Jump to content

User talk:IceCreamAntisocial

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kannie (talk | contribs) at 02:28, 12 January 2008 (→Barnstar: D'oh!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

/Archive 1

Hullo and welcome to my talk page. Please leave a message. Comments, questions, complaints, bribes, rants, compliments, insults, interpretive dances, and suggestions welcome. No death threats, marriage proposals, or vandalism (unless it's funny), please. Thanx.

Your comments

Thanks for the fixes in R americana entry, its much improved! Fsiviero

Not sure how to leave a message, as I am still learning how to use Wikepedia...but I wanted to leave a message for you. Delete afterwards if you will. I read your comments on my recent contribution to the dictionary. I took offense to your unkind thoughts [1]. If my article does not meet requirements, that is completely fine--I am presently trying to source and reference my credits online, as many of my co-workers in my fields have done with their own Wikipedia pages. I completely accept criticism, but please do not make personal comments about my work for all to see in a non-constructive manner. It's unprofessional, mean, and was completely out of line. I take great pride in scientific studies of paranormal activities and hope I am making a contribution to this world by helping people to understand unexplained phenomena (or to disprove so-called "phenomena"). I also whole-heartedly support my line of work in the performing arts field...theatre is a great medicine for many people in whatever form it may come in.

If you expect the same respect from Wikipedia users, is it cool to keep your opinions professional and courteous and helpful to those who have submitted? That would be wonderful. Thanks. Sweetaurora 11:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi there. I was not making a personal attack against you, I was pointing out that the subject of the article does not come close to meeting the importance criteria for biographical articles. If you wrote an article about yourself, you might want to read the vanity criteria. Feel free to write tons of articles, that's great, but writing about yourself is just not a good idea, as you have found out. Cheers, IceCreamAntisocial 19:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It looks like your comment met the criteria of a personal attack: "How about let's write about someone doing something important out there in the world?" is about what you said. I don't mean to be falling into the category you mentioned--I've had coworkers in both of my fields publish Wikipedia pages to back up our online contacts (it's perplexing that their pages are still up...!) I know my page is not up to par because I haven't been in both careers long enough to have numerous references. I understand why it's being deleted--I understand it doesn't meet the criteria. That's totally fine. I was only following the leads and suggestions of other Wikipedia pages (as well as other pages that mention my name--I thought that if other pages can mention my name, I could write an article for myself that linked back to those pages to back the info up..if that's understandable). I just wanted a simple apology for how you handled your comment, as it ridiculed both fields of work. Thanks. Sweetaurora 22:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In response to your latest comment on the article, is that in itself grounds for deletion? I guess I'm just confused, since I know of others who have uploaded articles about their own work onto this site--would theirs be considered non-neutral as well? Sweetaurora 23:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I doubt if it's grounds for deletion in itself, it's just one more reason. Yes, anyone who writes an autobiography is in conflict of interest. The article should be either deleted, made into a user page, or entirely rewritten by someone who is neutral. And it should be rewritten only if the subject of the autobiography meets notability guidelines so that nobody nominates it for deletion. If you see an article that is an obvious autobiography, you can always tag it for deletion or put tags on it, such as {{autobiography}}, {{potentialVanity}}, or {{originalresearch}}. All we're doing here is trying to keep Wiki neutral and prevent spam and self-promotion. And I'd also like to add just once more that I never made a personal attack on you, as I do not attack other Wiki editors. I made a snarky and admittedly unnecessary comment about the subject of your article, not knowing that the subject was also the author. So don't worry, I have nothing against you, it's the material in the article that does not belong on Wikipedia. Anyway, cheers. - IceCreamAntisocial 00:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Apparently, the groups I belong to and work with do not belong on Wikipedia either, then? Just find it curious that their pages haven't been cited or deleted, if their material is not of Wikipedia's standards. Thanks for clearing this up. Sweetaurora 00:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalinda Gray

Hi there. Your comment there was removed by an editor, as they were not necessary. Remember that, when talking about living persons, they may take offense. While I can understand making such statements (I am sure I have done some myself in the past), you must remember that, sometimes, these users truly don't understand the notability guidelines, and act in good faith. The AFD has been closed, and your comment shrinked to the minimum necessary. Please consider the etiquette next time you participate in a discussion about someone who appears to be non notable. -- ReyBrujo 05:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hinagdanan Cave

Hi! Thank you for your edits/contributions. It's been awhile since the article has been a stub. Perhaps you can consider expanding the stub yourself? Please let me know...--Ate Pinay (talk•email) 07:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whiteandnerdy37

This page was obviously not an attempt to create a user page, so I have deleted it. Please don't userfy pages unless you notify the owner and are sure that the page is intended to be a user page. This was a timeline created by a user with no other contributions; no reason at all to keep it around. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 09:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Brian Smith (photographer)

An editor has nominated Brian Smith (photographer), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Smith (photographer) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 18:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daughter Darling

Hi. Why did you put a prod on Daughter Darling? To my knowledge and according to the article, it does meet WP:MUSIC. Karol 12:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Esoteric Order of Art

Hello. You suggested that Esoteric Order of Art section should be merged to Tapani Mokko. That is not a good idea. Mokko is just a member in the Order and therefore does not represent the whole art movement. He has his own artistic endeavours which are separated from the EOA, but still he participates in the project of the order. I'll remove the tag and if you have guestions conserning this matter don't hesitate to contact me. Astbury 13:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

High Mountain Park Preserve

Wondering about your editing of above-named page; don't want just to revert to the version before your edit in mid-January, since that will serve neither of our intended audiences well (and will frustrate us both). Also, you are far, far more experienced than I in this medium, so I'm hoping you can give some specific suggestions on what I must avoid as I try to serve my intended audience. . . .

