User talk:Lady Aleena/Archive 4

Archive 4 of Lady Aleena's talk page. Dates included are 1 January 2008 through 30 June 2008.

Re: Lady Aleena, a damsel in distress

I'd be more than happy to help you out. Japanese series can get pretty epic; I know of a couple that started in the 1940s and are still going on in one form or another. -Limetom 08:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello Lady Aleena, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 22:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome for rollback. :) I came across you while looking at Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. I saw your name there, had a look through some of your contributions, and decided you would benefit from having the rollback feature. Acalamari 23:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Removal of category from your userpage

Hi. In enacting consensus from User categories for discussion, I have removed the category Category:Wikipedians interested in books from your userpage. It was determined in that deletion debate that this category should be depopulated of individuals, but kept as a parent category. If you wish to display a category reflecting your interest in books, please consider one of the specific sub-categories under its umbrella. Thanks, and please excuse the necessary editing of your user page! ----Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Adding a personal note to this template: since you've expressed an interest in retaining redlinked categories, I have rather simply neutralized yours than removing it. While it has been depopulated and we ask that you not re-add yourself to the category, there's nothing wrong with your retaining a link to it if you'd like for historical purposes. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Reopened discussion on Category:Wikipedians interested in books

You were part of the discussion of the ucfd of Category:Wikipedians interested in books. I have reopened the discussion. If you wish to particpate in this second discussion, it can be found here. - LA @ 23:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice, I'll check it out. - jc37 09:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed mergers

Generally, it's best to propose mergers of only inactive or newer projects. But, for what it's worth, as the person who recently "developed" the recreated Holmes project page, I have no objections whatsoever to such a merger. I have added a few more to the list you started, for what it's worth. I do like the idea of trying to use the somewhat dormant fictional series project as a place to "host" the majority of the multimedia projects. Wikipedia:WikiProject Coronation Street, because of the magazine stories, Wikipedia:WikiProject Degrassi, with its graphic novels, Wikipedia:WikiProject Battlestar Galactica, comic books and novels, etc., and a few more. I've actually avoided working on that part of the new directory in part because of the number of potential "cross-over" listings. If you want to propose turning the less active ones into subprojects, including the new Sherlock Holmes project, though, you have my full support. John Carter (talk) 15:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I know the current directory is more than a bit outdated, as I'm in the process of updating it myself. I can try to add the various "newer" projects I know to your list though, and go through the others I know of to ensure that they all get listed. My guess would be that probably initially we might propose mergers with those projects which are described as being inactive. Then, depending on how complicated that makes the banner, we can propose mergers to the other active projects, with them giving a better chance of responding based on the apparent "success" of the earlier mergers. Let me run over my list of projects which I still haven't added to the new draft directory to see which also qualify and add them to your list, and in a couple days we can go on from there. The Alias, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, Blackadder, Dad's Army, Encantadia, Lemony Snicket, Narnia, Only Fools and Horses, Shannara, Sword of Truth, The Bill, The Fairly OddParents and Torchwood projects are all currently tagged as inactive, and we can certainly start there. We'll have to deal with the issues regarding assessment parameters probably on a project by project basis. John Carter (talk) 15:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably better {{mergeto|WikiProject Fictional Series}}. We would want to know the full exact scope of the Fictional Series project first. Would it include series in, as it were only one primary medium, like The Sword of Truth, as well as multimedia series? And if only the latter, how many other media items would be required? John Carter (talk) 15:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The extant template seems to take it as a given that the project "should" become a task force, which could very easily provoke knee-jerk reactions that it doesn't, which would be counterproductive. That's what happened when the Superman project was proposed to be merged with the Comics project, leading to them not in fact being merged. I would probably try to steer clear of using it on that basis. But I am going through —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Carter (talk • contribs) 15:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Finishing statement, which I can't believe I left dangling - the list of projects I have and adding a few to the talk page, starting with Mortal Kombat. With projects like that we might have problems because they're already sort of subprojects of Video games. And changing the phrasing probably wouldn't hurt. I figure the best thing we could do would still be to approach the inactive projects first, so that the active projects can have a better idea of how adjustment can be made for them as well, seeing what has happened to the others first. John Carter (talk) 16:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

task forces

good idea. You may want to start a number of typical series, to encourage others to follow. cheers Pundit|utter 01:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ribbon numbers

Unfortunately, I don't know of any way to do this so that the number won't leave a "footprint" of itself somewhere. I've kind of reduced the impact of this somewhat with my awards, where I have all the numbers set up in a different row so it just looks as though I intentionally left a margin between the ribbons and actual barnstars. You could likely do the same with yours - just make an invisible column to the right side, and nudge things around from there. Here's a short sample in case that's not overly clear:

Award	Giver	Date	This cell would be blank, but I'm leaving it filled for demonstration
	MiraLuka	10:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)	Ditto
	Uncke Herb	02:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope that's close to what you're looking for? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Project name

