User talk:Calton: Difference between revisions

Hello:

I just wrote the page "The Union Theatre" and my understanding is that you feel it is a commercial or advertisement for the space.

The space is CLOSED and does not exist except as a piece of theatre history of Peterborough, Ontario. The intent is to have the history of this unique space noted.

I will place a "hangon" note at the top of the page.

Is there something in particular that I could add or delete that would make the entry more appropriate?

Thanks for your feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Germahughes (talk • contribs) 17:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

Archive01 12:21, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC) Archive02 20:23, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) Archive03 10:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC) Archive04 12:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC) Archive05 02:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC) Archive06 23:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC) Archive07 11:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Archive08 07:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC) Archive09 04:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC) Archive10 04:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC) Archive11 00:20, 4 December 2006 Archive12 23:59, 31 December 2006 Archive13 07:20, 12 February 2007 Archive14 14:46, 4 April 2007 Archive15 23:59, 31 May 2007 Archive16 23:59, 30 June 2007 Archive17 22:59, 14 September 2007 Archive18 23:59, 31 December 2007 Archive19 21:26, 8 February 2008 Archive20 09:50, 25 February 2009 Archive21 15:03, 4 July 2009 Archive22 08:13, 19 April 2010 Archive23 09:20, 17 November 2012 Archive24 00:00, 6 July 2015 Archive25 00:25, 3 November 2016 Archive26 16:00, 13 June 2017 Archive27 07:54, 28 June 2018‎ Archive28 01:34, 16 March 2019‎ Archive29 01:20, 18 May 2021 Archive30 07:02, 15 February 2022 Archive31 00:00, DAY MONTH YEAR

It's clean-up duty, mopping up after the dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that.

Some ground rules before you leave a message

1. I am not an admin. I did not delete your page or article, nor did I block you. I may have, at the very most, suggested or urged deletion of pages or articles but I have no power or ability to do so on my own. I'm just an editor.
2. This also means, of course, I cannot undelete your page/article, nor unblock you. I can, however, offer you a cookie.
3. If you are here to make an argument dependent on arcane or convoluted interpretations of Wikipedia guidelines or rules, note that Wikipedia is not game of nomic nor a court of law. Adherence to common sense and rational argument trumps ruleslawyering, as far as I'm concerned. I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt, thankyouverymuch.
4. There is no Rule 4.
5. Don't post when drunk. Seriously.
6. All communication sent via the "E-mail this user" link is considered public, at my discretion. Reasonable requests for confidentiality will be honored, but the whole "e-mail is sacrosanct and private" argument I do not buy for one solitary second. Do not expect to use that argument as an all-purpose shield.
7. Do not assume I'm stupid, especially when arguing for something obviously untrue. I do not respond well to having my intelligence insulted.
8. Don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams. Do I look like Montel Williams? Do I? NO? Then don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams.
9. Especially bogus, hostile, and/or trolling remarks are subject to disemvoweling.
10. Please post at the bottom of the page and "sign" your posts using the squiggly things (--~~~~).
11. Please extinguish all cigarettes, as this is a No Smoking page.

Thank you. -- The Management.

I will ask, but one more time Ma'am, do not post on my talk page again. If you do so, I will ask for assistance from an adminstrator. I hope I will not have to do that, though. Good Day to you, Ma'am. - Flatsky (talk) 06:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity - do you intend to report Flatsky as a Neutralhomer sock? JPG-GR (talk) 08:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Took care of it. Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Neutralhomer JPG-GR (talk) 09:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious about the use of the {{temporary userpage}} template when applying spam notices? As in: [1] .

Is that template transcluded in the tag you're using? Should it be there? Thanks for clarifying :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Calton,

Nothing against you personally, but your reasoning for eliminating the Grammy reference: "fame ain't contagious" was a bit rash don't you think. Really it'a an interesting and relevant fact about Rhymefest that ties directly into why he was mentioned in the article in the first place- because he won that Grammy for authoring "Jesus Walks".

I have to insist that we change it back, no disrepect to you.

Thanks

24.15.22.244 (talk) 17:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calton,

Are you really going to deprive people of information because your worried about it making someones accomplishments more credible? Rhymefest as a grammy winner is a fact and is something that someone reading thar article would care to know. You are being unreasonable at this point and I really don't think it's right. Your denying factual information, not opinion.

24.15.22.244 (talk) 03:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Listen Calton, My information is improving Rhymefest's article, don't single me out, by you changing back my edit in rhymfests article you returned it back to having orphaned and unworking links, which again denies the public information. If your purpose is to clean up and improve wikipedia, your actions are contadictory. It's hurting...

24.15.22.244 (talk) 03:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should remain

Hello:

I just wrote the page "The Union Theatre" and my understanding is that you feel it is a commercial or advertisement for the space.

The space is CLOSED and does not exist except as a piece of theatre history of Peterborough, Ontario. The intent is to have the history of this unique space noted.

I will place a "hangon" note at the top of the page.

Is there something in particular that I could add or delete that would make the entry more appropriate?

Thanks for your feedback.

Article in the San Francisco Weekly: [2].

I posted on WP:ANI about this: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Article_in_San_Francisco_Weekly. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

The Gindi Family of Israel is a very prominent family, among the wealthiest in the country. If you'd like we can delete the links, but Wikipedia is full of links, so I thought it was ok to add them. My only intention is to have the history of this family noted.

Gindi holdings (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)from: Gindi holdings[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hediedwithafelafelinhishhand.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 00:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your WP:CSD work. In cases of users named the same as companies as in User:Printplast for example, it would be better if you reported them to AIV as they are in the user space, not main space as articles. Thanks for your help. Alexf⁴² 12:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reviewing this article [3] and have noticed that you once voted for the deletion of a related article on Miss Tourism Queen International 2007, however, there are still remnants since the following editions are still existing: Miss Tourism Queen International 2004, Miss Tourism Queen International 2005, and Miss Tourism Queen International 2006. Please cast your opinion and votehere. Thanks. --Johnsoul (talk) 18:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for tagging. Did you mean to use the empty template? --Dweller (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed from your reply that your tag must have edit conflicted with an expansion of the article, but it didn't. It wasn't a very good article, but I'm struggling to see how it fit the criteria of empty. Anyway, I've prodded it, because the last time it went to AfD it was deleted because of lack of RS, which I guess will lead to a similar result this time around. --Dweller (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did this guy a favor by userfying his page. No good deed goes unpunished. :-) Bearian (talk) 01:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went to DRV and had it restored. Also, it has a raft of sources. And apparently they're well-enough known internationally to have an article on seven other Wikipedias. What gives? Chubbles (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put the AfD notice in there for the sake of full disclosure. I went to DRV the day after the AfD closed and had the article restored. Chubbles (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our journalist friend may have been made to walk the plank. Her name no longer appears on her paper's masthead.[4] I sent copies of the letter I sent to her two days prior to publication to her editors. I ambushed them, I think. I believe the editors were surprised by the revalation but had to print because cancelling was too late. Notice in the article that the sister stuff appears tacked on at the last minute. Maybe Wiki people stepped in for me. Maybe the editors had a fit. I don't know. A favor: Can you fix all links to my Talk page on "Attempted Outing"? "Attempted Outing" will go into archives soon and be uneditable. I would like the links to work, so can you make the links to archived versions of my Talk page as the current page is a blank? Two bloggers that I know of are going to write about the incident and maybe rival papers to the Weekly as well. I'm sorry for what happened but those yatches hounded me for a half a year and I had to take measures. Life without Wiki bullshit is pretty good. Lots of free time. Thanks for all. This message will self-destruct in ten seconds. 71.139.24.255 (talk) 02:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Griot, aren't you banned indefinitely? Found another sock in the drawer? Boodlesthecat (talk) 04:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Calton, while I admire your drive to rid Wikipedia of spam, I'm not sure tagging user pages with WP:CSD is the way to go. Have a look here for the right procedure. I know you've tagged a lot of these and may have had this discussion before, so please forgive me if you already know this. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 00:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying my own thoughts - and per an exchange I just had on my talk page - I think it's clear that obvious advertising can be deleted per CSD. Blogging or using the user page as a personal MySpace would still need to be MFD'd though. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 00:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoo boy! I've never seen the s.p.a.s come out in force quite so eagerly as for this one. He's got a pocketful of The Truth, don't he? --Orange Mike | Talk 04:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to "what part of 'empty' was unclear?", the simple answer is that the article was not empty in the terms of the speedy criteria you sought to apply to it - A3 covers articles with no content, which consist primarily of links, etc., but specifically excludes stubs which have valid context, which this did. Complain about pointless bureaucracy all you like, but the policy is quite clear on this, which is why your tag was rejected. Twice.

If, in the future, you have an issue with a decision of mine, kindly leave me a message on my talk page rather than a snarky comment in an edit summary. Thanks. _GB^T/C 08:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did I say I had a problem with legitimate criticism? Irrespective of the question of whether your "criticism" (a) even constituted criticism, as opposed to a snide one-liner, and (b) was legitimate or otherwise, its method of delivery was, put simply, uncivil. I would suggest you follow the link you provided me with and read the paragraph below. _GB^T/C 15:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No matter how much you may wish to obfuscate, this conversation is not about me, it's about you, and in particular it is about your lack of civility. To save you having to re-read the paragraph I linked to first time around, and lest you fail to spot the relevance to your own behaviour, allow me to quote (with added emphasis to make it as clear as can be) the pertinent sentence. "Every user is expected to interact with others civilly, calmly, and in a spirit of cooperation".

Your edit summary failed in that regard, and I would ask you, again, to be civil in your future dealings with myself and others. As I cannot be clearer than that, this discussion has nowhere further to go. _{The public face of GB}^T/C 17:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What, in any of the foregoing, has been in any way remotely uncivil? Clearly nothing, if you are reduced to the hyperbole of "endlessly pestering" (for which read "replying to your posts") and "wielding link after link" (for which read "pointing you to the same two links on civility twice"). As for ending this discussion, well, I did - just one paragraph above here. Tell you what, since you clearly didn't see it first time around, I'll do it again. This is the end of the conversation. Period / full stop. _{The public face of GB}^T/C 18:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was using my user page to temporarily draft an article before posting it and then deleting it from my user page. This is acceptable. Leave me alone. Ununtrium (talk) 13:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not lash out at other editors on topics you are not involved with simply because you have a personal grudge against an editor, which you did here. If your thinking is that you are going to follow me on Wikipedia to attack me (replete with such violent imagery as needing a "two by four") as part of your personal, irrational, and childish grudge, let me strongly disabuse you of that notion now. Please do not make me have to revisit this issue again. This is your first and only warning. Boodlesthecat (talk) 15:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]