In brief, the page that existed before your edits in January, while admittedly long-winded and in some other ways problematic, also contained a wealth of information valuable to my intended audience, which is members of the hiking public in North Jersey and New York City. The page as it now exists (due to elimination of directions for how to reach the park, rules for use of the park, etc.) is not hiker-friendly. --The directions are particularly important because trailhead access, and route of one of the trails, have recently been changed.

If you'd let me know the audience for which you're writing, I will try to take them into account as I edit. (I hope their interests aren't inherently incompatible with the interests of hikers!) I'd also welcome any specific suggestions you might have on what cannot properly be included in an entry.

Thanks!

Pushcat 18:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi! Yeah it looks like I copyedited that article. Generally we don't put driving directions in encyclopedic articles, because that info is not of general interest and is available via Google searches or the park's website, etc. It also makes for clumsy reading unless one is specifically looking for that info. Articles at Wikipedia are not supposed to be aimed at specific audiences, but rather to a very general, worldwide audience. I edited the article after coming upon it randomly, as I do for other articles about which I know nothing and have no personal interest. So, if there is something you would like to put back in the article, feel free to do so. I won't remove it (someone else might, though!). I didn't mean to delete all your hard work! Thanks for your note. IceCreamAntisocial 19:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transwikiing junk

In an edit of 27 July to "Lachrymose", an "article" that I am about to delete, you altered

From the Merriam Webster Dictionary

to

{{move to wiktionary}}From the Merriam Webster Dictionary

To me, the whole article looked like a simple copyright violation, as is suggested by "From the Merriam Webster Dictionary".

I see an awful lot of crap transwikied to Wiktionary, but I see no benefit in sending it copyright violations. -- Hoary 07:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Hi, I noticed that you proposed deletion of Oakwood Baptist Church. I agree that it appears to be non-notable and should therefore be deleted. However, it did not appear that anyone had warned the original author; it's good practice to do so, and easy to do by copying the line that appears at the bottom of the PROD box once you have added it to the article. I've done it now for this case. Best wishes, Fayenatic london (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ligusticum

Hi, if you're working on new Ligusticum species articles, the one we really need is L. wallichii, due to its importance in traditional Chinese medicine. Badagnani 06:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DGK

Just wanted to say "good call" on the DGK page. You know I reverted some vandalism on there a month ago, but didn't bother to read the article, so I didn't know how poor it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan4314 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert on your edit

Hi. I just wanted to inform you that your edit has been reverted by an IP user. This user asked to undo my edit just before on my talk page. The problem is that there should not be two articles on one topic. That was the reason for your edit. I hope I was clear enough to the IP user. --Leyo 19:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • You are right and you explained it well. Seems that user doesn't understand the purpose of a redirect. S/he also seems to have an agenda and conflict of interest. Well, I'm going to leave it alone for now and perhaps redirect in the other direction later when the user goes away. Thanks for pointing it out. -IceCreamAntisocial 19:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I had the same feeling as you. It seems that Toxicology and Chemical Substances (without the "TCS" in the name) would be the most appropriate lemma. I am not sure whether we should move European Chemicals Bureau or TCS Toxicology and Chemical Substances to that place. The former article is older, but as I am the creator I might not be neutral to decide which article to keep and which to change into a redirect. But let's wait for the reply of the IP user concerning the name before moving articles. --Leyo 19:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please see original citation Aloysia

Dear Please see original citation of Aloysia Palau, it i citrodora you emmend in wrong --Penarc 11:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of I & K Motors

An article that you have been involved in editing, I & K Motors, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I & K Motors. Thank you. — xaosflux Talk 14:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Murdoch SSH page

I see you took our page away. I'm new to Wikipedia and would like to understand why. MUssh —Preceding unsigned comment added by MUssh (talk • contribs) 01:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi. I assume you mean Faculty of Arts and Education. I didn't take it away. What I did was merge the page by adding it to the article already in progress, Murdoch University. When there is an article on a topic, such as a university, it is generally most helpful to add information to it rather than create 100 articles about different aspects of the topic. An exception might be a university with a huge sports team: creating a separate article for the sports team would be a good idea because both articles will be very large. If you have more information about Murdoch University, feel free to add it to the university's page! I didn't erase your info, it's all there. Also, when you are creating a new article, it's a good idea to give it a specific title. Naming an article "Faculty of Arts and Education" might be confusing, because it could be an article about the Faculty of Arts and Education at any of a billion schools out there. Thanks for writing - IceCreamAntisocial (talk) 01:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

For creating all the plant articles - I'd been intending to do them, but with my backlog of photos to upload, it wasn't going to be any time soon! Stan (talk) 17:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flora of California articles

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I just wanted to drop by and let you know that I appreciate all those articles you've been creating on the flora of California. Over the past year? or so, you've probably made nearly, what, 500 articles? Probably more. Because of this, I award you this Tireless Contributor Barnstar for your unyielding efforts on Californian flora. Bravo! Rkitko (talk) 04:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Did you know you were mentioned in the Wikipedia Signpost this week? And by the by, have you thought about joining us at WikiProject Plants? Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 04:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My goodness, that barnstar was way overdue. You deserve it! Thanks for joining :-) Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 04:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Fauna Barnstar
For making decent articles about flowers. Kannie | talk 02:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IceCreamAntisocial. You have new messages at Kannie's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IceCreamAntisocial&oldid=183765080"