Given the apparent scope of the fictional series project, maybe changing the name to Multimedia fiction or something to that effect might be clearer. Also, it is becoming to me a bit clearer just how huge the scope of the project really is. If we were to include radio programs, for instance, The Shadow, Tarzan, Frances Crane's Abbott Mysteries novels, Ellery Queen, Father Brown, Nero Wolfe, Philip Marlowe, The Thin Man, Sam Spade, The Aldrich Family, Amos 'n' Andy, Ozzie and Harriet, and lord knows how many others (I just counted the A's in the United States) would be within the scope of the project as well. If comic strips were included, counting only the A's, add Spider-Man, Archie, and Asterix. While there is clear evidence that the subject would benefit from serious coordination, I wonder whether the scope of the project would be too staggering to be really doable. And, also, at least a few of those, specifically including Spider-Man, are clearly within the scope of other projects as well. John Carter (talk) 15:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually fairly good at project banners, and could probably copy the WikiProject Micronesia or some other banner if you wanted. They don't have the "upcoming" or whatever it's called parameter from the Film banner though. Regarding proposed subprojects, I'm not sure that the Proposals page would necessarily be able to be directly linked to. I am however one of the more regular "participants" on that page, and could probably add a link to the page or a statemetn about possibly making the proposed group a subproject as those sections are added. John Carter (talk) 16:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Globalize/US and Canada

Hello, I've posted a comment on the globalize template talk page. Hope it helps! Macy's123 (talk) 00:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the fictional series project

This would be my take on what would probably be the best way to determine what should and should not be within the scope of the project. If there is a separate, more narrowly focused project, which has a given series character or storyline clearly within its scope, then we would leave the totality of that series, including TV, radio, book, film, whatever, to that project. If, for whatever reason, there were a project which dealt only with a specific aspect of a given subject/character's media appearances, then we would deal with the subject as a whole, although allowing the other project to do as much work regarding the subject's appearances in that medium as possible.

Also, it would really help if we defined a bit more clearly exactly how many appearances in media, and what kind, were required for a given series to qualify within the scope of the project. I think we would all agree that single issue condensations of novels for Classics Illustrated wouldn't be enough to qualify a novel for the series project. My guess would be that a subject would qualify if there were original stories within a self-contained series, released at least three times in the "secondary" medium, for a qualification. For TV and radio series, my guess would be at least two years of original stories. However, if there already were a separate project covering those stories and the other, "main", stories, then we would functionally leave it all to that project for as long as it were active.

Would that be a reasonable place to at least begin discussion of the scope of the project to you? John Carter (talk) 01:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

If we want to persuade the M*A*S*H group and others to join the fictional series project, we need to have a banner to show them, preferably with a "task force" indicated. Do you have any particular preferences for how you want to see the project banner set up? Let me know, and I'll try to create it shortly thereafter. John Carter (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Understood completely. I hope you start feeling a bit better soon. I'll create a sample banner, probably tomorrow, as I think I'm still tied up for today. I'm also going to check to see which if any inactive projects fall within the scope, and maybe try to see if they can be merged in. That should help establish the project's "solidity". I hope whatever it is that's giving you trouble sleeping goes away soon. You've been an excellent contributor, and I hate hearing your feeling poorly. In addition to that, I think, from what little I know, you're probably what most people call a "good person", and that's important too. I hope and pray that you start feeling better again shortly. John Carter (talk) 23:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Templates

Thank you for pointing those out. They have now been deleted. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the Dishpan!) 16:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up

re: Rebooting WikiProject Fictional series

Hello...WikiProject Fictional series is in the process of getting a new start by attracting task forces. I am currently getting things set up for this and other project building areas. Please stop by and take a look. Your suggestions will be appreciated. - LA @ 01:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

• OK thanks. Long time no see! Belated Happy New Year! Mainly missing in RL just now, but I'll look in some time this week. // FrankB 21:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

• • OK, so was longer than a week, but I added some input on two discussion pages. Seeing the give and take between you and John Carter around the beginning of the month, have you thought of putting out the word on the VP? Cheers // FrankB 21:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I oppose you

I oppose you and your uniformity views. I will fight you tooth and nail. This is my declaration of war. GreenJoe 22:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I was asked to clarify. This is my clarification. I don't like how you're treating school user boxes. You're taking away their individuality. GreenJoe 22:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

New Project page is up and running

New Raymone e feist page is up and running. Check out WP:RAY Fattyjwoods ^{(Push my button)} 01:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Incoming email of thanks from the other side of the planet

Hi there,

You have requested that incoming emails should be highlighted in your talk pages so that you would not autodelete them. So here is the indication or advance notification of said email. Andmark (talk) 13:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Crossovers

Your article looks interesting but doesn't it get somewhat into "original research"? Type 40 (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Also you might want to look at Fictional crossover. Type 40 (talk) 21:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

irc

type in

/msg nickserv ghost Lady_Aleena PASSWORD

replace PASSWORD with your psswd

change your nick back, and log back in SynergeticMaggot (talk) 00:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Lady Aleena/Archive 4 and thank you for your contributions on articles related to the groundbreaking HBO series, The Wire. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject The Wire, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of The Wire and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out and participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! Creamy3 (talk) 22:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review of "Wikipedians by television programming" categories

