User talk:Zetawoof/Archive4

This page contains archived discussion from User talk:Zetawoof. Please bring any new discussion there.

Suresh[edit]

Much better than prodding it, thanks. Dorfklatsch 19:43, January 3, 2008

Your request[edit]

I won't restore all the articles I deleted. As far as I'm concerned, there was blatant advertising involved in all of them. There may have been individual cases where it was more blatant than others, but all of them were blatant. Advertising was in fact the sole purpose of the articles' existence, and most of the content appeared to be taken from the manufacturer's promotional material. But if you think there is grounds for a deletion review, by all means go ahead with it. Deb (talk) 13:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reg: Speedy Deletion[edit]

I had only requested to remove me from here but what I see you are eager to delete every thing on wikipedia. Brhmand Pujan page was already there since last Dec. You see This page was tagged stubbed & orphaned but you see it is growing since last month. Eukesh, Greame, Aleta are improving it see (history), I am not touching this page due to it's sensitive conditions. Yes you read it again & you too can edit it if/where essential. But kindly don’t remove this page Rest of the pages were created by me your goodself can link those pages if you feel but don't your good self feel Brhmand Pujan article which has no other reason other than stub-orphan now has the reason to stay & grow. I request you to keep this page. & remove other new created page if they appear inappropriate to you.Pls Zetawoof help me out pls.-Dralansun (talk) 05:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that those articles continued to exist was an oversight, not a deliberate decision. The deletion discussion back in December concluded that the subjects of those articles (Brhma[a]nd Pujan and Naresh Sonee) are not suitable topics for articles at this time. Please do not recreate either of them, or any articles on related subjects.

Furthermore, you really need to stop canvassing every editor in sight whenever you want help. (For instance, you tried to convince a computer program to help edit your articles, ignoring a big red warning that explained what was going on.) It's considered rude. Zetawoof_(ζ) 08:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poodle hybrid resolution[edit]

Good Morning Zetawoof. I have made a statement offering a position as mediator for the Poodle hybrid case submitted to the Mediation Cabal - if you are willing to accept me as such, I would appreciate if you could leave a statement saying whether you do or do not. Thank you. Regards, Rudget . 18:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh meat, huh? Works for me, I suppose. Good luck keeping Nismonx involved, though. Zetawoof_(ζ) 21:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in The Simpsons by MBTI type[edit]

I thought that as closer you might like to know that following discussion with the deleting admin here and here the article has been undeleted and I have reopened and relisted the discussion. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB[edit]

Thanks, I thought I added a link to the Marine Corps portal but I must have hit save to fast. Its on there now.--Kumioko (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Powersurge[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Powersurge, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powersurge. Thank you. Welt^anschaunng 08:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]

:)--{{123Pie|Talk}} 14:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shortland Street[edit]

No need to slow down, I was talking to David Gerard, not to you. =). I agree 100% with what you've said in the deletion discussion, and in my mind the statement "nominating in the face of an arbcom injunction shows jawdroppingly defective judgement, such as to question value of any nomination from this nominator" is more than a little unfair and hostile, especially when the injunction says nothing about taking such articles to AfD. So much so that I felt I had to speak out. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Ah, cool. Indentation just made it look like you were replying to me. Zetawoof_(ζ) 20:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you've got mail :)[edit]

Hello, Zetawoof. You have new messages at Travellingcari's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks[edit]

For the help on the whitelist (not the world's most popular page), appreciated as I have been rather busy of late, cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Just picking off the low-hanging fruit. Zetawoof_(ζ) 09:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relationships between similar devices[edit]

One of the main uses of an encyclopedia is to provide a broad understanding of the relationships between different similar concepts and ideas. Whereas there are specialized publications for details, the encyclopedia helps with lateral thinking, to make interdisciplinary connections between disparate fields of study. In my research I design, build, test, and manufacture hydrophones and geophones, which I note are quite similar to one another. Making the connection between each of the four states-of-matter, and the equivalents of microphones in each of these four states-of-matter, I believe is useful.

