User talk:Pascal.Tesson/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

StealBoy?

Not sure if this is the aforementioned StealBoy but I just marked an article created by CoolMattew8888 (talk · contribs), Films (film) as a hoax - and prodded it - as it is about a film scheduled for release later this year from Columbia Pictures which seems not to be generating Google hits, which is a tad unlikely. I have reverted the links on a couple of articles to this one, which were added by an IP at the same time. (Note to self: I really must bone up on the various film hoaxers as I seem to run into them on New pages at least once a week ;O). Anyhoo, you can take a look at my edits from around 01:30 UTC ... Cheers FlowerpotmaN·(t) 01:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Just a PS while you are around :They do seem to pop up around the weekend. You might want to take a look at the history of Disney's Magical Mirror Starring Mickey Mouse and I think you might spot the common thread. I don't think it's StealBoy, and as I said I reeeaallly have to bone up on who's who in the hoax department, but is there someone who has a habit of adding (virtually) incomprehensible edits to Disney articles? FlowerpotmaN·(t) 03:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• • (reply) Yup, now that I think of it, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Which Way and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Music Tunes were probably StealBoy. Actually, I think the reason I ended up in Disney-related articles was that I was following a one similar article and tripped over a couple of other obvious hoaxes. And I also have to admit that I am more Loony Tunes oriented, myself ;O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 04:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Alexei Gromoff?

Why have you deleted my page, there are many other pages similar to it that exist so why can't mine. --Qboy1 (talk) 06:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Birdmen

Hiya. Re the above article, the history says you protected it, expiring in June. However, if I go to the article, I don't get any warnings about it being protected - is this what's supposed to happen, or should that little padlock symbol appear on the page ? CultureDrone (talk) 12:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, and apologies for not going wayyyy back to the earliest versions before I requested a speedy delete :-) CultureDrone (talk) 12:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

My UserPage

I will not be changing it. As the article you quoted to me states, "It does not, however, include statements that support controversial groups or regimes, that some may interpret as an encouragement of violence." Put in context, clearly my userpage is fine. Thank You. AniChai (talk) 04:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Craigslist ad controversy

Hi. I saw that you recently merged Craigslist ad controversy with Internet privacy. I personally don't think that in this case the redirect is necessary, as the incident was never referred to by that title and as one user pointed out, the title was vague and could refer to a number of incidents involving Craigslist. It was a poor choice of title, and I think that the redirect should be deleted.--Urban Rose 15:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... I guess you do have a point. I kind of zapped that part of the debate. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 16:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Requesting an Editor Review

Hi, you opposed my last RFA at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gary King a few weeks ago. I have decided to open an Editor Review at Wikipedia:Editor review/Gary King so I could receive a new assessment for my recent activity on Wikipedia. I would greatly appreciate it if you could take the time to look over my recent contributions and point out areas where I could improve. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 04:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

AniChai

Have you thought of opening a RfC for her conduct at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct? I have been told on the MfD of his user page that I should do this, but I feel that I don't know this editor enough to open it myself. --Enric Naval (talk) 02:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Margaret Rhodes

Please do not remove CSD tags from articles, as you did with Margaret Rhodes (artist). If you do not believe them to be valid, please add the hangon tag beneath the deletion tag, and explain why on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to drop me a line on my talk page. If you think the article should stay, then I would thoroughly recommend rewriting it so that it no longer appears to be a copyright violation. Thank you, StephenBuxton (talk) 12:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Van Veldhoven Syndrome

Hi, Pascal. I nominated the article for AfD as a blatant WP:HOAX. I wasn't sure whether to tag it for speedy delete as vandalism or go via the AfD route. Should I have gone ahead and tagged it for speedy after finding no citations on PubMed and ScienceDirect? Thanks for any input, Nk.sheridan   Talk 22:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

excuse me

what were you thinking deleting my article Small Sluts, Nice Butts. That fine article was vetted by no fewer than 3 other admints. JeanLatore (talk) 03:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Vetted? I don't think so. One removed a speedy tag, the other a prod tag because you had contested it. The fact remains that the article was essentially empty and that this is a completely insignificant porn series. If you want to recreate it, you can always go to deletion review but I can assure you this would be a complete waste of your time. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 21:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I am requesting feedback here: Wikipedia:Editor_review/JeanLatore. Thank yu. JeanLatore (talk) 01:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Well said

