User talk:Kannie/Archive 1

This page 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.

Hi Umalee,

I saw your name in the category for users requesting adoption. If you are still interested in being adopted, I can adopt you. If you want to read about my contributions and about me, just visit my user page. Just let me know on my talk page! --lovelaughterlife♥^talk? 04:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I have been off and on for the past 3 weeks.. just real life stuff, like my trip to the States and HUGE independent studies and exams coming up. Anyways, I will still be on Wikipedia off and on for the next month too. If you are seriously looking for an editor to adopt you, I could refer you to some who are seeking to adopt. I was reading over the list of possible adopters, and I definitly recommend User:CattleGirl or User:(aeropagitica). CattleGirl is on vacation right now, as states her user page, but she is planning on requesting for an adminship position soon. (aeropagitica) is an administrator on Wikipedia. If you ask either of them, I think they would be more than happy to adopt you! However, I'm still here if you need any immediate help :) --lovelaughterlife♥^talk? 21:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I'm so chuffed by the totally unexpected recommendation from Lovelaughterlife above! May I just say that Lovelaughterlife is an amazingly positive and vibrant handle? Warm regards, (aeropagitica) 22:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello there! Welcome to WP! I hope you enjoy your time here. I'm actually not all that new, but I felt like editing the sandbox. Feel free to stop by my talk page if you need any help or just want to say hello, though. GassyGuy 19:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Would you like to be adopted? Let me know which areas interest you here on WP and I might be able to help! A message on my Talk page is the best way to contact me. I am on UK time (GMT+0), if that is an issue. (aeropagitica) 22:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Lovelaughter said you were a good 'adoptive parent', for lack of a better word. Is it okay if I get adopted by you? --

Umalee

18:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine with me! Feel free to ask my any questions that you have about Wikipedia and I will do my best to answer them for you. There may be a delay where I am asleep or at work but I will respond as soon as I can! Regards, (aeropagitica) 18:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure I wouldn't mind helping you out here and there :). If you have any questions feel free to contact, I'd be glad to help.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 05:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I have a lot of questions. My first one would be if I saw were to see an article that needed clean up, or needed a professnial (think doctor or lawyer) and yet has no disclaimer saying so. What should I do in that case? Also, how do I make citations for an article? --

21:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, if I came across and article that I thought required the attentions of an expert in the subject, I would tag it with {{

WP:CITE and footnote information can be found at WP:FOOT. There's a lot to take in with my answer. Let me know about your follow-up questions and we'll go from there. Regards, (aeropagitica)

22:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Havent heard From you in a long time.. Wats Up..!!Need Help Pliz do Contact me..Bye.ø~Cometstyles~ø^(talk)

• I dont need help and I asked if you needed Help becoz you havent been Editing 4r a long time..Ok byeee..Cometstyles ^talk
• If you would like to Update your Userpage and make it look something like mine ..I would be more then happy to help...--Cometstyles 05:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
• Actually the only thing I know is to crete a new 'article' under your use name then Move all your userboxes in your new subpage and link it on your main userpage for example use this:
• User:Umalee/userboxes..OK and if you need any more help Aks ..OK--Cometstyles 05:50, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Umalee,I have created a Userbox section for you and if you like it you can keep it but if you dont you can revert your Userpage to its Original Version.Ok Bye..ø~Cometstyles~ø^(talk)

Hey, I like your new Userbox section - I have one just like it! Good call on that one! (aeropagitica) 22:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you add a subpage to your user page? --

20:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi! The instructions can be found at

WP:USERPAGE#How_do_I_create_a_user_subpage.3F. Regards, (aeropagitica)

22:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry if you Didnt like your New Userbox Section..Bye..ø~Cometstyles~ø^(talk)

Anywayz here ist he Linkif you want 2 know the number of Edits you make which right now is over 100 edits Link--Cometstyles 04:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

How can I put something up on my userpage that says I'm taking a short break from editing but will respond to any messages I get? Sorry for asking so many questions. --

02:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello! You don't need to apologise for asking questions, that's one of the reasons why I am here - to help you! To place a notice that you are on a Wikibreak on to your Userpage, you need to create/copy a template notice like mine - User:(aeropagitica)/wikibreak . You can then fill in the blanks with the to/from dates and a reason, if you want to give one. Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Stub--Cometstyles 15:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

1. How do you designate an article a stub?
2. And how do you get the infoboxes that says "this article is part of {insert article group name here} and has such-and-such rating and such-and-such importance)"--
   Umalee
   15:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
3. I have another question. How do you make it so the stub refers only to a certain section instead of the whole article? --
   Umalee
   17:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

1. Wikipedia:Stub gives all of the information about stubs that you should require. An article is a stub if it is:

   "...is too short to provide encyclopaedic coverage of the subject, but not so short as to provide no useful information."
   

   A stub is a short article with the potential for expansion, rather than a limited definition of the article title. This is because

   Wikipedia is not a dictionary

   and definitions can be Transwikied to Wiktionary or another appropriate Wiki project.
   

2. Infoboxes

   Politics of the United States is an article that I have found with an infobox side menu, which I assume is similar to what you are referring to? I haven't found one with a rating and importance tag on it, can you provide an example, please? The infobox on Politics page is a Template, similar to the Wikibreak template that we discussed earlier. You can find it at Template:Politics of the United States. I think in this case the template was created to group the articles together for the Politics portal project, as it makes it easier for researchers and editors to locate articles related by similar themes and concepts.

3. A stub does refer to the entire article at the time of its initial creation. If you want to expand a particular section of an article then the {{
   sectstub
   }} tag to indicate that a section requires expansion too.

Finally, I am very sorry about not sending this reply to you earlier! I was interrupted in the middle of typing and I thought that I had sent it to you. My sincere apologies and I hope that I have no inconvenienced you with my tardy response. Regards, (aeropagitica) 23:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there any way to link the petition to restore our right to vote in the wikimedia foundation on my user page? --

17:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide me with a link to what you are talking about, please? (aeropagitica) 20:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Your addition of links to the Patrice Munsel article, in my opinion, takes away more than it adds. Why do we need red links to people who will likely never have their own articles? The second link to Metropolitan leads to a disambiguation page; if the reader wanted to investigate the Met they could use the first link, only two sentences earlier, which actually takes them to a useful article. See WP:MOS, the section "Wikilinking", and WP:DATE, section "Partial dates". Especially, read about overlinking in WP:MOS-L. Linking every year is, in effect, changing the style established by the original editor, and changing from one acceptable style to another is generally discouraged. There is so much real, useful work to be done; we should add information that is lacking, or fix errors, or clean up true ugliness before we go adding a lot of links just for the sake of linking everything possible. Happy editing! Chris the speller 05:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

No need for being sorry, we all had to learn, and all made questionable edits while learning. I hope you found my assigned reading interesting and not overwhelming. Call on me any time you have a question. The guidelines are not always easy to find or easy to understand, part of the reason it takes a while before people stop trying to correct you (some still try to correct me, even when I follow the guidelines to a 'T'.) And don't get discouraged; your edits become more satisfying as you build experience and the confidence that comes with it. Chris the speller 19:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello. You added a merge suggestion to The Frost King but did not give your reasons for suggesting this merger on the talk page. Please do so, or remove the merge suggestion. Thanks. Cheers, Doctormatt 06:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really sure how to go about doing it. Smerdis of Tlön might know. I'll ask him, or you can. --Bluejay Young 15:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically, to start a merger you copy all of the text in the article to merge from, and add it under a new subject header in the article to merge to. Then you look and see if you made any formatting messes, or created any redundancies in the sense of the article. At Talk:Helen Keller, there does not seem to be unanimous consensus that the Frost King material ought to be merged, though. I have no strong opinion either way, but it probably needs to be talked over a bit before the merger actually takes place. - Smerdis of Tlön 15:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the status . Hope you can help.

AzaBot 23:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

You accidentally overwrote the content of the template [1]. Don't feel bad, you aren't the first person to do it :) . I just wanted to let you know so that you can avoid it in the future. I have reverted. --Versageek 03:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

When you go to edit - make sure you are on a talk page, not on the Template:anon page. The page name appears above the edit box.

The syntax for the anon welcome on a talk page would be:
{{subst:anon}} --~~~~. --Versageek 03:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Please try to be more cautious when you are leaving vandalism warnings for people. Thank you, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

If you don't know why you're warning someone, you should not be doing it. Period. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I know perfrectly well why I gave you a warning. You deleted what I presume to be someone else's comment on an article talk page. --

Umalee

20:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

The comment you're referring to was an attack comment. [2] If you cannot differentiate between actual vandalism and the removal of discussion board insults, you have no place warning people. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. --

Umalee

21:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Another thing to be careful about. You have removed red links systematically for Anatol Rapoport. But red links have a function in indicating what future Wikipedia articles are needed, such as "teach-in". So, please revert. Bellagio99 22:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"reverting yourself" sounds pretty daring -- and seriously, good ego strength. Thanks. And let's keep moving forward;-)

Bellagio99 00:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, sorry. I'm not used to these wikis just yet.--AveryG 05:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Hey man, you can take down the lyrics. I suppose I could post them if Rise Against provided the lyrics on their site (which they don't) and used it as a reference, but since no reference is available, you're correct in taking them down. I'll be doing it also for Give it All.

76.97.157.1 05:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your Welcome

Thank you very much

Hello,

You can check the IP with a few services listed here Wikipedia:Recent_changes_patrol#Trace_IP A more experienced Vandal fighter or admin might be able to give you a better answers. All the best...Leafyplant 17:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Umalee. Unfortunately, your question on Dynamic IP's is a bit too technical for me to answer. You might consider asking at the village pump's technical area, though. -- P.B. Pilhet 17:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Please don't add Category:Clothing retailers or Category:Canada to articles that are already filed in Category:Clothing retailers of Canada — Wikipedia does not apply duplicate categorization. Thanks. Bearcat 22:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thank you for the welcome note. I found it funny you forgot to sign. I have trouble remembering to do so too. :) I do have one question. I see that people have warnings on their talk page after they vandalize pages. How can I warn people? Pizzachicken 19:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, what is this WelcomeBotResearch thing? --Pizzachicken 19:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I read a little about it. I don't have to do anything, so that's ok. I'll stop bugging you now. :) Pizzachicken 19:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on deleting the "Bastardy" section from the article. It really was out of place, as written, but no one had shown your boldness of thought. (Regrettably, some touchy persons, themselves born out of wedlock, deleted a thought-provoking list of historic persons who had been born illegitimate.) logologist|Talk 02:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, IMO, it would make sense to take out the list of historic illegitament people. Wikipedia shouldn't be a list. It should be an encyclopedia. --

Umalee

23:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

hi umalee, article "Cory Williams"

needs serious attention and expert assistance. the basic issue is Cory Williams clearly wrote / created his own article as a form of blatant advertising. Cory Williams is not noteworthy in my opinion, as well as others that have debated and discussed the issue at hand. Clearly the Cory Williams article has violated TOS, and this issue with bias and neutrality needs expert help. thanks kindly TomSkillingJr.

Umalee, you're the second user (?) that has suggested that i quote "calm down". i feel very strongly on this issue, because the article is blatant advertising and bias resume created by Cory Williams to help propagandate his "career". I (myself) have been on tv, in paper, and on youtube. does that mean i deserve an article on wikipedia so i can google myself ? clearly, the answer is no. i apologize if i have some emotion attached to this issue. i guess i will try to

calm

down. possibly its something i should read up on. because the focus is turning to into a argument rather than an open civil debate.

to me the its civil to ask , "is it okay to write your own wikipedia articles (about your life and self) in an online encyclopedia ?" in my view point, it's completely bias and unfair to have pages created for people who upload videos to youtube and cheat their terms of service. regardless, i'll read up on how to cool down, i must have lost my point somewhere. Can you (and others) tell i am upset that the article is written like an self-advertisement for a man who openly cheated Youtube.com? thanks for advice. i'll read up on policy further TomSkillingJr.

== TINKLECOMM Mail ==

MY ARTICLE DOES NOT NEED TO BE DELTED BECAUSE IF SO THEN ALL ATRICLES ITHAT HAVE TO DO WITH WEBBASED MAIL NEED TO ALSO. DO NOT LEAVE THOSE TAGS ON MY PAGE SAYING THAT IT NEEDS TO BE DELTED BECAUSE ITS NON SENSE.

--Muriness 22:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

== RE TINKLECOMM Mail == FIRST OF ALL YOU SPELT IT WRONG AND NUBER 2 ITS A SMALL WEBMAIL SERVICE SO ITS NOT VERY POPULAR. ITS IS NOW DEFUNT AND THE COMPANY WAS TAKEN OVER BY ANOTHER COMPANY. DO NOT DELETE MY PAGE, IM SICK AND TIRED OF THE NON SENSE. NOW IF IT NEEDS FIXING ILL FIX IT BUT DONT JUST DELETE IT JUST LIKE YALK DID MY OTHER PAGE.

--Muriness 22:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

YOU KNOW, YOU REALLY HAVE SOME NERVE. I SPENT 3 HOURS WORKING ON THAT PAGE AND MAKING IT LOOK THE WAY IT SHOULD ON THIS SITE SO THAT IT MEETS THE "WIKIPEDIA STANDARS" AND YOU GO AND DELETE MY ARTICLE!?!? HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND!?! I EVEN ADDED THE NEW SITE WERE THEY CAN BE REAHCED!!! I GOT ALL ACCURATE INFORMATION SO THAT THE READER DOESNT GET CONFUSED AND YOU HAVE TO BE THE IDIOT AND ERASE HALF THE DAMN PAGE. HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IT IF I DELETED HALF OF YOUR PAGE OER PERHAPS THE WHOLE PAGE!?!?! YOU WOULD LIKE THAT NOW WOULD YOU???? NO, SO DONT DO IT TO OTHER PEOPLE. HONESTLY DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ADVERTISE ON THIS DAMN SITE?? YOU NEED TO PUT EVERYTHING BACK THE WAY I HAD IT BEFORE.

--Muriness 00:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Muriness, Umalee isn't an admin, she can't delete pages, maybe you should go talk to the admin who actually did the deletion, Renata3. -- Versageek 00:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Umalee

I'm a person who editted using thier IP address instead of logging in.. sorry.. I already had an account.. but I thought I had already logged in when I apparently did not. It was my first day. Thanks for the notice and making me feel more welcome at wikipedia though. Khanny045 01:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Nice job reverting

19:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Per your userpage, that would explain why you know so much, then. —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 19:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You could move

19:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Go to

User:Umalee

. You'll see tabs at the top of the page saying

user page discussion edit this page history move

Click on "move". Where it says "To new page:" enter "User:Kannie". Under "Reason:" enter "move to my new page" or something and click "Move page". —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 19:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as both pages have a history, you may have to request speedy deletion by putting {{db-g7}} on each page before moving. —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 19:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You don't see the move tag because your account is less than four days old. I can do it after the pages have been deleted, if you like. —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 20:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You may have misunderstood me. We need to delete the pages we're moving to. —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 20:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

As you can see, DONE! —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 22:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

See

.

You might want to include a direct link to your talk page as this makes things easier for people replying to you. Got to your preferences and under "Signature:" enter, e.g., [[User:Kannie|Kannie]] | [[User talk:Kannie|talk]], which would produce Kannie | talk. Make sure that the "User raw signature" box is checked, and click "Save". —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 22:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm Brazilian, so I've been contributing recently to the Portuguese Wikipedia, and probably my contributions around here should be pretty scarce. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primo Dang (talk • contribs) 22:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I have replied to the warning you gave me here. AngelOfSadness talk 22:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 9, 2007, compares against the

:

1. Well written?:

trivial

.

2. Factually accurate?: Needs major citation improvements per present tags/banners. Remember to cite all facts likely to be challenged, especially assertions about living persons, quotations and attributed opinion.

3. Broad in coverage?: Fails to provide a comprehensive encyclopedic presentation of the history of the office. Focuses far too much on U.S. information. Needs to have its context within the larger legal and law enforcement system expanded (i.e. relation to other offices).

4. Neutral point of view?: Seems to be fairly neutral, but the dire need for accuracy and style improvements do have an effect on the overall neutrality of the article.

5. Article stability? Is not currently the subject of any edit wars.

6. Images?: Sufficient, if not inspiring.

As is readily apparent, I did not apply the customary hold period to this article. This is because the article violates at least one the of

}} variety.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be

. Thank you for your work so far. — 00:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I started the article only this morning, and did not want to fill it up with unreliable inf. So, wanted to carry my research.
Manik (talk) 07:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't object to its deletion. Maybe the Santa Clara para could be merged into Santa Clara Valley Water District? -- Avocado (talk) 20:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

== [Rhinoplasty]

Hi sorry about the tests, i didnt want to change it just test some stuff out, but in the article id like to have it mentioned the Doctor who came up with the term in the non surgical rhinoplasty part. Heres also the source for that trademark (Tm-Source:Serial Number 77/097,402) just in case if you needed the citation. Thanks Signed Happyfeetprod —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happyfeetprod (talk • contribs) 20:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi kannie

Got your messege, and will use the sandbox from now on. however, could i make a reference to the original doctor who came up with with the fraze in the first place? I just think its a bit unfair if a person came up with a term/procedure/invention but not be given credit for it. Happyfeetprod —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happyfeetprod (talk • contribs) 20:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

On Wikipedia honesty should not be taken into consideration, but rather the factual relevance. I will apologize for using the word idiotic, however, people should not call a person born in 1991 a general in the military, when he was born in 1981 and is an English cricketer. I am indeed sorry for the use of such a word and also sorry to waste your precious time.

21:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm fine with your idea. It would make sense for the article to be merged into wiktionary. --G2ace (talk) 01:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Nope. I have no idea what you are talking about. But I can look into it. (G2ace (talk) 01:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC))

I asked a question on Yahoo! Answers. Now I just have to wait for the answers. It might take a while. --G2ace (talk) 02:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You can ask. But I already got one answer. I'm not sure if they are right but at least I have something. "There's no obvious "merge" feature, however, since both sites are open for anyone to edit, you could simply copy and paste from one to the other." --G2ace (talk) 02:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Elective is on wiktionary already. Here is the link. [3] So maybe we should just add the information on wikipedia to there. (G2ace (talk) 02:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC))

Can we just delete the article on wikipedia since it's more of a dictionary definition? --G2ace (talk) 02:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I love it when there is an agreement. Thanks for "chatting" with me. I feel like a "real" contributor to wikipedia. --G2ace (talk) 02:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope we do run into each other since the first encounter was successful. --G2ace (talk) 02:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

--04:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I fail to see how

02:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello. It was a mere assumption that I made after doing a google search, and tagged it, since no matter if it is notable or not, the article is in a state in which it would need to be wikified and expanded. You can, obviously, still propose deletion or request speedy deletion if seen fit. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 07:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you maybe help 'clean up' the article a little bit by adding a few trustworthy sites to the stub? I'll be glad to do it myself if you wish, but since you think he's notable, I just thought I'd ask. --Kannie | talk 19:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so (i'm too lazy, at least right now). The article still does not make a real assertion for notability, so i'd say it is still eligible for speedy deletion under criteria A7. Nominate it if you want (which, to have mentioned it, i have not discouraged at any time).

Oh, I'm sorry. I'll nominate it for speedy deletion now. Kannie | talk 20:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

An investigation should be requested at UCLA administration since vandalism has been produced for over 6 months now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.128.45 (talk) 18:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you are wrong about this AfD. Could you spare a minute to reinspect? Cheers, Pete.Hurd (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Christofascism_%282nd_nomination%29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmegill (talk • contribs) 19:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

It's ok as we all make mistakes. Happy Holidays! :) AngelOfSadness talk 10:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that adding a welcoming message to every IP user who edits Wikipedia is the best thing to do - if it was it could be done by a robot. I'm sure your efforts are well intentioned, but I really think there are more important things that they could be focused on. 199.125.109.108 (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

You do have a point. I haven't really had an anonmous user contact me until now, unless it "contacting" me to vandalize my talk page! It's just that this template encourages people to register an account, and links to my talk page, which encourages at least encourages non-anon peopple to ask for help. That's was why I 'welcome' everyone to wikipedia. Out of curiosity, why don't you think it's a good idea? Kannie | talk 22:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I do recommend being welcoming, but there are over a million people who edit Wikipedia, and most only do one edit and never come back. When you click "edit this page" you get a boilerplate of what Wikipedia thinks is important for everyone to see, old and new alike. I have heard estimates that there are less than 500 active Wikipedians (I'm not one of them). It often takes me an hour to make one edit (researching, looking up references), I see some people making over 500 edits in one day. Many of the robot tasks on Wikipedia are literally done by robots, like Sinebot if you forget to sign a talk page, and Cluebot if someone vandalizes a page in an obvious manner. It's really hard to tell if an IP user is a one time editor or has come back. I look at their contribs and see if they have edited multiple times before throwing them a welcome. You will find that there are some habitual IP users like myself who just don't want to be bothered with registering, while most will welcome the advice. There really is a welcoming committee, and if you aren't a member you should be. Also since you are relatively new you can ask for a mentor. 199.125.109.108 (talk) 22:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I was actually registered under a different name at one point, but yeah, at one point I had a mentor. I think my problem is that I'm being a little bold, ya know? But thanks for the reminder, and thanks for telling me about the welcoming commitee--I have heard and forgot about it. Kannie | talk 22:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well bold is good. Have fun. 199.125.109.108 (talk) 23:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the chuckle. Yeah, I know I'm not bold, but this is bold for me, actually. Pretty subjective concept. Kannie | talk 23:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I shouldn't be guessing how bold you may be. 199.125.109.108 (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know if you're familiar with

23:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah - being bold I see. Good for you, Kannie. But they are right. If you have read all the templates a hundred times it is pointless for someone to drop one of them on your talk page, and better to customize your notice to them. Now, what was I working on when you distracted me? Oh yes, finding a category for an article. 199.125.109.108 (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

...Anyway, Kannie. I get a trillion messages a second from bots warning me about the many (possibly hundreds of) unused/disputed/etc fair-use images I re-uploaded in reduced resolution. Since I don't care about fair use images (other than I don't want the Wikimedia foundation to get sued over them) I delete these warnings from my talk page and this is what made you think that I was blanking needlessly. Please don't do that again, k? :) And if you're using some custom script or other, please tweak it so that people blanking their own user/talk pages doesn't trigger it, to save them some annoyance.

Also, hi again Tim. :) Lewis Collard! (it's cold out there, but i'm telling you, i'm lonely) 02:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Kannie. I am very new at using Wikipedia and I am trying to create a page for the President of Robert Morris University. As I was checking out what I had done, I saw your warning tag on my page. If I am doing something wrong please let me know. I am trying produce this page and learn at the same time.--Ndellomo (talk) 00:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

This was a true shopping centre and most of the tourism agency in Singapore are there, why delete, please expand data if possible and thanks.--Quek157 (talk) 15:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

• How could i expand it as sources was not available on net as it does not have a official site and it was not a shop but a shopping centre cum residential cum residential project and it had up to 14 floor and i emphasize that this was 100% NOT SPAM OR ADVERTISING AND I HATE THOSE PAGES TOO!--Quek157 (talk) 15:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
• Could you see the sources i provided and comment again--Quek157 (talk) 15:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I have seen that you have tagged an article requesting that it should be speedily deleted. This articles is

) 15:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course it is. You can check it at the article of this World Championship. For

Walint (talk

) 15:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

No, I haven't remove anything, you can check it at the history page. The intralink is

Walint (talk

) 16:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

CIA Human Rights

I was a little surprised to find a deletion template on a new article, seemingly only a minute or two after it had been created. There has been significant discussion on the general CIA article talk page that there is too much material for a single article, and this article was one of a group of sub-articles into which content would be distributed.

While I'm happy to discuss the reasons this is being done, it seemed a bit premature to flag deletion with no discussion. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I had not seen your name in the CIA article discussions, and it seemed unusual for someone who has not been involved to contest the creation of a sub-article.

An intelligence task force is also being created in the Military History project. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 16:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the Epicenter Collection article. See, the references are actual references that just happen to be hosted at the same website. So shall I draw it back into "working status"? I do really want to keep it... TheListUpdater (talk) 17:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's particularly productive to pull the speedy-delete trigger on an article one minute after the first edit on it. - JasonAQuest (talk) 20:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm following procedure, but I'm a little perplexed by your hair-trigger approach to implementing it... hence the note here. Is it really recommended to shoot first on speedy-deletes and ask questions later? Just a couple minutes looking at the article and the pre-existing links to it would have established it has a high likelihood of being notable, and it's mathematically clear that you didn't spend that. - JasonAQuest (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to make sure you knew that your actions were hostile to Wikipedia's productive editing environment, and pointing it out on a Talk page I had no reason to believe you would bother to read wouldn't accomplish that. If you don't want to be bothered by criticism like this, try acting with a little circumspection. In the five years I've been on WP, I've found that thinking before you edit helps a lot. -JasonAQuest (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed your great work speedying new pages, and wanted to encourage you to keep up the good work. I also wanted to blatantly pitch

20:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd be delighted to help!

1. First, open up your your monobook page.
2. Edit it, and add this in;

   importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js');

3. Save the page, and hard-refresh it; this is usually done by holding the Ctrl key and pressing F5 at the same time.

Hope that helps! You should notice new tabs popping up at the top of any new pages you visit. Cheers, Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 21:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... you wouldn't happen to be using Internet Explorer, would you? Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 21:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Try clearing your cache (tools -> clear private data). If that doesn't work, I'll check your monobook and see what could be up. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 21:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Wait, so we're on the same page... you're sure you bypassed your cache while still in your monobook? If not, go there and do the Ctrl F5 thing; if yes, then I'm not sure what's wrong, as the code is correct. I guess checking Wikipedia:Bypass your cache wouldn't hurt... Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 21:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Darn, so you can't see any additional tabs? You know, where the 'edit this page' tab is? That sucks. You could try contacting

User:Voice of All or User:AzaToth, as I have no idea what it could be. