User talk:EvanCarroll
Welcome!
|
Noticeboard comment
Blocking is intended to prevent harm to the encyclopaedia, but edits from several months ago don't really qualify as any significant threat. If the user gets three warnings within a few days you can report them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Hope this helps. Tim Vickers 05:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- To follow up on that, this user might have a legitimate reason for removing the tags. People sometimes disagree. Reporting them to ANI asking for a ban is not very ]
WikiProject Houston
|
You are invited to participate in WikiProject Houston, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about the Greater Houston area. |
{{unreferenced}}
{{
]- Thanks for the advice, I didn't even know about those templates. EvanCarroll 18:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Houston
Thank you for becoming a participant! Your expertise in the areas you mentioned will surely benefit the project. Please feel free to discuss anything related to the project at
Planeshift
Hey did you mean to nominate for AfD? You nominated the page for Redirects for Deletion. SpigotMap 04:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For constructive, varied and well-documented edits on Rudy Giuliani |
Dogru144 20:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism of Controversies of Rudy Giuliani
Greetings. I hope that you agree that the blanking of the article is completely POV. I'd have to research the matter, but I am trying to recall if it was Time WasteR that expunged all of the neg. material from the MA bio page, and shuttled it to this page.
Regardless, it is ironic that some Rudy partisan got all the negative stuff off the site, and onto the Controversies site. Now that the Controversies page has mushroomed, they are upset!! I hope that you share my vigilance to protect said article. Dogru144 23:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not quite as infused on this subject as you are, I'm not sure a Controversies of... page is ever a good place for non-redundant material. I just don't think that there is anything wrong with a wikipedia run consortium of wikilinks to the MA of those controversies. If someone wants to know why Rudy Giuliani is talked down upon they should be able to find out the reasons for this distaste without knowing all of the supposed good he has done. EvanCarroll 00:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- EvanCarroll, since you previously objected to my dismantling of Controversies of Rudy Giuliani, you should know that it is now up for AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversies of Rudy Giuliani. Wasted Time R 23:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)]
Kingwood High School
Regarding this edit: [1]
Kingwood is not its own community. It is a part of Houston that has its own postal address.
All schools in the Houston city limits should be stated as in "Houston, Texas" in the intro.
WhisperToMe (talk) 22:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
By the way, it would be wonderful if you took photographs of Kingwood and Kingwood Park and posted them on here! WhisperToMe (talk) 23:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Warning to 76.183.171.127
There is no such template as {{uw-bw}}. Please do not use it to replace the warning that I added, {{uw-biog4}}. --Nlu (talk) 08:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- I added the warning, and signed it, you do not have my permission to alter that which I sign... Or remove it. I was looking for {{]
IMDB
There is zero to no reason to have two IMDB links in an article. There is a discussion about this extremely pointless part of the infobox over at [2]. As you can see, it was added in to the infobox after almost no consensus whatsoever less than a month ago (which means only a very tiny fraction of infoboxes have this IMDB link included right now, and I'd like that number to be even tinier), and many people want it removed from it, although no one has acted upon that because the template is protected from editing. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 01:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- You could make an argument for removing IMDB links in External Links. I would disagree. You however can't make an argument for removing information from an standardized infobox. We can invoke an admin. But an infobox has a standardized subset of info for the purpose of a presenting a uniformed encyclopedia. You violate that integrity when you rub off your view-points as WP Policy: they are not. If you have want the infobox changed, you need to push towards a consensus or admin action and not remove other peoples work to better fit your preference. FYI, I have no preference as to whether or not IMDB links are in the Infobox, but as it currently stands I would highly prefer you not remove the hard work of others to create a uniform encyclopedia. EvanCarroll (talk) 16:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't understand this argument. The IMDB was only added to the Template_talk:Infobox_actor#IMDB_link_in_infobox.3F; the very last few posts there point toward removing it from the infobox, but no one has acted upon that yet. Whether the IMDB is included in the actor infobox or not is supposed to be the result of our viewpoints, it's certainly not a set-in-stone fact that it should be. Also, just because a field is included in the infobox template, doesn't mean it has to be used, the infobox also includes "restingplace" and "restingplacecoordinates" (these should perhaps also be removed), which I've not seen used anywhere. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 18:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)]
- I don't understand this argument. The IMDB was only added to the
- The field is there for a reason, an Infobox is there for a reason: uniformity, and you're breaking it. If you want the Infobox changed, go for it. Create a debate. dispute the addition of IMDB. As it is, the field is there for a reason, and you are not in the right to strip it out when numerous other people opt to utilize it. It isn't an integral feature of the Infobox, granted. But the consistency of the infobox is the sole purpose of the Infobox. It doesn't matter when a feature gets added, the Infobox, should always closely match a filled out modern template of the infobox. Furthermore, you're argument about duplication is total WP:STYLE. From the manual of style In theory, the fields in an infobox should be consistent across every article using it. You're violating that consistency without just reason.
