinstated

Hey, faithless, you just deleted my page, which was intended to be a joke for tomorrow, and then removed shortly afterward. If you could put that back up, because it was funny, and for the christmas party at my shop, that would be great. It was NOT intended to be left up, and was going to be deleted friday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhais (talk • contribs) 10:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but that isn't what Wikipedia is for. We're trying to create a serious encyclopedia, and things like that hurt Wikipedia's credibility. Hope you understand. faithless (^speak) 10:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

well, you know, thats kinda messed up. It was going to be deleted day after tomorrow, and its all in good fun. I understand that this is intended to be a serious encyclopedia, but lets face it, without a bit of humor it just falls short. I'm not trying to say that our endeavor is pointless, merely that I would just like to be able to have my fun. It'll come off, and it doesnt hurt anything....nobody else is even going to look it besides the people at my office. Not a major deal right?Rhais (talk) 10:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well, if not putting the page back up, could you email me a copy of the final page before you deleted it. Its part of a gag-christmas gift, and it would be nice to have. Just an image file that i could print out or something?Rhais (talk) 10:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I sympathize with you, there's just really no argument to have here. I've moved the information to User:Rhais. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 10:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I really appreciate this. Rhais (talk) 11:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck with your gag. faithless (^speak) 11:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Night Fred, Night Sam

Hey, buddy. Just wanted to say it was a pleasure doing page patrol with you today (tonight). I'd give you a barnstar, but I'm too tired to dig one up. How about a smile instead. ;o) --OliverTwisted 14:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

A pleasure indeed. And hey, it's the thought that counts! :-) faithless (^speak) 21:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

re: bevlyn Khoo

Hi,

My company managed the artist above...We have the rights for.Please advise on how to write the details up on the wikipedia.

Thank you.

Regards, Dean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.7.207 (talk) 08:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I just noticed this message. Well, looking at what was there, the article would need to be completely rewritten to be up to Wikipedia's quality standards anyway, copyright violation or no. But before you put in the work, you might want to ask yourself if the subject passes our notability guideline. Feel free to contact me with any more questions you have. faithless (^speak) 10:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

AdminWatch

I believe that the process has to be confined solely to whether there has or has not been a breach of WP:ADMIN (reasonably easy), perhaps how significant the breach is (harder), and recommendations for how to remedy the situation (might be easy, might be hard). In most cases where there has been a breach, what is best for the project and for editors will be simply an acknowledgement by the admin of that breach (occasionally an apology). If this presents a psychological problem for an admin, perhaps they shouldn't be an admin. After all, they're bound to set an example to all editors, and should gain strength and our trust by the occasional admission.

There may well be disagreements by admins that they have actually breached the policy. Some of these cases will provide a basis for recommending a tightening of the wording/detail in the policy, to minimise trouble in the future.

If these are the "teeth" of AdminWatch, they seem to be positive and not punitive in quality and outcome.

There may well be disagreements by admins that they have actually breached the policy. Some of these cases will provide a basis for recommending a tightening of the wording/detail in the policy, to minimise trouble in the future.

If these are the "teeth" of AdminWatch, they seem to be positive and not punitive in quality and outcome. Tony (talk) 09:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Favour to ask

Can I ask a favour? I don't know quite what has happened since I went to bed, but I tagged Corey Boudreaux with {{db-move}} so that Corey Bordreaux – and its page history – could be moved to a new (correctly spelt) name. The original author had attempted a copy-and-paste page move (see here), which isn't how it's done. Instead, I find that the original article, Corey Bordreaux, has been deleted by author request.

Could you please undelete Corey Bordreaux, delete Corey Boudreaux, then move the latter to the former? I've already asked the deleting admin, but it appears they're offline. Thanks. -- Skarl

Done. :-) faithless (^speak) 08:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, you are a champion. -- Skarl 09:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. faithless (^speak) 09:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

hey wonder?

i was writing a page on a very important/influential band in the PDX area of Oregon and Washington. I was also introducing a new word and philosophy into the English dictionary....Whats the deal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codycook21 (talk • contribs) 09:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and thus has criteria for inclusion; this is to prevent every Tom, Dick and Harry from creating articles for their garage bands. Please see WP:BAND for the specifics. faithless (^speak) 09:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

ok i understand, but this is no tome, dick and harry garage band. I will check the criteria and change what most be done.thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codycook21 (talk • contribs) 09:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

What's the Big idea?