Thank you for both notices. I suppose I'll comment there. - jc37 18:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Category:Wikipedians interested in television by genre

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Wikipedians interested in television by genre. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. - LA @ 18:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Category:Wikipedians interested in non-fiction television

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Wikipedians interested in non-fiction television. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. - LA @ 18:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

UCFDs of Wikipedians by media/genre interest

Jc37...I have requested in several of the UCFDs a suspension of all UCFDs on Wikipedians by media/genre interest until they can be reorganized. Since you seem interested in these categories, I would like to know your opinion, in any of the discussions with my request. Please take a look. Thank you. - LA @ 08:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

First, note that I removed your request from 2 noms which did not involve parent categories, and so had nothing to do with your wish to re-org.

Second, while I thought you did a nice job of sorting the categories, it needed pruning. For one thing, some recent UCFD discussions have made it clear that "extra" parent categories in a tree are less than helpful to navigation (See: this discussion, for example.)

Third, your reOrg made it convenient to group nominate a few categories of which others of those type have been deleted. (Talk television, for example).

Fourth, I see that part of this has to do with some templates your creating, but please remember that Wikipedian categories are not userboxes (or user templates). One may have a userpage notice, such as a userbox or other notice, and not need a category grouping. Perhaps these comments may help clarify.

Fifth, I'm not understanding why you didn't just drop me a note on my talk page. If you'll look over my userpage, you may note that I'm a big fan of organisation. (Much of the foundation you're basing your ReOrg on, is based on my previous work.) As User:Black Falcon noted at WT:UCFD, a talk page discussion at this point would likely be useful. What's your intent? What do you wish to do? Perhaps I can help? - jc37 18:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Apology and explination of a possible plan

Jc37...I am so very sorry that I didn't come to you first, and the only excuse that I can offer is that those deletions came on a really bad day. I am currently trying to convince a lot of people that this is notable and not cruft with no original research. I had spent several days writing and referencing it and hoping that by leaving messages on the various series talk pages I would find others who would be willing to help me make it an article worth putting into article space. Instead I have just gotten a lot of negativity with no significant additions to it by others.

There is good reason why I created those categories, and I will attempt to come up with a category tree at some point to illustrate all of the parent categories I feel are needed. I don't know where yet. While thinking about my reply to you, I came up with a really good reason to keep Wikipedians interested in non-fiction television. Have you looked at some of the non-fiction television articles that are on Wikipedia? I am not the best article writer, but I am good at starting them with basic information with the hope that others will come along and expand them. If you look at The History of Sex, a five part series narrated by Peter Coyote, there has been no significant additions to that article since I put it up. That is a non-fiction television article that really needs work. If we had a category of people who like those types of series, it would help.

Actually, I came upon the idea of reorganizing the television series with the thought of the creation of non-series television categories. There is (like) made for television films, (like) high definition television, (like) internet based television, (listen to) television soundtracks, (read) television tie-in novels, (work in the) television industry, (work in) television repair, and more permutations. Separating the series by genre was the way I came up with keep the television series together. There are also parent categories for genres.

The template that I am creating may have also lead me to this, but I am not about to create categories for every series that is or will be on it. I do feel that every series should get its own Wikipedian category since there is so much that goes into a series, even if it only lasted a few episodes. For each series there should be the main article; the cast, character, and crew list; and episode list minimum. For series which are part of a franchise, the amount of articles goes up. For each franchise there should be the main article; common cast, character, and crew list; series list; and all of the articles that should go with each series.

For series like the Jon Stewart show, to use something up for deletion, there would be the main article; cast and crew list; and an episode list with guests listed with each episode and maybe even a hot topics list. I don't know since I don't watch it. So that Wikipedian category is useful, especially since it is an ongoing series. A series like the Jay Leno show would probably be bigger, since there are more episodes and a lot more guests. To be international, there is also the Graham Norton show which could use a Wikipedian category.

Maybe once a television series has been fully covered by the basics I mentioned above, the Wikipedian category could be deleted, but that would only be for series which are no longer being aired. Also, since a lot of media is crossing these days, most television series are multimedia. Even Law & Order has video games, believe it or not. Ripley's not only has a comic strip, but four television series, books, and museums. The more media a series crosses, the bigger its footprint becomes, and any series could be revived to cross media lines. I shudder at the thought, but someone could come up with a chocolate conveyor belt video game based on the I Love Lucy episode. For every series that released a soundtrack, there should be a seperate article about it.

There is so much that television covers that to get every series covered, we first need to be able to identify who may be willing to work on the articles about the series. Those who like a series are more apt to do it, than someone merely interested in it. I am interested in the series Jericho, but since I haven't seen it, I am not interested enough to edit it. I am more interested in editing series which I like to improve those articles.