- The infobox is not supposed to be the sole place for information, I agree; however, an external link is not information in that sense. The uniformity you're talking about doesn't exist because: 1. infobox fields are deleted and created on a regular basis so there has never been the kind of definitive, consistant version that you seem to be implying exists - which leads into 2. not all actor infoboxes across Wikipedia contain the same thing - many list simply the name, birthplace and birthdate; some also have "children" and "parents", "influences" and other variables; some include deleted sections like "height" and "notable roles": at the moment, very very few infobxes contain the IMDB field (go over, say, the entire cast of The Player and see that probably not a single one of the 70 or so actors listed has an IMDB field in their infobox), so, in fact, adding it breaks the consistancy of the majority - if you want to look at it from that point of view. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- The field is there for a reason, an Infobox is there for a reason: uniformity, and you're breaking it. If you want the Infobox changed, go for it. Create a debate. dispute the addition of IMDB. As it is, the field is there for a reason, and you are not in the right to strip it out when numerous other people opt to utilize it. It isn't an integral feature of the Infobox, granted. But the consistency of the infobox is the sole purpose of the Infobox. It doesn't matter when a feature gets added, the Infobox, should always closely match a filled out modern template of the infobox. Furthermore, you're argument about duplication is total
- A protected Infobox with slots for information is safe for inclusion into that implemented infobox, unless noted by the usage-docs on the infobox. If you press issue further I will follow a RfM -- Do not continue to strip infoboxes of adequately entered information -- try to better the Infoboxes through WP:SNOWBALL -- get over it and adapt, or take the right path to oppose it but do not discourage the adoption of a feature based on a personal whim. PS. Infoboxes are often easily parseable data, natural language prose are not, we can style an IMDB link differently, and even have it hide-by-default per the source of the infobox, but it is a much greater task to retrieve the information you are removing or to source it from the another distinct template within the page. Infoboxes can be thought of as a autonomous and distinct profile that just so happens to reside in the same namespace as the article. EvanCarroll 21:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)]
- The problem with an IMDB link is that it isn't information, it's a link. So I am not stripping the infoboxes of any information. Furthermore, the person who requested the addition of the IMDB link to the infobox in the first place [3], User:ConradPino, says that this field is "optional" [4]. Anyway, I put in a request with User:Patrick to delete the IMDB field from the infobox template (he was the one who added it at ConradPino's request), based on the apparent consensus to delete it on the template's discussion page All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- A protected Infobox with slots for information is safe for inclusion into that implemented infobox, unless noted by the usage-docs on the infobox. If you press issue further I will follow a RfM -- Do not continue to strip infoboxes of adequately entered information -- try to better the Infoboxes through
SSP
You did not file your SSP case correctly. You made it part of another case. Please resubmit per the directions. You also need to provide informative diffs. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Mike Huckabee Merge Proposal
Please comment on merging
Blanking of Abdullah Bin Khalid Al-Thani
Hi. One editor has opted to delete this from the Giuliani Partners article, saying that it belongs in the
Reply
Thanks for your comments on my user page. I like keeping conversations in one place, so I've posted my reply there. Cheers! Unschool 05:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Your user page
Whoops. I made a small correction on your user page—what I assumed was an innocent spelling error. But now, looking at the history, I see that it is possible that you intended to use that spelling (though I'm not clear as to why). My apologies, if I stepped over the line. My intentions were benevolent, I assure you. Unschool (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Adp.gif
Thanks for uploading
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our
Fair use rationale for Image:Adp.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to
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 "
- That is not acceptable, in a non-threating fashion: your bots utility will be disputed in the immediate future through official channels. A smarter bot, can fix the problem the right way and without tagging images for deletion or removing them from articles. Your bot does not currently suffice an acceptability requirement. Fair use can be determined implicitly from the use and a rational can obviously be automated, you make no such attempt. And no Human would take the action your bot has taken. I cite rules: IGNORE_THE_RULES, and SNOWBALL to back my conclusion your bot must go; it is not in the best interest of the encyclopedia. EvanCarroll (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