I noticed that you deleted this information from my contributions on hydrophones, geophones, etc.. Thus I would welcome your thoughts on alternate ways of presenting this useful connection in Wikipedia, as a number of other researchers have found these connections (mention of these relationships between the devices) to be useful.Glogger (talk) 03:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of Wikipedia's core policies is verifiability. Can you cite reliable sources (published papers in music theory, for instance) which make this connection? Zetawoof_(ζ) 03:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you for your comments on MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist and Spam-whitelist. Bit of an obscure corner of wikipedia which makes it especially nice to have additional input. Drop me a note any time. ;)--Hu12 (talk) 10:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PROD on NoteBurner M4P Converter[edit]

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from NoteBurner M4P Converter, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Redfarmer (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Megalithic geometry[edit]

I think it is easier to read a Wiki article with images, especially if the subject is technical, as this one is. Not anyone knows what a pendulum is, for example. You should put at least this one back.--Little sawyer (talk) 11:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If someone doesn't know what a pendulum is, they can click on a link and find out - there's no need to explain everything in every article when we have plenty of other articles. And if someone doesn't know what the sun or moon is, I'm truly frightened.

In any case, it's a moot point now, as the article is gone. Zetawoof_(ζ) 21:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

pinball protection[edit]

thanks for getting the pinball article tagged; if you couldn't tell by the lengthy talk page item, there are two admins who feel compelled to keep the article locked even after (some semblance of) consensus was reached. They expressed concerns over what some would call excessive WP:EL, and there was agreement on how to handle that, but they have not unlocked the article to allow even those of us who participated in the discussion to make changes -- any changes -- at all. What recommendations do you have on this, considering that it's not easy to go suggest that two admins are handling an article's access improperly? Thx... SpikeJones (talk) 12:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Restore Image:Dogcow.png?[edit]

Yep, it looks like vandalism that went unchecked for eight days. I've restored the image, thanks for the heads-up. east.718 at 19:50, March 31, 2008

Proprietary[edit]

Sorry but the correct response to incorrect or biased information is for it to be removed, not left in articles in the hope that something accurate or unbiased comes along. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 01:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of top 100 web sites in the United Kingdom[edit]

Permission from Alexa. Because Alexa Internet understands that we are an information resource, we are happy to have people refer to our data in their own work. As long as you credit us appropriately as the source, do not mis-represent the data or attribute Alexa Internet with your subsequent analysis thereof, please feel free to cite Alexa's information, including our charts and graphs, in your publications. There is no copyvio here. Can you please reconsider your vote?Anwar (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to be permitting the use of Alexa data in larger works, not the wholesale reproduction of their data. Zetawoof_(ζ) 01:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, The list is now sortable with additional data from Compete.com. So, it is no longer a wholesale reproduction of Alexa ranks only.Anwar (talk) 19:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zetawoof on testwiki[edit]

Noticed this when I was unifying my account. It's not mine - any idea whose it is, and why it exists? Zetawoof_(ζ) 21:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be mine. I did that to demonstrate what I perceive to be a bug in the software, which is currently WONTFIXed. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 22:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So why did you happen to pick me as your test subject? Just curious. Zetawoof_(ζ) 23:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picked at random from any user which did not exist but had imported edits. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 21:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Water in Our World[edit]

I think "Pt" in the article "Water in Our World" meant petatonnes, i.e. 10^18 kg (a trillion by the traditional scale, a quintillion by the Merkin scale), not pints. JIP | Talk 20:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps - indeed, water cites that value. Any case, it's gone now. Zetawoof_(ζ) 01:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Top of the Pops 2003.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Top of the Pops 2003.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted. Looks like someone mangled the infobox which included the image, making it go orphaned by mistake. Zetawoof_(ζ) 05:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doxie-Pin[edit]

Check the Doxie-Pin talk page.Cheat.2.Win 01:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vengeful spirit[edit]

Umm, didn't you noticed that I already had an AFD? I don't know what to do... Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odd... my edit went through first, it looks like. It's possible that MediaWiki decided to merge our edits automatically or something. Zetawoof_(ζ) 09:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promote africa[edit]

I had no problem speedy deleting these, just a request that when tagging an article with an open AFD for speedy can you leave the afd in place so that who ever deletes is aware of it and can close that discussion as well. Gnan garra

I'm pretty sure that I left the AFD tags in place, just stuck the {{db-advert}} above it. Zetawoof_(ζ) 21:36, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

California Spangled Cat[edit]

It's CaliforniA Spangled, NOT Californian Spangled in English AND French. Caserini (talk) 19:15, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article on the French Wikipedia has an 'n'... if this really is incorrect, fix it there. Zetawoof_(ζ) 23:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]