ACK! I didn't realize I had typed so much. I hope that gives you a glimpse of what I was trying to accomplish. Again, I am so very sorry that I didn't just come to you first. I hope that we can work together in the future to find people willing to edit articles about all forms of media. - LA @ 23:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok.

First, it's refreshing to see someone who can be almost as verbose as I can : )

I think you have a great plan, and a bit over a year ago I would have been gung-ho and joined in supporting all of it, (and I still support some of it) but now after having seen a few years of XfD discussions, two things come to mind:

1. While it's a nice idea to plan ahead for possible new articles, and we should leave room for future creation of such parent categories, it's not such a great idea to create those parent categories "now". Let the articles and such grow at their own pace, and trust me, the categories will follow suit (often at a speed faster than the articles).
2. Single article categories are typically summarily deleted. While, yes, I may presume that eventually every television article should have complete episode and character lists, among other things (cultural impact, etc.), that doesn't mean that they have them "now", or that they will ever have them. and I can tell you honestly, until they do, the current trend (repeated, consistant consensus) is to delete categories (not just Wikipedian categories) which concern only one or two articles. The feeling about Wikipedian categories is that one merely need go through the edit history of the article to find those who would be interested in continued collaboration on it.

So it's typically best to "UpMerge" to a higher tier in the "tree", until such other categories are needed. There is no deadline, so we can always flesh out the "tree", as needed, later. Besides, as I've often discovered, by then, Wikipedia may have grown in ways unforseen, and then a whole new organisational plan may be needed. So, for that reason too, it's usually better to "organise based on need", "as-we-go" (if you understand).

To give you an allegory from articles:

These days, it's usually best to merge characters to a single list. should any of the character's section in that list grow beyond "stub-size", then, per Wikipedia:Summary style and/or Wikipedia:Article series, that section gets "split" to it's own article, with the use of Template:main in its old location in the list, with a small summary. As a member of several fiction-based WikiProjects, I've seen quite a bit of this.

Same goes for Wikipedian categories. There's no need to subdivide parent categories until the parent grows to a size requiring the split.

I hope this helps clarify. And, btw, I do welcome more discussion on this. - jc37 17:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:IRC

you can kill your ghost with /msg nickserv ghost nickname password . Regards, nat.utoronto 18:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: My connection dropped

Hey. No problem. I did most of them. There are about 25 left; I'll leave those you. Shouldn't be too bad in comparison. ; - ) Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Categories

Just so you know You have several deleted categories that your userpage is in; for many, yours is the only entry. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering she intentionally keeps them there via bot exclusion, I'm reasonably certain she noticed. --erachima formerly tjstrf 02:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

What brought me here I was cleaning up categories from Wikipedia:User categories for discussion, and noticed that you were the only person in a certain category. I went to your userpage to see if I should delete it, but I saw that you had several categories, so I figured I would tell you rather than take you out of them. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Go for it If you want to be in redlinked categories, be my guest. My operating assumption was that you would be like the 99% of other users who would not want to be in them, but I noticed that you had several, so something must have been awry. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

What brought me here? Well, nothing in particular. I've just had your user and talk pages sitting on my watchlist for about a year and a half. And since I'm interested in categorization issues, when I saw the headline "categories" on my watchlist I clicked it out of curiosity. --erachima formerly tjstrf 13:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Novels project coordinator election

Given the degree of overlap between the media franchises project and the novels project, it might be a good idea to ensure decent relations between the two. The Novels project is keeping the period for nominations for their coordinators positions open a bit longer, apparently, to try to draw in a few more candidates. If you wanted to present yourself as one, that might help both projects. Just an idea, of course. John Carter (talk) 14:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Committee

I didn't realise there was one. Of course I'll join!~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If you are using Wikipedia with Internet Explorer, get Mozilla Firefox as soon as possible.

Amen.

I have a similar thing on my userpage. '''[[User:WBOSITG|<font color="darkblue">weburiedoursecrets</font>]][[User talk:WBOSITG|<font color="navy">inthegarden</font>]]''' (talk) 14:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Much thanks for your thanks!

It is boring but has to be done! - I've been away from the wikipedia community for a while so I thaught I'd help out in some aspect and theres nothing on TV on a tuesday.--Wiggs (talk) 21:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it hard when you kind of have to look over each one before grading them, it takes forever, but the list is getting smaller.--Wiggs (talk) 21:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Assessment (again)

Following our successful assessments, I have a couple of questions. Should we remove point 4 of the DW WikiProject task list (develop assessment criteria?)? And should we start actively looking for disambig and redirect pages that need to be added (I know I have, but then again that's just me)? And should we designate someone in this committee to assess the new episode articles in their various stages of completion? Once again, wonderful work. I hope you enjoy your barnstar. Cheers, Weebiloobil (talk) 07:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That heading

The heading that I replaced it with conveyed EVEN MORE information, and didn’t sound official. You know what I mean, it doesn’t sound like you’re a democratically appointed group with an official role... I don’t really approve of you being called a committee, even! The idea of titles isn’t to ensure that the content is read, it is to give a summary of the content to ensure that people who are interested will read it; my title did that better.

