User talk:Gtrmp

Pre-adminship talk archived at /Archive.

Admin promotion

You are now an admin. You might want to browse through Wikipedia:Administrators. Good luck. →Raul654 02:37, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Congratulations! I trust you will do an excellent job with the digital mop and broom. --Slowking Man 06:31, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll do my best. -Sean Curtin 01:33, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

Vfd/Deep

You kind of voted for two different things on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Deep. Which one are you in favor of?

Vote clarified. -Sean Curtin 23:07, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

TV Naming conventions.

At some point in the past you expressed an opinion on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television). I have instigated a new poll on that page. I am hoping that this poll will properly allow all users who have an interest in the subject to express their views fairly before we come to a consensus. I have scrapped the poll that was previously in place on that page because I believe that it was part of an unfair procedure that was going against the majority view. I am appealing to all users who contribute to that page to approve my actions. I would appreciate it if you could take the time and trouble to read the page carefully and express an opinion and vote as you see fit. Mintguy (T) 16:58, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well I can understand that you would prefer your version of the poll, but it appears that such complicated polls are not preferred by other users. My first draft here was declared to be too confusing by several users. It is possible to add additional sections to the poll I have proposed. BTW please remember that what we trying to do is create sensible disambiguation where (and only where) it is neccesary, it does not need to be overly complicated. I believe that Netoholic is championing your poll for his own reasons. Mintguy (T) 23:39, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The problem with allowing voters to add their own options during the polling process is that those who vote first are essentially voting on a different poll than those who vote last. Additional options for and input on the poll should have been solicited before voting began. -Sean Curtin 23:47, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)

All of the options on your poll are covered, albeit lumped together, as up for further discussion if necessary. A poll of this nature worked very well on talk:analogue disc record, see [1]. Mintguy (T)

- That poll looks as badly organized as any I've ever seen! Heh. -- Netoholic @ 03:23, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)

Unjustified detour

Regardless of your adminship, I consider it vandalism to redirect a topic, such as belief system to belief, without prior discussion. Those two subjects are very different in many respects. Good day. Adraeus 22:05, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No page existed at belief system until I created the redirect. I agree that the two topics are distinct, but until someone creates a page on the topic (which I would welcome) the redirect should suffice. -Sean Curtin 23:38, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
- I guessed that was your reason but you provided no context to accurately judge your intent. Adraeus 05:39, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:People by year

I added some not very original stuff with this page. Maybe you are interested. -- User:Docu

Occupation of Palestine

Please see my question at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Occupation_of_Palestine#Tally: Rephrasing the question -- Jmabel 01:22, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

Request dispute resolution

Sean, please see User_talk:Adraeus.

Nevermind if the abuser stops harassing me.

Happy Birthday!

Happy birthday, Sean! Best wishes. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 02:51, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! -Sean Curtin 03:30, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)

Bong/Bangs

Lester Bangs eh? Oh my God, of course. I learn something every day - thanks. ←Hob 15:24, 2004 Oct 20 (UTC)

your comments are desired

Please take a look at a discussion on the village pump; an admin has taken it upon himself to challenge clear VfD deletion results through a third channel, other than voting and undeletion requests. Thought you might be interested... Postdlf 01:45, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Prophecy and Prophet

I hope that you will come to realize that these two cultural phenomena are not indistinguishable, that they have separate cultural histories and retain separate spheres even in populist modern culture. There are plenty of prophecies at the check-out counter. There are many prophets other than Daniel. This merge is such a poor idea. How can we prevent it? --Wetman 01:22, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The prophecy page is a quite poor page, and would best be served by redirecting to something else. -Sean Curtin 02:21, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

User page unprotection

Hi, I unprotected your user page based on a request by UninvitedCompany, on the grounds that protection is generally considered un-wiki and should be reserved for situations in which it is seriously needed. I decided to unprotect because the history shows that your page has never actually been vandalized. I think any isolated instances can be reverted without serious harm; if vandalism does become a serious problem for you in the future, perhaps we could reconsider the question. --Michael Snow 22:34, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Vampire Lifestyle butchering