What's the big ida with 70.108.247.46, I don't understand him. 68.34.4.143 (talk) 02:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Some people have nothing better to do with their time. Kind of sad, really. faithless (^speak) 03:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hi, and thanks for all the help and support over the last year. Have a happy and safe holiday season. Best regards for the new year. --OliverTwisted ^(Talk) (Stuff) 10:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Right back at you, and keep up the good work with the CSD tagging. :-) faithless (^speak) 10:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of my subpage

May I know what did that IP vandal do with my subpage before you deleted it. User talk:Felipe Aira/Test. A restoration would be good. Thanks. PS This user has something against me (and the rest of the Filipino-Wikipedia community, I would at least like to know. — Felipe Aira 13:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I've restored the page, minus the CSD tag. Let me know if you want it deleted. faithless (^speak) 02:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Freddie Mercury bio

That was quick! Thanks for the assistance. :-)

Dreamer.se (talk) 06:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy to help. :-) faithless (^speak) 06:23, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

CSD of the Week award

Faithlessthewonderboy has been identified as an Excellent CSD'er, and therefore, I've officially declare you as Balloonman's CSD'er of the Week! As those who know me can attest, I hate speedy deleters. A careless or hasty CSD'er can do more damage to the project than the worst vandal! BUT I recognize the absolute need for CSD and value those people who take the task seriously and do the job right As for what I look for when awarding this, please see for my criteria Thanks for being a beacon of light at CSD, we need more people like you! Balloonman PoppaBalloon A record of your week will always be kept here and a short review of your deletion work here.

Thank you, Balloonman! It's always nice to know that one's work here is appreciated. :-) faithless (^speak) 08:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem... CSD is a necessary evil, one that has a bad reputation... but that reputation stems from a handful of poor CSD'ers in both the admin/non-admin ranks. I've decided that rather than confront the CSD'ers who blow it, that I'm going to start focusing on those who do a good job and appear to take the responsibility seriously. I feel comfortable in the fact that you do take it seriously.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 08:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, and I agree whole-heartedly. Every time I do CSD I cringe at the massive amounts of improperly tagged and (much worse) improperly deleted pages I come across. It's one thing for someone to mis-tag a page, but I am flabbergasted by what some administrators consider "nonsense." I imagine they're just using it as a "catch-all" and, to be fair, there are plenty of flat-out inappropriate introduced that don't fall under any CSD rationale. But that's hardly a reason to ignore the proper processes. It's a slippery slope that these admins are on. faithless (^speak) 09:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

When I review CSD'ers at RfA, I look at A1 and G1 the closest because those are the two places where I see the most mistakes or sloppiness. You might be interested in taking the survey I just posted at the CSD talk page.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 09:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Hermione Granger

Earlier today I edited the article on Hermione Granger to say that she defeated the Devil's Snare plant with sunlight as opposed to fire, however you changed it back. I just watched the movie today and it was sunlight not fire that she fought it with. Was this a mistake? is it diffent in another release of the movie or in the books? 71.94.188.53 (talk) 04:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I did not change it back; User:Hermione1980 did. The reason (as Hermione1980 explained in the edit summary), is that, as you guessed, the scene was changed for the film. In situations where the book and film contradict each other, we go with the original material. The films are, after all, merely interpretations of the original work. faithless (^speak) 05:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks! 71.94.188.53 (talk) 06:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. faithless (^speak) 06:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Lincecum edit

Yesterday, 12/29/08, I made an edit to the Tim Lincecum article, changing it to him winning the Cy Young in just his second season and then saw that you had undone a similar edit by someone else. I think that accomplishing such a feat so early in a career is worthy of special attention, but if you disagree I'd be happy to discuss it with you to see if we can come to an agreement on how the article should look. Your partner in editing, Eaglebreath (talk) 18:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I certainly appreciate what you're saying, and I don't disagree with you per se. It's just that "just" in that context strikes me as quite weasel-y. Though I suppose if a source can be found discussing the unusual achievement, that would quell my objection - I imagine it'd be easy to find, I'm sure Sports Illustrated or ESPN Magazine (probably both) did a piece on it. In that case, I think a little more context is needed; just a "just" would still be weasel-y, IMHO. Something like, "Lincecum won the Cy Young in just his second season, becoming the youngest player since such-and-such in whichever year." (I'm just talking off the cuff here, but I'm sure you get what I'm saying.) Cheers, faithless (^speak) 19:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Image Replacement

This commet is from File talk:HesABullyCharlieBrown.jpg.

This Image needs to be replaced with a screenshot of the title, is there anybody who is able to accept my request? 68.34.4.143 (talk) 19:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)