While I appreciate your hard work in assessing them, the basics of formatting styles on Wikipedia remain the same! —TreasuryTag—t—c 08:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Doctor Who talk page deletions of Needed articles

The "Needed-Class" should be put to death, and if I had a bit more time / patience, I would kill it myself. Talk pages shouldn't exist if the article doesn't (G8). If those pages are "needed" by a WikiProject, I'd suggest using a subpage to list them. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 13:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou!

Its a great priviledge to be awarded my very first barnstar! I'm sure I'll award you in the future for your hard work, thanks a lot it means so much!--Wiggs (talk) 23:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

User categories

Do you use IRC?

I hope you do, because I think that we need to talk about these categories that are being deleted. Something has to be done to save what's left. - LA @ 04:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't, actually.

"Save what's left"? I don't see the Category:Wikipedians structure going anywhere any time soon.

Though more directly, I'm concerned about this edit:

• You apparently didn't understand the result of the discussion (it wasn't deleteion), and further depopulated the new category agreed upon by consensus.
• "fight"? If anything, if you continue to use your tools contrary to consensus, someone may ask to have your usage of them revoked. (Not a threat by me, but an observation of what I've seen in the past.)

If I may offer an opinion, I think that you're so wrapped up in the categories, you aren't seeing "the forest for the trees". Pruning the bushes is not equal to cutting down the forest. There is just too much prior consensus to bypass for anyone to even consider it.

As I said before, I'd like to work with you. But you're placing me in the position of having to revert your edits due to the XfD discussion.

I welcome your further thoughts. - jc37 16:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I have to say, that that post really concerns me. As such, I've gone ahead and nominated the category for discussion at WP:UCFD, for broader community discussion. - jc37 17:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Genre and media user categories proposal

Thank you for stopping by and letting me know what is going on. I am currently writing a proposal for user categories by genre and media which I will probably have to give its own page. (It will probably be longish.) Do you have any suggestions where I should start this proposal? I was thinking about putting it at Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Genre and media categories. Do you think that would be okay, or should I start it elsewhere? - LA @ 19:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like as good a place as any : ) - jc37 19:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Genre and media user categories proposal progress report

This is just an FYI that it is still in progress. It is Saturday, so I am going between my computer and the washer or dryer, since it is my laundry day which includes other housework. I just don't want you to think that I am writing a book on the subject. I am thinking of other things that need to be added, so please be patient. If you would be so kind, would you please put all genre and media user category discussions on hold. :) - LA @ 00:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Genre and media categories is open for discussion. Please stop by and take a look. - LA @ 08:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. As I'm currently a bit pressed for time, I've left only a short comment on the proposal's talk page; I will try to look at and comment on the specifics in a few hours. Thanks again, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Working on commenting there. - jc37 17:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation

User:LA is all yours. You'd better go create it before somebody else does. Regards — Dan | talk 17:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd set it up soon myself. Names like that don't last long. John Carter (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed your request on Dan's talk page, and created it for you since an administrator had to do it. I've e-mailed you the password — change it to yours when you login. seresin ( ¡? ) 22:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

List

Words like "enourmous" actually come to mind. The only stipulation that I think might be useful would be to try to make sure that any to be included all have original material in at least a few media. If, for instance, a stage musical were filmed intact and later had its soundtrack recorded, and that's all, it might be better suited to either the Theatre or Musicals project, as all the other media are clearly derived from the original. It'd also help keep the scope a bit more managable. Novelizations of movies and the like probably wouldn't necessarily be enough either, for pretty much the same reasons. But otherwise, it does look like you've got a fairly good idea of where the project is going. John Carter (talk) 23:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I have been adding the banner to the various subjects which I've noticed qualify, like Tarzan, Sexton Blake, Nero WOlfe, the Lone Ranger, and the like. In a lot of cases, though, I don't know that much about how many films, books, and whatnot they have, although once I get them all tagged I can go through the various sources and find out. John Carter (talk) 23:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day

	HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!	from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE
	Wishing Lady Aleena/Archive 4 a very Happy First Edit Day! Have a fantastic day! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

--SMS ^Talk 18:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Film Coordinator?

Thought you might like to know that your name has been mentioned as a possible "draft" candidate for the post of one of the coordinators of the Film project by Girolamo himself at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Coordinators#New coordinators, welcome!. So far, the other individuals they've formally asked to take on the post have seemingly declined. If you would be interested in taking on the role, you might be interested in leaving Girolamo a message to that effect. John Carter (talk) 01:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Needed Class

Hi, LA. Since you were the person who raised the Needed Class issue at WP:1.0, you should probably comment over at this CfD discussion. I specifically raised the Doctor Who articles and your post to the Comics project. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 06:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you help?

