User talk:SmokeyJoe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SmokeyJoe talk page

Contents

[edit] Copyright violation

The article in no way prevents Rowling from profiting from or furthering her success from the series. It's merely a synopsis and commentary on the character. There are no text lifts or reprints of copyrighted material. Using your guidelines, most of the HP articles could be deleted. John Reaves 08:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I was refering to the HP articles on Wikipedia, most of them are the same or similar. In fact, many of the articles at the Harry Potter Wiki or direct copies that have been "dewikipediafied". So using your logic, the articles here, at Wikipedia, should be delted as well. John Reaves 14:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Smokey Joe. Just thought I'd make you aware of Wikipedia:Deletion review, in case you still want to carry on the discussion. It is not difficult at all to restore deleted pages, and that's what Deletion review is for. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 17:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Potter in translation series

Hi SmokeyJoe. The article was deleted because of the deletion nomination, which you can find here. The consensus was vastly in favour of deletion. See Wikipedia:Why was my article deleted? for further advice. If you are unhappy with the decision, please see Deletion review for information on how to appeal. Proto::► 14:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, no. The consensus was clear. Please go via deletion review as I said. Proto::► 00:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yellow Eyes and Russian Blue

Helo, I saw the comment on the rewording of Russian Blue having Yellow Eyes. Although I agree with your rewording, I am wondering if you have a source proving that yellow eyes are an imperfection found only in non-pedigrees. If you can prove this, I would like to see it, becasue my russian blue had yellow eyes, and he was a pure bred. Thanks. --Emevas 06:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know: here's a picture of the cat:


Ozy, 2 1/2 years old male Russian Blue

Thanks! --Emevas 06:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's actually a fact that purebred parents can carry genes to cause imperfections. In fact, purebreds have been bred so often, the animals have actually lost a lot of intelligence. --TylerMcBride 13:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you find a reliable citation for that fact and add your information to Cat breed. SmokeyJoe 02:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Right thing

Yes, because now the ongoing discussion is in one location rather than two. >Radiant< 12:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblocked

user:CanadianCaesar, were you overzealous in autoblocking 129.78.64.106 due to the actions of user:Moosethemoose?

Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 129.78.64.106 lifted or expired.

Request handled by: Yamla 16:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advisement on Good Faith and Civility

SmokeyJoe, I ask that you please comply with the wikipedia policies of Assuming Good Faith Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith and Civility Wikipedia:Civility.--Fahrenheit451 16:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Credential Verification

I have replied to your kind message on my talkpage. Any particular reason why you invited me specifically? William Connolley is probably the chap you need more than anyone. JFW | T@lk 22:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I asked you specifically because I see your edits and contributions a lot. I read far more pages than I edit. Your contributions are of very high quality and are clearly grounded in your expertise. You don't seem to engage much in wiki-policies, and I thought to ask you directly about Jimbo's proposal. I think the opinion of an expert is extremely relevent regarding a policy that would apply specifically to experts. SmokeyJoe 09:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:pnc nominated for deletion

See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. --Kevin Murray 23:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recreating deleted material

Please do not recreate deleted material, as you can see form the logs, Category:Neutral Good Wikipedians was deleted per a CfD an should not be recreated or readded to user pages. John Reaves (talk) 03:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion Review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Neutral Good Wikipedians. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SmokeyJoe 08:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. I'll leave a comment there. - jc37 10:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Essays

Discussion is presently active about the definition/description of "essays" at Wikipedia_talk:Policies_and_guidelines#Problem_with_wording. Radiant, Kevin Murray and myself are presently involved. I left a note on Father Goose's page as well. ... Kenosis 21:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Adnan Oktar

Based on some of our work together in the past, I though of you as good evaluator to assist in the dilemma at Talk:Adnan Oktar. I visited this page in response to a request at 3rd Op. --Kevin Murray 17:10, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Wikipedia:Numbers

Sorry for the late reply. Feel free to reuse that title for Wikipedia: Notability (numbers), or a redirect to it. Cheers. —Michael Z. 2007-10-08 20:49 Z

[edit] User:SmokeyJoe/HP

Hi. I have userfied the material you requested at the above temporary page. I hope this will be helpful to you. When you've finished with it, please just tag it with {{db-userreq}}. If I can be of further assistance, please just drop me a note at my talk page. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding fictional child stars

Hello! Thank you for this nice edit. I have a great deal of respect for such open-minded editors as yourself who are willing to take efforts to improve articles into accounts. Anyway, I just wanted to wish you a great night! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 06:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re. full protection of the article Albus Dumbledore.

Hello SmokeyJoe and thank you for contacting me. Sorry, but I decided to decline your request for unprotection of Albus Dumbledore. I understand that only a few users were involved in the edit warring, but it was still an edit war that can only be stopped with full protection. After all, despite their misbehavior, the users were not vandalizing the article but instead involved in a content dispute. I suggest that a discussion be created on the talk page to decide through consensus which of the disputed content will (or will not) be present in the article. The article shall then be promptly unprotected. Best regards, Húsönd 02:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An application of BIO

I got involved in Mitch Clem at AfD. Can you look at the references and let me know whether you think I'm right on his notability. He is not an important topic, but this illustrates an important application of the BIO and Notability rules. I think that the Minnesota Public Radio spot is just about enough, then the mention in PC World, while not in-depth clearly is saying this person is noticed. The other comixtalk source is marginal, but I think that it adds to credibilty. It appeares that Comixtalk has a blog section, but where he is covered is more akin to an online magazine in a scheduled and dated issue. Cheers! --Kevin Murray 15:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Straw Poll

Thanks for the advice. I didn't think of that before, but it makes sense. Professor marginalia (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NOR Request for arbitration

Because of your participation in discussions relating to the "PSTS" model in the No original research article, I am notifying you that a request for arbitration has been opened here. I invite you to provide a statement encouraging the Arbcom to review this matter, so that we can settle it once and for all. COGDEN 00:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not disputed (yet)

In moving this essay you commented that it should be as it was "disputed"; but this is not (yet?) the case. The only contention voiced was clearly a fallacious argument using an analogy that was clearly unrelated. I'm wondering if perhaps you have a viewpoint on it (and then I'd like to hear it for my own edification) that disputes (fair enough if so). The only other "issue" was forking from the existing OSE, but that isn't even an essay, it's a tiny section of an essay. To say that this is a fork of an accepted essay is a bit of a stretch. (Not even going into the fallacies of that section and the similarities between the WP:OSE and the existing one where the points are valid.) I would like to contest the move but more importantly gain insight and assistance in improving the writing and explanation of the precedent essay. Ultimately, it's a critically important aspect of Wikipedia and Wiki's future growth (or shrink as of late?) and I need all the help I can get to make the OSE essay clearer and better. Thanks for your help! VigilancePrime (talk) 21:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I replied at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Courier (comics)

Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 21:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of albums released in 2007

Thanks for your thoughts regarding the AfD of said article. You commented... The list (or is it a table?) needs expansion, including more notes, and may well become so large that it needs splitting. Wikipedia incorporates an encyclopedia of released albums, with some threshold of notability required. If you care to follow up on this, please feel free to leave a comment on the talk page, with more specific ideas for improvement. -Freekee (talk) 03:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: Wikipedia talk:Silence and consensus#Oppose

I think we got off on the wrong foot in that discussion thread. Reading your subsequent comments, you effectively reiterated what I was trying to say in the Wikipedia talk:Silence and consensus#Implied vs. is section several above where you joined the page. I read too much into your comment (and choice of section header) and failed to consider that it might be a reaction to the then-current wording of the page.

My own reaction was triggered by your suggestion to "call a poll". You did appear to me to be advocating polling far more widely than is current practice. Thank you for clearing up the misunderstanding in your subsequent comment.

Your point on trust is interesting and probably ought to be worked into this or some other page somewhere. (I'd also like to see if this page can be effectively consolidated into another "how the wiki works" page somewhere. I still think Kevin had some good points about instruction creep that we haven't yet resolved.) Thanks for your time. Rossami (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Straw poll to merge "Alternative terms for free software" to "Free and open source software"

Can you please comment at Talk:Alternative_terms_for_free_software#Survey. Thanks. --Karnesky (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Syracuse Zen Center comment

I wanted to thank you personally for your honest and forthright assessment of our efforts. It is good to see someone outside of our small community support us. Thanks again! Golgofrinchian (talk) 20:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] sign last comment at PROF

--Kevin Murray (talk) 00:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] W.marsh

Exercised his right to vanish (I was sad). The account was renamed to something innocuous and the new account was created at W.marsh to prevent impersonation. I hope this explains things. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] King of wiki

Hi. I appreciate the reasons you made the request and indeed applaud you for doing so. If the username was the only reason for the block, I would probably agree. The deleted contributions of this user, however, are not particularly pretty. There is one extolling the virtues of a road, one dedicated to the "dude that sits next to me in I.T.", one telling us that a country called "Amrica" can be described solely by the word "MCDONALDS" and one accusing someone of being the only queer in school. This is quite obviously a disruptive user. I do still applaud your concern. Sam Korn (smoddy) 15:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your mistake

I would like to notify you regarding the end of our discussion on my talk page. Your non-acceptance of your error in accusing me of misblocking has wasted a great deal of my, and other editors', time. I cannot force you to accept your mistake, but I am not required to respond to further accusations, foul-cries or disruptions. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Martial arts Notability

I saw you mention in the Edgar Sulite AfD, that you hadn't come across Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial arts/Notability before. It is a relatively new essay by some members of the MA project and any input to improve it would be appreciated. As it is currently only advisory it is informal in tone. --Nate1481(t/c) 14:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Atlantichurricanecenter

I was of the opinion that it was a "Misleading" and/or "Promotional" (More misleading) to this organization's Atlantic center http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/ . MBisanz talk 15:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with nicer worded templates. We do have a straight "warning" of a bad username,{{Uw-username}} that puts the account in Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over, but that category has a 1,062 account backlog at the moment. And we have 2 levels of username block, {{Uw-ublock}} for run of the mill violations and {{Uw-uhblock}} for egregious things. You might try looking around Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings or asking at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace to have a different wording. I'll note that in a given day, I think 6,000 accounts are created, so even giving them a once over catches only the most straightforward issues; and we've recently changed the username policy to discourage blocking of confusing names (as opposed to disruptive, promotional, role, or offensive names). Thanks for the feedback though, it does help shape my actions, and policy in general. MBisanz talk 01:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notice of deletion debate for Instant-runoff voting controversies

You have either participated in a previous deletion debate over this article, or edited the article or its Talk page. If you are interested in contributing to the current debate, please visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instant-runoff voting controversies (2nd nomination). Thanks. --Abd (talk) 22:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your Refactoring and removal of my rationale in an AfD debate

Stifle, you [1] removed my rationale in an AfD debate. This is offensive and improper. Please put my comments back. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't remove it, I refactored it (and other long comments) to the talk page. This was because the comments were so long that they impeded the reading of the day's AFDs. Stifle (talk) 08:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] “minor” edits, Wikipedia talk:Notability (schools)

Looks like we will just have to agree to disagree on that one.--Sting Buzz Me... 10:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion review for List of environmental websites

You voted to overturn the deletion for List of environmental websites based on the fact that the AFD did not reach consensus. Were you looking at the right AFD? The nominator for this article says that it was mentioned at the AFD for List of environmental periodicals, but I can't find any mention of it there. There was a separate AFD for this article at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_environmental_websites that the nominator did not mention. eaolson (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jbirdman

Hey, why did you post a welcome message on a MfD discussion? :S Ironholds 16:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Substing

Hi, just to let you know that when using certain templates on talk pages, for example welcome messages and user warnings, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:welcome}} instead of {{welcome}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you, Cenarium (talk) 17:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)