User talk:The Kinslayer/Archive 1

You're High-Larious!

Thank you Schavira, I try my best. The Kinslayer 09:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Lews Therin Telamon? - JNighthawk 02:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Nightwish - The Kinslayer 07:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi,

Theres a video interview with Daniel Sussman and Helen Mcmillan on www.britishgaming.co.uk which confirms the exact number of songs and also has more information on the 'rock chick' (who isnt called tj lawz)- except thats in part II that apparently hasnt been uploaded yet. Not too many new facts, but a lot of fascinating background stuff.

Thanks, I'll check this out this evening when I'm home from work. The Kinslayer 10:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:FCEUXD

I removed it because I do not think it is spam. It reads like a very neutral, balanced article that sets out the facts about the subject. enochlau (talk) 15:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

• Fair enough on the spam part, but it still warrants deletion on notability and indiscriminate information. The Kinslayer 15:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Freak xxi

I'm interpreting the release of four albums as a de facto assertion of notability. (Releasing four albums on a major or significant indie record label would meet WP:MUSIC, after all.) I was disinclined to speedily delete it as it's about a Spanish band (and thus it is more difficult to assess notability) and because the article is fairly well-developed. A {{prod}} tag would probably suffice for this case. The fact that there are no last names is troubling, so I would endorse a proposed deletion. I just don't think it's speediable. -- Merope ^Talk 15:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, that's fair enough! Just wanted to know why. The Kinslayer 15:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Spam tags

Please be more careful in tagging articles with {{db-spam}}. Shibaricon, for instance, is a neutrally-written article on something obscure, not an advertisement for it. Keep in mind that speedy deletion is not the only way articles become deleted: there are two other processes: proposed deletion (PROD), and articles for deletion. See Wikipedia:Introduction to deletion process for a general intro. Thanks! Mangojuice^talk 13:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

In the case of what I consider borderline articles such as the one stated, my standard procedure is to Speedy first, then Prod if the article is judged to not meet the criteria for a speedy. In the case of the subject above, the lack of any third-party sources, and the single link to an official website, met my criteria for constituting an advert. The Kinslayer 13:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Steve Ridgway

Your speedy tag on Steve Ridgway has been removed because the subject is notable as a CEO of an airline. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 15:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I realised but forgot to remove the tag! My bad. The Kinslayer 15:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass!

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass! --Indie.Bones 15:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)Indie Bones

• Such a prospect sounds painful and unpleasant for the both of us! The Kinslayer 15:36, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S.-i am NOT a moron! --Indie.Bones 16:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)Indie.Bones

Well, you fooled me, congratulations! Have a kitten. The Kinslayer 17:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Crystal Ball-Gazing?

Regarding the "proposed deletion" tag added to the Dragon Ball AF article...

Would you care to elaborate on what you mean by your comment? This article's purpose is to inform readers about a topic that is well-known in the context of Dragon Ball and its fans, which has reached the status of a "myth" in the fandom. The article expressly avoids speculation on "plot points" and the like (as naïve fans are wont to do), concentrating instead on the origins and means of distribution of the myth, as well as emphasizing the facts in the situation. Perhaps a purely descriptive approach to the rumors (while still focusing on the factual evidence against them) would be better, but I and others who have worked on this page viewed such a format as likely to only further misunderstandings by those who read the article without an eye for context. If you wish to give any concrete reasons as to why the page ought to be deleted, then please do so. I realize that the article treads close to the line of fancruft, but as its intent is to inform readers on a topic that is remarkably persistent and raised all too often, I believe that it has value. --Julian Grybowski 15:33, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

You know, I can't be arsed replying in any detail to this. The Kinslayer 15:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The user page

I was wondering, how do you get those box things with the words in them? I know it's coding, but is there a list of ones with specific words? MB 20:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I started looking here and just poked around looking for ones I wanted. The Kinslayer 20:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Bully(Talk Page)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Vercalos 23:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove legitimate warnings from your talk page or replace them with inappropriate content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. If you continue to remove or vandalize legitimate warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. --Vercalos 20:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow, all this attention for one word out of, let me see, how many edits? Your comments need to get a life. The Kinslayer 20:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

With regards to your comments on Bully (video game): Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 20:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

In that case, your comment can kiss my ass. The Kinslayer 20:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 21:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I invite you to check my comment again. It wasn't a personal attack, it was a directed opinion about the comment itselve, As suggested by your own post. The Kinslayer 07:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:PAIN

per this diff and this diff, with consideration of an NPA2 warning ayou were already quite legitimately given...