Hello Lady Aleena. Thank you for your comments [1] about my suggestion to overhaul the members list for the Doctor Who wikiproject. You mentioned setting up a page to list the inactive members. I was wondering if you might create that page for me. I have an idea of what you are talking about but I would hate to get it wrong and then have to have the page moved or altered. If you can do please leave me a note on my talk page with a link to the new page. Now there is no hurry on this and I want to say that any help that you can give will be much appreciated and thank you for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 12:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, very much, for the help. I will get to work on it though it may take me a few days to finish depending on how busy life is off wiki. Thanks again. MarnetteD | Talk 21:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I am not quite sure what you mean. I am putting in a comment in case any questions come up regarding the move. Do you want me to not put in a comment at all or do you want me to put it in as a hidden message? Could we leave them in until I am done as they might help any editor who has a question about what I am doing and, as the days go on, I might forget the specifics of a given move? Also is there anything with the edit summaries that you would like me to change. I apologize if I am breaking wikiquette in some manner and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 23:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Many many thanks. It sure is nice having someone keeping an eye on things as I get going on this. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 23:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Been Away, Now I'm Back

Good day, Milady. Thank you for your message re. Oxford boxes. You have my total support; I shall be using the appropriate box myself. Let me know if I may be of assistance

The Stealth Ranger (talk) 13:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

13:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Editing userpages

A little of Column A... I generally use WP:AWB and then go back and see if something was missed by hand or using a script. When a category is empty, I move on from there. Please let me know if you have more questions. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Skipping Aleena, I am happy for you to have redlinks on your userpage, but the categories are not going to be redlinks in the first place if they are not deleted and they will not be deleted unless they are unpopulated. I think you can see the paradox here. If you choose to add a category after it has been deleted, that is entirely up to you, but I would recommend for your own sake as well as any others that you wait c. 48 hours after a category has been deleted. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

Keegan^talk 17:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA

Being one of the most frequent TfD closers on en.wiki, I have already supported your candidacy, but would you allow me to write a co-nomination? RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the Dishpan!) 00:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Support & Questions

39. Support per Boniface College, her score of 7813 on the Wikipediholic test and her "Edit philosophy" of Merging. Master Redyva ♠ 21:56, April 23, 2008 (UTC)

Optional Quesions from Master Redyva

10: Have you cried under water?

11: Do you think a hearse carrying a corpse should be able to drive in the car-pool lane?

12: Can Batman and Bruce Wayne actually co-exist?

• Master Redyva ♠ 23:02, April 23, 2008 (UTC)

:O

Gurch (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome Template

Thanks for having a go, but it just doesn't work for me. I've no idea why. What am I doing wrong/not doing that I don't know about? WilliamH (talk) 15:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I am now. Thanks for boldly stepping forward to help a fellow Wikipedian, it's much appreciated. WilliamH (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

empty categories on your user page

Sorry about my re-removals on your user page recently. Won't happen again.--Rockfang (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

get well soon

Hello, Lady Aleena, I saw your note on your RfA where you mentioned being ill. I know that the stress of undergoing an RfA can't be helping, and yes, I had my part in adding to that by opposing, but I hope you feel better soon. --Kyoko 21:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA was not successful

Hi Lady Aleena. I have closed your RFA. I am afraid there was no consensus to promote you. Please address the concerns that were raised, and feel free to reapply in the future. Good luck. --Deskana (talk) 22:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry.

I really had my fingers crossed for you. Better luck next time. Master Redyva (talk) 22:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Tis a real shame. You're obviously here for the betterment of the encyclopedia, and could've used the tools. If its any consolation, I have the tools, and most days wish I didn't, as they seem to get me nothing but grief and stress. Life is easier as an editor. That said, I wish you luck, I hope you stick around and continue to help build this zany place. If you ever need anything, let me know on my talkpage? Cheers (and I strongly recommend a beer right now...:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Ditto. There is always a next time though. :)—Preceding unsigned comment added by SynergeticMaggot (talk • contribs)

Same here. I think you'd make a great admin. I'll keep an eye out for your next WP:RfA. Be well, :) X Marx The Spot (talk) 04:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Your thankspam was among the nicest most meaningful thankspam's I've ever received---even though I opposed your first nomination! I am confident when you re-run in a few months that I will be able to support you at that time. My biggest piece of advice would be to take your time in answering the questions. Treat them as you would questions at an interview. Give complete well thought out answers and I'm certian that you will pass. Good luck.Balloonman (talk) 05:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

(ec)*I just wanted to say that I'm sorry your RFA wasn't successful. I really did want to support you, there were just a couple of issues I saw. Anyway, I hope you have another RFA at some point, so I can hopefully support you. Sorry again, Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for the note you left on my talk page, regarding my comment on your RfA. May I say that I'm temendously impressed by your display of graciousness. My very best to you. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 07:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. Best of luck in the future, and best wishes for now, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thirded. Good luck, Spencer^T♦C 10:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Fourthed. I'm hopeful of a success for you in the future, and if I can offer any help will be only to pleased to. Pedro :  Chat  13:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, your civilty was something that was never, ever in doubt. And the wonderful thank you note was a prime example of that. You are trully a great Wikipedian, and I am confident of a succseful future RFA. Pedro :  Chat  14:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Aye, I'm sorry that it didn't succeed. Better look next time, it'll be a support then. Rudget (Help?) 15:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Erm, fifthed?  ;) Shame really, I stand by my support, however. Thanks for the thanks. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 15:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hah, what cute RfA thankspam. See you again in a few months ;) -- Naerii 17:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Good luck next time, you got my support any day. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 23:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:RfA