HAPPY HOLIDAYS
You're right, this is probably not notable. But without a rationale for the prod, I have removed the tag. Please take it to
- The reason is obvious WP:A, WP:N. It is stupid to remove a prod if you agree, especially if you were able to discern the reason for the prod. You're right ... not notable. EvanCarroll (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Was deleted less than a year ago at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_12#Showbiz_families_-_H.
Thanks
Thanks for correcting my tag over at
Ping (video games) article
Hi, you claimed you were an expert on that topic, so I'm wondering if you could add info on the following:
1- Is the ping value in ms usually for a both way travel delay? As in, 15 ms going, 15ms coming back = ping of 30? Or is it a 1 way value (and therefore close to the speed of light delay in a best case scenario?)
2- I think other n00bs might not even know why a ping "is", so maybe some expansion on this would help :P See the talk page, some guy didn't know what ping meant still. (I know, kinda, but I'm not sure) Althena (talk) 17:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Out Campaign
Hello EvanCarroll. How are you? Thank you for creating the article Out Campaign. Good job! We are trying to promote the article Richard Dawkins to the FA status. You are invited to comtribute. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
If you want to create a page on Wikibooks, you should head over to Wikibooks [6], not create it on Wikipedia. It can be confusing, but it are separated (but related) projects.
- You're right and I know that -- setting the skins to the same has made this confusing.EvanCarroll (talk) 20:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
David Huckabee
User David in DC has unilaterally censored this page from the American Criminals category. You should restore it and if he starts an edit war (as he is wont to do with his suspected sockpuppet jpk212) you should file an ANI on him. He/they have been causing mischief in an attempt to censor the child molestation prison sentence served by an obscure member of a 60's pop group, Peter Yarrow. John celona (talk) 13:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
question re contributor
Sir: I have a question regarding a user who you have outted as having a strong wp:coi involving his editing of a certain page? Should I speak to you here or is there a better way to contact you? I am a bit discouraged at this point. Thanks65.91.69.113 (talk) 18:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
All communication pertaining to WP users should be done on Wikipedia so they are entitled to see what is said. EvanCarroll (talk) 16:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of David Huckabee
A
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
- *My interest in this article is genuine. I do not think David Huckabee is notable. Since a year has passed since the last proposed deletion ended in no consensus, I'd like to see it come up again. I hope you won't take offense. Thanks! CorpITGuy (talk) 16:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I will not forward my request to WP:UNDUE to the negative aspects. Can you help? Thanks! CorpITGuy (talk) 12:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)]
- I would say if your local newspapers are in themselves notable and reliable than yes. With that said, generally speaking, notability flows, to some degree, within one familial degree of a highly-notable person. You could in theory merge this whole well-researched and properly weighted article (not Wiki's fault the press dwells on the negative) into his dad; but, then it would throw off the weight there, and an equal amount of resistance would reveal itself. A good quantity of highly-notable people have their news-worthy family members on wiki, especially if it speaks to matters they are running on. Keeping this on its own page, permits a statement akin to "Huckabee runs on X, but his own family values have been called into question in regards to his son foobar by the NYT." That might now be properly weighed in the Huckabee article without drawing undue attention to the details of his son's transgressions. I had also had enough information on Huckabee to warrant a spin off article before I began. EvanCarroll (talk) 17:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Prod at Outwit (software)
Can you please provide a reason for the {{
]
- I've removed the prod because I generally don't like proding for notability. But, it sounds like one big advertisement for something. Half of it is in marketing lingo, the "outwit kernel". "outwith hub", "outwit images" -- no one really cares. It seems like just another OS project that wants to advertise on Wiki. No reputable primary source exists for this, and its popularity is easily challenged. Why should it stay? You have some pretty pictures but I question how much the authors understand about wikipedia -- articles like this are a joke. If you want to teach people about OutWit and use the meta* platform to do so write a wikibook -- you've got some excellent screen shots. Take a look at my profile on wikibooks, I delete perl modules all the time on wikipedia and create wikibooks for them. ;) EvanCarroll (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- I tend to agree with you; I'm just asking that you provide the reason within the template as is required (as well as an edit summary) to guide others who come to the page and see the prod there. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- Might want to reprod then -- I don't see any mention at all of the source code, I just removed the link spam and restructured the screen scraper page -- maybe outwit has a commercial incentive to spam wiki. EvanCarroll (talk) 03:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)]
