User talk:Sarcasticidealist/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Thanks

Thank you for protecting me so fast it was over before I noticed it.David in DC (talk) 04:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Your block of Guamrules2

Hi SI, I was looking at Guamrules2 (talk · contribs). S/he had only three edits and no warnings. Granted all three were vandalism but shouldn't there have been some warnings issued before blocking? (I admit it probably would have ended that way anyhow, but...) Aleta Sing 04:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I thought it worth asking you about it, but I won't undo it. I would have warned first, but like i said, I do think it probably would have ended the same way. I think your analysis is probably accurate; I just would have approached it slower than you did. Aleta Sing 04:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - Subjective Advertising

Thanks for mking the Onion Juice Therapy content avaialble!!!! On the subject of advertising, I see your point I just think that funneling people to a website of anykind for any reason is similar to what we are doing in as much that increased trafic ups the chances that people will donate to a particular site. In effect it is all advertising and promotion to a point. I think the standard as always must be intent. Is this something you believe in and promote to help people or is it designed to bring in revenue to pay salaries - commercial or not. In our case there is no motivation other than to help people have a choice when making critical decisions about their own health. In some respects, every article on Wikipedia is advertising at everyone has something they want to sell to others - even if it is just ideas without profit. Again, the intention is everything in determining what could e perceived as advertising. The problem is that admin's o not have the time to dig very deep to determine that intent and frankly 99 out 0f a 100 cases the intent is to profit - no matter how it is packaged. Think tamks are very savy at presenting what appears to be independent analysis and research - but it is all advertising - all mememtics designed to change ideas, policy, funnel money to a PAC. I believe our approach, while different, is by far the most honest and upfront. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesMMc (talk • contribs) 16:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment at Wikipedia talk:Good article criteria

Quite a few of my song articles could be considered short but broad, I guess. It's all about context. Something you might like to see would be WP:GAN/M (happy to do this for you if you like), if you'd rather get a second opinion on your reviews...cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

"How should we proceed?" - I suppose the easiest thing would be you find an article and start reviewing, and I'll gently breath on your shoulder observe. I've got a stack of useful essays and the like combined at User:Dihydrogen Monoxide/GA tools if you're interested, but it may not be overly user friendly...feedback please! :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Monkeyking123

This user is back at Mountain Pointe High School, readding the same unsourced information here [1] even after you warned him not to on threat of block. Just thought I'd let you know, I didn't want to edit war over this since he obviously doesn't care about sourcing the section. Redrocket (talk) 02:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

and now i know. aren't you supposed to be writing? </post> Geek45 (talk) 13:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

'On drama' quote

Just thought I'd let you know, I've taken your 'On drama' section from your UP to use as a quote on mine as I thought it summed up the whole 'WIKIDRAMAHZ!!!!1111' thing perfectly. Hope you don't mind [you, obviously, have full attribution!] Thanks.RichardΩ612 Ɣ |ɸ 15:35, May 8, 2008 (UTC)

Yep, looks better now. Thanks for pointing it out. Sorry about 'fixing' it, I am something of a Grammar Nazi! RichardΩ612 Ɣ |ɸ 19:32, May 8, 2008 (UTC)

From your userpage, thought you should know

Deleted Again

Hi! I contacted you before to retrieve my deleted page content. I made some changes that I felt addressed the issue and was promptly deleted again by the same admin - who you said was on borderline grounds for deleting in the first palce. I am a new user with I think much to contribute to Wikipedia - providing a not so often heard but globally legitimate perspective, but I am feeling that this process is abusive and a waste of my valuable time. Is there anyway to keep aggressive admins from attacking new users and letting them work through a process - or allowing peers to decide what is relevant and important, instead of one admin with an axe to grind or an ego that is uncontroled? It seems if an article does not contain a western bias, it gets hit hard. America is so limited in it's perspective - American's need to travel more. Such narrow perspectives. If it is not on CNN - must not be important or relevant. Pathetic!!!!!

I would appreciate any help, including the deleted file. Any way to lock this idiot out? Sorry forgot to sign JamesMMc (talk) 19:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Onion Juice Therapy

P.S. Seems this same admin has now deleted my username JamesMMc (talk) 19:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Another question

How can I tag a section to be revised to meet NPOV? the article is here the section is "Hardware Issues" hopefully, you will see what I mean. </post> Geek45 (talk) 03:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Email

I have sent you an email relating to your candidacy for the 2008 Board Election.

For the Election Committee, Daniel 23:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

John celona could use your help.

At this noticeboard. Please chime in asap. Albion moonlight (talk) 08:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep

It helped </post> Geek45 (talk) 23:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Moo

You made me laugh today. Thank you. David in DC (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion due to banned user

Mr. Idealist - the Drug Policy project page was deleted, and although I agree that deleting pages created by a banned user is a valid reason for a quick purge, I put a fair amount of work into that myself to ensure NPOV (so as not to have some pothead banging the legalization drum) and to broaden scope from just prohibition to treatment options and distribution/regulation of legal drugs, as well as unofficial policy (such as Iran-Contra and the French Connection).

As I looked into the thus far scant List of Entheogens page, there was a question about listing the legality of each, and I responded with a comment about regional differences making this difficult. I think that the banned user had a good idea in looking into the Policy aspect of intoxicants, and 200 million illicit drug users (according to www.unodc.org) worldwide probably agree (as might the many more users of legal ones)! Might we discuss reviving the project, and what flaws in it you saw, if any, apart from its creation by a banned user? Regards - Clavius Centralis (talk) 02:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to assist with this project, it was deleted before I could join. --Abd (talk) 16:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a note to say that I'm examining this issue, and will address it tonight when I have a few minutes. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Too damn much rush around this place anyway.... --Abd (talk) 23:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks in advance. I'll keep my eyes open. My email's posted as well if you have questions. Shamanchill (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Found one that was overlooked, and if you could please undelete, SarcasticIdealist, we'd appreciate it. Cagegory:WikiProject Drug Policy members. Regards Shamanchill (talk) 21:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
You looked after that super quick, and just as I was about to add a second page as a minor edit. Wikipedia:WikiProject Drug Policy/Assessment. Thanks again, Shamanchill (talk) 22:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
SarcasticIdealist - could you please undelete the following:
  • Unassessed Drug policy articles
  • WikiProject Drug Policy articles
Thanks again - Shamanchill (talk) 22:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Fredrick day up to his same old same old

[2] --Abd (talk) 22:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The situation is getting worse. See [3], where an AfD nominator removed strikeout I'd inserted and threatens to "report" me. See also [4], and contributions for the IP.
(This AfD is complicated because the article is about the public debate over Instant Runoff Voting, and thus part of what is sourced is opinion that ordinarily would not be considered reliable source, but which is reliable for the fact that the opinions are being expressed notably. The subject article was not a POV fork, it was created through a consensus of editors working on the main article, including editors affiliated with various POVs in conflict, as a means of exploring, in an NPOV fashion, the details of the debate, more thoroughly than was considered appropriate in the main article. WP:FORK specifically allows this as a matter of editorial consensus, but the nominator -- and Fredrick day -- are appealing to a knee-jerk reaction against kinds of sources that would, indeed, ordinarily be inadequate. Further, I'm in the process of adding secondary sources about the debate. They exist.) --Abd (talk) 14:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Hello again. The Highly Active Users project has gone through a complete revamping per popular demand. We believe this new format will make it easier for new editors to find assistance. However, with the new format, I must again ask you to verify your information on this page. I attempted to translate the data from the old version to the new, but with the extensive changes, I may have made some errors. Thanks again. Useight (talk) 03:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my userpage -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 07:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Rollback feature

Thanks for granting me the rollback rights. Just so I understand a bit better -- is there anything special I have to do to use the feature, or will it apply to any reversion I make? GreenSarah (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Dave fork

Think it was previously deleted as a speedy. The first thing I thought when I saw it on the new pages list was that I was pretty sure someone had just got done deleting it. I think the first article might have been Dave Fork. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC) From deletion log "15:57, 16 May 2008 Stifle (Talk | contribs) deleted "Dave fork" ‎ (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance) " Hope that helps Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


Thanks

for your contribution. I'm new in this and created the Britney Sixth Album article with limited knowledge and now im getting it fast. Mazenation (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Closure of Lara's userbox MfD

Please see my last comment there. Thanks. Equazcion •✗/C • 18:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I hate to do this, both because I'm a Keep !vote, and because I'm the one who requested the closure, but there may be some merit to that suggestion (that the content was just moved to the userpage, rather than retained as a template-style Userbox). Do MFD's deal with individual content items on userpages? If so, then maybe this should stay open... The alternative, and one that might get wider discussion, would be WP:ANI, which I'm sure everyone would be thrilled about. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 18:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
(moved from Equazcion's talk page) Frankly, I'm out of my element here, since I probably don't have the breadth of experience to evaluate the proper use of MFDs, and whether your proposed use of this one qualifies. I'd have no objection to somebody else undoing my close. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 18:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I started an ANI discussion regarding this -- WP:ANI#User:LaraLove's controversial userbox. Equazcion •✗/C • 22:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for colorizing my reasons box.

I got frustrated by the process and said the hell with it. Albion moonlight (talk) 05:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)