You're very welcome, and I am sorry to hear that you didn't succeed. However, looking on the bright side, many bits of advice have been left by everybody who voted, especially those who opposed, and once you have addressed these points, you should be ready for another go. Happy editing! Lradrama 12:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello there. :) The RfA process was rather tough and unfortunate, but i think you handled it well (and I especially love your positive attitude). Thanks for the sweet message. You are an excellent and very nice editor, please keep up the good work and next time will be lucky. :) Don't forget that you can always count on my support should you like to give it a go a second time. In the meanwhile, take your time and have fun! I do hope our paths in the Wikipedia world cross again soon. Take care, --PeaceNT (talk) 14:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your RfA

Hi Lady Aleena, I too am disappointed that your RfA didn't pass: I think you'd have made a great admin. Anyway, there's nothing to stop you from running again in a few months time; just listen to and take the advice of your opposition, and remember that some of our best admins didn't pass their first RfAs either. Best wishes. Acalamari 16:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Time is dynamic. Yes, there is nothing to stop you next time. I admire and appreciate your spirit and involvement. Regards. --Bhadani (talk) 17:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the card. I'm glad that you are taking this setback graciously, and I hope to be able to support you in a future RfA. I also hope you are feeling better. --Kyoko 19:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not very proud of my oppose to your RfA. While I do think the gist of my post was a solid oppose reason (among a few others), my dismissive attitude was out of character for me and I've sort of regretted it since. I apologize for not making constructive, thoughtful comments along with my oppose, as I typically do. If you decide to become an RfA candidate again, I will look with a critical but fresh eye, and will tell you why I am !voting either way. Tan | 39 23:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Not that I am the first person to leave a message about this on here, but I think that you should run again in a short time...you have the qualifications to be an admin for sure. Leave me a message when you run next, because I'll vote for you then too...the only reason why I saw your RfA this time was by luck. =D Good luck! the_ed17 15:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, just remember to have fun. I'll be off in Menominee playing tennis today, and more tennis in the days to come, and the senior class trip is on Thursday & Friday, and then summer will eventually come, but if I see a second RfA on my watchlist, I'll vote...though I guess that being an admin isn't everything! Have a great day! the_ed17 14:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Wold Newton

I'd prefer to keep mine in my userspace, thanks. Phil Sandifer (talk) 13:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 04:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting

I can recall a time in elementary school in which we all brought valentines for valentine's day, to disburse to the other students. Typically a student would have one for every other student, though, indeed, this was optional, and at the discretion of each student. That said, we all were aware of what it meant when someone gave valentines to all but one person. It wasn't that they wished for the valentine, but rather what they learned about the intention and feelings of the "giving" person.

I will not choose to analyse actions beyond that, except to think that perhaps my own internal introspections (noted elsewhere) were apparently a waste of effort on my part.

In any case, I note that apparently you are or have been "under the weather". I wish you well. - jc37 00:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Jc37...I am so ashamed that I missed you when saying thank you to all of the others after my request for adminship closed. I was trying so hard to not miss anyone, that I did. Of all the people to miss, how could I have missed you? I think that I will have to rate this my worst gaff in my Wikipedia history. You took so much time participating in my RfA that you should have been at the top of the list. I know that it is a little to late, but thank you for participating. I know that we do not usually see eye to eye on almost everything, but there has been nothing but good between us communicatively, until now. Could you please think of this as the valentine card that slipped out of the pile for which I have been fervently looking and have now found at the bottom of my book bag? - LA @ 06:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Certainly, and thank you for your thoughts and comments.

One thing I'd like to clarify (at least from my perspective):

"I know that we do not usually see eye to eye on almost everything..."

We probably agree on more than you may think. It's probably just that very recently we've interacted mostly in one small topic area (User categories).

Anyway, again, thank you for your thoughts. I hope you're having a good day : ) - jc37 15:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Getting to Know Me as StayTuned

Getting to Know Me:

I'm 35 years old - have a girlfriend that I hope to make my wife. She lives 600 miles away in NYC. We talk on the phone a lot, and I met her In Real Life in Manhattan in 2007. I plan to visit her in 2008. I am in a band called Digital Noise Control which is due to have music in iTunes in June (6/7/08). Our music appears in Jamendo.com under the same working title. The album is called Sky Wheel and you may download it for free if you like. It is only 30 Meg.

I have 2 published books with a 3rd on the way in June. The books can be found at http://www.americanmohawk.com and http://www.dancingoverthefury.com. They are poetry books.

Essentially I have a lot of time on my hands - and I maintain the following websites... http://www.noisecontrolpublishing.com http://www.noisecontrolmedia.com http://www.digitalnoisecontrol.com http://www.noisecontrolresearch.com http://www.noisecontrolradio.com

Stay cool.

ChrisBradley —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.125.227.195 (talk) 09:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for the comment, per the_ed17, I reckon you will make a sound administrator and once you form a more articulate response on the areas that commentators said were lacking, I see no reason not to support in future. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

All the Best! --Bhadani (talk) 13:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Typo Alert!

There is a typo in the notice you posted to Keeper76's page. You have it as the Wikpedia namespace, not the WikIpedia namespace. That means their watching an article that will never be created. I fixed his, but you might wanna fix anyone else's you've notified. MBisanz ^talk 09:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA talk discussion

I posted this new discussion here, regarding the messages you have been posting on user's talk pages. For the record, I still consider it canvassing regardless of the time it is being done, as clearly outlined in WP:CANVASS. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 14:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

your message (canvassing, and other stuff)

Hi Lady Aleena, thank you for your message. I know you meant well by it, but you should be aware that it may be a violation of Wikipedia's guidelines on canvassing, and your messages are currently the subject of a discussion here.

Because of these messages, some users may choose to oppose you on a future RfA, while others may not. The guideline is somewhat open to personal interpretation, as suggested by this line on the WP:CANVASS page (under "Votestacking"):

Some Wikipedians have suggested that informing editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who participated in a previous deletion debate on a given subject) may be acceptable.

Some people may view your messages in this light, while others might not. While I'm personally inclined to let this instance slide, you should probably avoid similar messages in the future.

I said I would talk about other stuff, and so:

1. You mention on your userpage that you delete unexpected incoming e-mail. I trust you know that admins need to reachable by e-mail because editors may want to discuss certain issues (blocks, etc.) privately._{That's funny, I just looked around various pages, and I couldn't find anything saying that administrators had to be available by e-mail. --Kyoko 17:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)}

2. On your RfA, you said that it would be difficult for you to create new content for Wikipedia for various reasons. Some RfA participants, including myself, prefer to see at least some content creation by RfA candidates. I noticed that you are a member of the Books WikiProject, and I'd encourage you to write more about books that you have read.

3. I strongly suggest removing personal info from your userpage, especially if you do choose to run for admin in the future. For more information on how to permanently hide this, please see WP:OVERSIGHT and WP:RFO.

I hope this impromptu message has been helpful, and feel free to write me if you have further questions or comments. --Kyoko 16:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, sorry to say but that message did seem like canvassing. It could spark some opposes if you ever do run for adminship, although I know you meant no harm. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 20:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lady Aleena, I think you handled this well, and that will likely work in your favour should you decide to run for admin in the future. --Kyoko 19:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Your next RfA

Hi Lady Aleena, I've added your next RfA to my watchlist. I saw your post on WT:RFA, and I wanted to congratulate you on your behavior there: you're the sort of person we need as an admin. Best wishes. Acalamari 19:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia meetup

As someone who may live or work near Washington D.C., you may be interested - if you've not heard already - about the meetup scheduled for Saturday, May 17th, at Union Station. For details, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 4.

You are receiving this automated message because your userpage appears in Category:Wikipedians in Maryland. Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 18:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The COOKIE MONSTER ate the cow

Fattyjwoods ^{Push my button} has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi, just to make sure you’re not too hungry, I gave you a cookie! I would’ve given you milk – but the cow just died and I tried to milk the bull but it kicked me in the face. *sob*. Poor daisy :( Anyway, enjoy the cookie!! Fattyjwoods ^{Push my button} 04:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Scepia/Grand Theft Auto

User:Scepia/Grand Theft Auto, a page you Editted, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Scepia/Grand Theft Auto and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Scepia/Grand Theft Auto during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ultra! 22:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

New Message

You have a new message at Talk:Three's Company#Looking for help writing an article about the spin-offs and crossovers of this series. Redfarmer (talk) 12:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

"Blanking" page

Non articles do not belong in the category system, as the category system is for articles for readers to read, and your userpage is not for public consumption. It is therefore inappropriate to label it as an article of any kind, even one of no importance because it will still be listed as one in the category. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Wow

Congrats on your Crossover page, which is very extensive. It unbelievable. Nice--AKIRA70 (talk) 00:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

-Also-

I would like to Invite you to talk on my talk page under a new topic of mine titled "Can Wikipedia Change, Should it Change?" Also feel free to invite anyone else you think can contribute to this topic. Go all over Wiki is necessary. I'll try to do the same to. I thank you for reading this even if you don't respond to it. And if you do . . . Yaaaaaaay.:~)-BTJM--AKIRA70 (talk) 08:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

If you thought last week was mindblowing...

I'm not going to spoil it... Sceptre ^(talk) 19:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)