- Might want to reprod then -- I don't see any mention at all of the source code, I just removed the link spam and restructured the
- I tend to agree with you; I'm just asking that you provide the reason within the template as is required (as well as an edit summary) to guide others who come to the page and see the prod there. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
List of Houston neighborhoods
Please review and participate in the
]Speedy deletion nomination of Earth Quest Adventures
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Get a life you lame waste of air. I mean seriously one save and one minutes later your on my ass.. Try helping build the article first. System Lord of the Internets (talk) 16:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Earth Quest Adventures
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Friendly Note
Removal of of the warning tags does not remove the issue of
Photo requests
Hey Evan! Would you mind fulfilling some photo requests for the Kingwood area, if you have some time? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 02:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
hello
hi, how are you? mikeMdupont (talk) 19:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
False citation in partial index
Hi. In July 2009 you added the claim "Partial Indexes have been present in Postgresql since at least version 7.0" to the partial index article, cited from [7]. However, the cited source makes no mention of partial indexes.
PostgreSQL 7.1 documentation states "Partial indices are not currently supported by PostgreSQL, but they were once supported by its predecessor Postgres, and much of the code is still there. We hope to revive support for this feature someday"
So please verify your sources more carefully.
Also, try avoiding statements like "MySQL as of version 5.4 still does not support Partial Indexes" — the word "still" is your personal opinion; Wikipedia should state facts. See
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia :) -- intgr [talk] 19:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Sean Wolfington
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a
AfD nomination of PlaneShift (video game)
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a
Wikipedia Ambassador Program in Houston
Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you're listed as a Wikipedian from Houston. The
Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).
If you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone in Houston who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page. Thanks!--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of David Bosset
Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. bonadea contributions talk 19:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Basically, that's the reason I deleted it. It was blanked as an attack page and tagged for speedy deletion. I didn't read it; I merely followed procedure and deleted it as a potential attack. --talk) 04:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)]
- I want to refute that, it isn't an attack page. It is as neutral as you can be when you're writing about a man only known, though known well, for tax evasion schemes. Evan Carroll (talk) 05:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
The article David Bosset prefix:Wikipedia:Deletion review has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- This is the wrong namespace for Deletion review. To have an article's deletion reviewed, please go to WP:DELREVand follow the instructions there instead of creating a new article here.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Seegoon (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
All fixed
I've gone ahead and restored the article for you. As I pointed out, all I saw was a deletion notice with a courtesy blanking notice. In reviewing your text, I saw nothing that attacked the subject. --
User:EvanCarroll/Why I Fucking Hate Wikipedia - a rebuttal (on one point)
Re "voting", we're explicitly not a democracy, and AfD is explicitly not a vote :P. Ironholds (talk) 19:15, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride: Houston
You are invited to participate in
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, EvanCarroll. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, EvanCarroll. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of David Huckabee for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Huckabee is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Huckabee (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, EvanCarroll. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)