I protest your continued butchering of the Vampire lifestyle page (as in august). Major edits involving ommission of previously added data not added by you should be discussed on the talk page. Falcon 01:15, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If you can find any references to support the claim that there are actually vampire hunters who attempt to hunt and kill members of the vampire subculture, feel free to add that section back in. I couldn't find anything to support it, and the claim that "any vampire is capable of killing any human with little effort" is contradicted by the majority of sites on the subject. I fail to see how one edit over two months ago is "continued butchering". -Sean Curtin 23:45, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)

Kolchak

Hey, thanks for fixing that up. Noel (talk) 01:46, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

I've "started" the Free the Rambot Articles Project which aims to get users to release all of their contributions to the U.S. state, county, and city articles under the CC-by-sa 1.0 and 2.0 license (at minimum) or into the public domain if they prefer. A secondary goal is to get those users to release ALL of their edits for ALL articles. I've personally chosen to multi-license all of the rambot and Ram-Man contributions under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License so that other projects, such as WikiTravel, can use our articles. I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all your contributions (or at minimum those on the geographic articles) so that we can keep most of the articles available under the multi-license. Many users use the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or even {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) on their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I understand, but I thought I'd at least ask, just in case, since the number of your edits is in the top 100. If you do want to do it, simply just copy and paste one of the above two templates into your user page and it will allow us to track those users who have done it. For example:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain (which many people do or don't like to do, see Wikipedia:Multi-licensing), you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}} -- Ram-Man 22:00, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

And vs. &

I wrote a question at Talk:Ampersand a while ago about whether to use and or &, but no one has responded. (This was brought to my attention when I saw your edits in Recent Changes.) 66.245.68.62 01:56, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

WP:RfD edit clash

Hi, we somehow seemed to have an edit clash on WP:VfD. Shall I fix it (to prevent us doing the same thing all over again, trying to fix it)? Noel (talk) 23:25, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ah, I see, you've already got it. Noel (talk) 23:31, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wrong redirection of Flashing

Your redirection of "flashing" to the flash disambiguation page has resulted in losing all information about flashing of BIOS and other chips. Flash memory is distinctly different to the process of flashing and the process of flashing a BIOS is now not covered anywhere. Please revert. (talk)

I've readded the lost section to the flash page. -Sean Curtin 01:00, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

RFC pages on VfD

Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:42, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

GoGo

Hi, thanks for merging GoGo. I agree with the merge and I've already voted for that page to be deleted. However on balance I think it was probably going too far to replace the content by a redirect while the VfD is still ongoing. I don't have terribly strong feelings about it, I just feel a bit uneasy about it, so I've reverted to the previous version. Thought I'd better explain. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 04:53, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No problem, I usually prefer to be bold in such matters but I understand wanting to avoid that when the page in question is on VfD. -Sean Curtin 05:14, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Merging of Clock/Sandal punk into Steampunk

I think these genres should probably have there own smaller articles, linked to in small summaries in this main article.

This keeps this article smaller, and more focused. It will also help define what is steampunk and what is not-really steampunk.

Other steampunk spin offs (Bronzepunk, stonepunk etc.) shoudl probably also be made into small articles.

"Variation of a theme" isn't really a criteria for redirect if enough substance is available, and inclusion detracts away from main theme. Personally I've had a lot more experience with Clockpunk, and thought that steampunk was just a variation of that.--ZayZayEM 08:05, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Although the "high-tech Renaissance" theme is probably at least as common as steampunk, the name "clockpunk" itself isn't a very common term for it, and "sandalpunk" is even less common. I'd rather see these merged into one page than given their own articles and inevitably being deleted (and they would most likely be deleted - see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Timepunk for the unanimous deletion of a related neologism). -Sean Curtin 23:25, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

Comics stuff

Thanks for the great cleanup work on X-Force/X-Statix. I'm curious, though, about your reference (in the edit summary) to the Milligan/Allred team as "X-Force III." What do you consider X-Force II? Also, if I haven't invited you already, you're welcome to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics.-leigh (φθόγγος)