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --Crimsone 21:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I invite you to check my comments again. They wern't personal attacks, they were directed opinions about the content itself. The Kinslayer 07:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Notice

I have now said all I intend to say with the regards to the above....people. Any posts I make to them will be in response to any of their own posts. This therefore means that any further posts by Vercalos, Chris Griswold or Crimsone will be seen as baiting and inflammatory and will be dealt with along appropriate lines. The process is quite simple, stop posting on my user page, I get the point (even though I am going to ignore it due to it being one word I said, and not a habit.) The Kinslayer 08:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of how you choose to take communication here, this page will be used to communicate with you about situations that affect Wikipedia. You do not own this user talk page; Wikipedia does. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I never made any assertion of ownership. I said any further provocation on the previous would be dealt with as provocation through the apporpriate channels. The Kinslayer 09:34, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Editing comments

Soory. All I did was put *Comment in front of the the comments so they are easily seen amongst the votes. Cheers. L0b0t 13:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

It's OK, but it's only Keep or Delete that really need to be bold. The admins know what their looking for on these things ;) The Kinslayer 13:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion noted. Sorry I put burr under your blamket. Cheers. L0b0t 14:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Empires mod

I was actualy planning on trying this mod out today. That decision has been changed due solely to the behavior of the single-purpose users at the AfD. You are correct, they bring it on themselves. Cheers. L0b0t 13:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Colwyn Bay railway station

OK, that would have merited an IP a {{vw}}, but I don't quite know what made you do that... Crisps and gravy? :s riana_dzasta 13:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

It was a joke for a friend of mine who works there. The intention was to revert after he saw it. I know I shouldn't have done it, but I couldn't resist! (Too much seriousness got to me in the end!) The Kinslayer 13:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thought it might be something like that - alert: a Wikipedian with a sense of humour! :p riana_dzasta 13:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

If you tell anyone, I'll deny it! ;) The Kinslayer 13:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swords of Xeen

Snooty remarks? I didn't know that saying your mind about "AfDs" would constitute as "snooty remarks", even if people do disagree with what is said. Havok (T/C/c) 16:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Ambar - deleted and then restored

Not sure if this has been pointed out, but it looks like AfD screwed up. Just to start the ball rolling and institute a culture change, I'm trying to get all admins closing things at AfD to remember to check the page history of an article before deleting, so that drastic changes in the nature of a page are spotted, and also urging those voting at AfD to do the same. See the following for details:

• Ambar
• Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ambar
• article log for Ambar

Copied to closing admin, restoring admin, deletion nominator, all who voted in the AfD discussion, and the AfD talk page. Carcharoth 23:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Yahushua

I admit, the deletion process is sometimes confusing on Wikipedia. If you want to support (or otherwise comment on) deletion of the article, you should go to the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yahushua. The {{prod2}} template is only relevant in the proposed deletion process. Regards, Mike Rosoft 14:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I see what I did after you removed it! I'd misread the AfD notice as a Prod notice which was why I had added a prod2. What I still don't understand though is why the speedy tag was removed at all? It's a wreck of an article that a re-created deleted one, with serious POV issues, amongst other things! Surely there's not much for discussion? The Kinslayer 14:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Marcel Paille

I removed the speedy that you placed on Marcel Paille. Current and former players in the National Hockey League and other top-level leagues are notable. I also added references. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 14:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Prod courtesy

While I agree completely with the proposed deletion you made of List of shells and explosives, I think your posted reasoning of "Pointless listcruft." is a little rude to the 11 editors who chose to spend time on the article prior to nomination for deletion.

Consider that deletion itself is a way of saying "this effort is worthless" to everyone who worked on the article prior to deletion. If we take just a little more care to avoid offending content contributors, perhaps they will redirect their energies to useful articles rather than get angry at being insulted, and we will certainly get better results. Unfocused 17:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I calls 'em like I sees 'em. The Kinslayer 19:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I also don't believe in suger-coating the truth just to spare an editors ego. I follow WP:CIVIL to the extent it insists, and beyond that I'll use my own judgement on what is rude or not. My apologies to the 11 editors involved in the article, but it is worthless, it is pointless listcruft and to say anything else would be misleading. At least people reading it know in no uncertain terms why I thought it should be deleted. The Kinslayer 12:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_November_13#General_Mayhem

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. The Kinslayer 11:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Don't forget to read it man. Keep your cool. —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 11:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  • That is me keeping my cool. Also, the fact that I gave myself the warning should probably indicate how seriously I'm taking this guy (as in not at all.) The Kinslayer 11:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

72 hour block

You have been blocked for violations of WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL: 24 hours for the violations themselves plus 48 hours for expressed contempt for site policy. Durova^Charge! 01:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you sir, may I have another? The Kinslayer 11:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Block reset and extended to one week for violations of WP:SOCK. Durova^Charge! 02:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry.

Apologies I wish to apologise for my extremely idiotic behaviour on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FCE Ultra in October 2006. I probably went a little bit too far in my stubbornness here and was blinded by my emotions, both of which I try to normally avoid. I'm so sorry that the debate ended up that way. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Not problem at all. Practically everyone on Wikipedia gets stubborn when they believe they are right. I know I do. The important thing was that we reached am agreement in the end! ;-) The Kinslayer 16:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)