Very well said. A point that I tried to make (but did so much less elegantly). --JayHenry (talk) 02:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing backlinks

Please don't make edits like [1]; thank you. --NE2 07:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

American liberals

In view of the fact that Category:Liberals has been retained, and that I moved lots of articles from that cat to Category:American liberals, if you could temporarily bring back Category:American liberals, I will put the articles into other more definitive categories so that this set of information (that these people are liberals from America]] will not be lost from WP. Thanks Hmains (talk) 03:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Motorex

I would like to write an article on them and (pending how it goes) I have another company I would also like to write an article on as well that I have not found information on. I read what you wrote, but am very new to writing articles. If you could help me be less opinionated, and more objective I would appreciate it. I am not affiliated with the company but had done some work with them. The company has been around for almost a century and I thought I would try my luck with them. I am more just excited to be able to add to Wikipedia, as I didn't know I could before, but there is alot of different pieces I have searched for and haven't found. This is only one of them. If you could bring back the article so I could try again I would appreciate it. Thanks for the reply on my talk page. Hope to hear from you again. :) Motorex (talk) 05:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Intelligent clothing

An article that you have been involved in editing, Intelligent clothing, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligent clothing (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

happy Admin Day to fellow Québecer Pascal!

Wishing Pascal.Tesson/Archive 18 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! RobNS 03:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Best wishes from Canada   ;-)   --RobNS 03:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

MIB School of Management

I have re-edited the page in order to avoid copyright violations. As I was asked by the school to prepare this page there was no 'real' violation anyhow I undestand your position. Now this should be ok. Let me know. --Roberto.pugliese (talk) 13:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Deadly Echoes was not released by any major, but it will be released soon. I understand your position, but I think there are not so many bands in that genre that are still working or that are having a good activity like STQ-3. If you have any suggestion in order not to delete this page,please let me know. —Misc prog 12:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

deleting STQ-3

Hello. Deadly Echoes was not released by any major, but it will be released soon. I understand your position, but I think there are not so many bands in that genre that are still working or that are having a good activity like STQ-3. If you have any suggestion in order not to delete this page,please let me know. —Misc prog 12:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Steven Greer's page

Hi, I just wanted to inform you that somebody deleted and redirected Steven Greer's page. Please take the appropriate steps to undo this change. Can we put a protection on this page in order to prevent it from vandalism? Thank you. I-netfreedOm (talk) 14:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, an other admin undid the changes. I-netfreedOm (talk) 19:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, somebody marked again Steven Greer's page for deletion. I wonder whether there is a policy of Wikipedia about how much time one has to wait between two deletion requests? Thanks. I-netfreedOm (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Turtlerock1.jpg

Please. Could you restore the image so I can make an attempt to save it? Philly jawn (talk) 15:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Kaenon Polarized

Hello Pascal, First & foremost, please don't be so demeaning & condescending when you are reviewing user posts especially when you are incorrect. Thanks in advance.

So I am curious as to why my page was deleted. I stated that I am not an employee of the company (I'm not) and just a passionate user of their products and that many of my facts were taken from the company website. I was in the process of adding factual information such as athletes & celebrities that use their products. Furthermore, the entry was extremely similar to the page of Oakley Inc, who is one of their competitors. Why is Oakley allowed to have a page but Kaenon is not? Especially considering that the Oakley page mentioned much information about the founders, revenue, etc - that seems pretty self-fulfilling if you ask me!

Zooch76 (talk) 04:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)Zach

Sorry

I am very sorry about everything but thanks for giving me another chance.Motofan 21:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Block of User:Cardiff123098

If you'll notice in the ANI thread, I have volunteered to work with this editor and see if it is possible to make an editor out of him. I ask that you undo the block and see how it goes between me and him. I will take full responsibility for his actions for the next 48 hours. Dusti^SPEAK!! 23:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Hello, Pascal.Tesson. You have new messages at Cardiff123098's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IconoplastDesignsInc. Question

Hi Pascal, quick question on these edits:

• (Deletion log); 02:02 . . Pascal.Tesson (Talk | contribs | block) restored "User:IconoplastDesignsInc." (1 revision restored: restore sock tag)
• (Deletion log); 02:02 . . Pascal.Tesson (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "User:IconoplastDesignsInc." (removing history to prevent recreation of spam. Will restore sock tag)

Can you explain this to me? I'm not disagreeing whatsoever, in fact I've been trying to obliterate this spammer and his sock for the better part of a week but I don't quite follow exactly what you did here. Can you explain it to me or link it to me? Thanks! _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 02:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. I figured that's what you were doing when you salted the article, I just hadn't seen it done with the userpage. I'm watching for a new username to pop up now that I blocked MasterPlaster. (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) again today for going back to his/her old habits after a few days off. Blatant spammers irk me to no end. Thanks for the explanation _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 02:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep, only just recently and I find watching other editors/admins and asking questions on what I don't understand to be one of the best learning tools. Have a good evening!

History of rodeo

I just came upon History of rodeo and noticed that you put a merge tag in there over a year ago. I recommend that if you still want to merge this article that you look at the history's of the two articles and contact some of the biggest/most frequent contributors for the two articles and close this merger proposition. Let me know. ~ WikiDon (talk) 22:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Cardiff

No contact, refusing to reply, has began vadalism again. He's had his chance, block him. Dusti^SPEAK!! 17:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I have reviewed this user's contributions, and noted the hard work you and User:Dustihowe and other editors have put in trying to help him, and agree the original block should be reinstated which I have now done. TerriersFan (talk) 19:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Pascal, I would like to have your thoughts on the discussion taking place here. Dusti^SPEAK!! 21:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Three more Lyle123 socks busted

Thought you'd like to know based on your entry on the long-term abuse page. I've been keeping an eye out for this little sonofagun as well. A user had left word with Persian Poet Gal about three unusual names and I'd only stumbled on the message since I'd left her one of my own regarding another matter. They were the usual CamelCase movie studio names or movie titles ending with a number. All three socks are blocked, his attempt at a semi-hoax article about a legit subject removed and all is right with the world...until he gets on mommy's computer once more.  :) Thanks for the hard work. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

• Update: Just found one more on the new user creation log: User:LookingandFindingNurplexKidfilmbyDisney2008. I've already reported it and this account should be blocked by the time you read this. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Woo-hoo! Caught ya online and you caught Lyle. Thanks for the block. Here's hoping he gets the message. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

• I wish I had checkuser privileges, but I only have rollback privileges. I gave back the admin privileges swearing I'd never want them again, but incidents like this almost make me want to reconsider if only for the privilege of being able to block someone malicious like this who's been at it for a year now. I do a lot of RCP and NCP. He's fairly predictable, so if he does pop up, I'll sound the alarm. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

• • Got your message -- I'll let you know whenever I find Lyle's socks lying around. NawlinWiki (talk) 12:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

• • • New ones: User:RatHunt2008, User:Runt2008, User:Wickedscienemovie2004, User:Wickedscienethemovie2004. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 22:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Darn, I should have known.

Somehow, I thought it rather coincidental that this User:Propeller driven would pop up so soon after the incidents with the original accounts, but I didn't listen to the little voice in my head. I'm going to change my AfD vote on his article to "delete." Doggone it, I just have to start listening to that little voice more often. Thanks for listening to yours.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

My RfA

I hope the other kids at school play with me...

Thank you for your support in my recent RfA, which closed successfully. I felt the process was a thorough review of my contributions and my demeanor, and I was very gratified to see how many editors took the time to really see what I'm about and how I can be of help to the project. As a result, some editors changed their views during the discussion, and most expressed specific, detailed points to indicate their opinion (whether it was , , or ).

A number of editors were concerned about my level of experience. I was purposeful in not waiting until a particular benchmark occurred before requesting adminship, because I feel - as many do - that adminship is not a reward and that each case is individual. It is true that I am not the most experienced editor around here, but I appreciate that people dug into my contributions enough to reach the conclusion that I seem to have a clue. Also, the best thing about this particular concern is that experience is something an editor - or administrator - can always get more of, and I'll continue doing that, just as I've been doing. (If I seem a little slow at it, feel free to slap me.)

I particularly agree with your comment about respect for policies, and I appreciate you taking the time to mention the difference.

I am a strong believer in the concept that this project is all about the content, and I'm looking forward to contributing wherever I can. Please let me know if I can be of any help. In the meantime, I'm off to school...

Thanks again!

 Frank  |  talk  14:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Lyle123

Hey there, in regards to this comment you made, please understand that only reason I left the note I did on the above RFCU is simply for transparency and for no other reason. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 04:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Briefly

Well said at C68-FM-SV. You're my new crush. - brenneman 02:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

meh... thanks I guess but the whole thing is pretty sad really... Pascal.Tesson (talk) 03:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Morhange

FYI, I've posted a question to your support statement there. Thanks. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 15:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

In another vein

Excuse me? I would request that you not assault my vote and that you strike out your comments. I was not making the assumption that she had to be on wiki 24/7. I was stating that she's been on wiki since writing that request for more time, and had not, since my oppose was timestamped, answered those questions. Check yourself, please. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 00:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You still have no business throwing a hissy fit because someone takes more time than you'd wish and your oppose is absurd. I have no intention of striking out these comments. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 00:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

My oppose is absurd? Who are you to make that assesment? I'll remember this. your conduct for the future. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 09:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

not trying to defy you

I see you deleted Monroe Dunaway Anderson for a copyright violation. I did not do it. Somebody else did it. However, now there is a red link. I recreated the article but it is not a copyright violation. There is much room for improvement as the article is crappy now. Chergles (talk) 19:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

?

Have you heard of this user? User:Pascal Tesson sucks Chergles (talk) 20:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

interesting... :-) Pascal.Tesson (talk) 20:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

You are a hack

Your deletion of a Page consisting of valuable information regarding the well known practice of Stallonism not only shows your total lack of scholarship regarding theology, but also a severe lack of scrupulousness on the part of a man who is supposedly an academic. As said before sources had not yet been implemented on the page because of the infancy and would be clearly outlined as soon as humanly possible. Your speediness in deletion under these circumstances borders on the ridiculous, as pages cannot be expected to meet %100 of wikipedia's standards upon their immediate construction. Certainly a man with an academic background would understand this, so I am assuming that blatant and outright bias was at the center of your actions. Furthermore, a reading of the page clearly displays an intelligent commentary on a subject of many facets that does not nearly qualify it for the label of "Patent Nonsense." Incidentally, for your abuse, defamation and stifling of the flow of information, I will be recommending your wikipedia privileges revoked and your IP adress banned from accessing any portion of this website. Have a nice day. DrDoak1199 (talk) 05:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)Dr. Doak (Harvard University)

Did you try asking nicely before this scathing indictment? _{1 != 2} (Never went to University) 05:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, after looking at the article in question I have decided this user is only here to act foolish and cause disruption, and as such I have blocked the good doctor. _{1 != 2} 05:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

BCs talk page

Is not liking his choice of words really reason to restore comments that he obviously isn't interested in having on his talk page? That would seem likely to inflame the situation as well... --Onorem♠Dil 04:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Given that this is part of an ongoing discussion about the wisdom of unblocking Betacommand, this will obviously be perceived as a way to just shut up people who agree with the block. I don't think that the fact that he isn't interesting in having these comments on his talk page is very relevant in this context. Moreover, using "revert trolling" in the edit summary is clearly not helpful. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 04:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image undeletion

Not a problem. Thanks for the heads up (not to mention the warning that I inadvertently started to step into an ANI thread - I find I'm more productive when I avoid controversial stuff like that). (ESkog)^(Talk) 04:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Re-instate Boston Secession and Jane Ring Frank pages created 26 July 2008

I am the founding President and current Tresurer of the board of directors of Boston Secession and we as copyright owners give full permission for materials from www.bostonsecession.org; www.testimonyofwitnesses.org; and www.janeringfrank.com to appear on Wikipedia in entries I created Saturday 26 July 2008 and all other Wikipedia references. Dandbear (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dandbear (talk • contribs) 12:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Please don't delete useful content. Please.

Not a registered Wikipedia user but just wanted to inform out that your deletion of the YouTubeMobile page detracts from the value of the Wikipedia to me as a resource. The information in this article was important to me and it is not readily available anywhere else. Someone had gone to the trouble to to contribute this article - but then you deleted it because it did not fit your idea of what the Wikipedia should be.

The information on the page may have contained inaccuracies. Most written material does. It's up to the reader to make a value judgement as to the quality of the information they consume and it's insulting to them to make that judgement on their behalf.

The Wikipedia will never be an authoritative resource and it's futile to try to make it so. Please consider the possibility that your doing less would actually make the Wikipedia more useful to a greater number of people than what you're currently doing. Maybe your efforts would be better spent an an online encyclopedia that seeks to be authoritative?

PS: Is there any way I can access deleted material? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.90.64.158 (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)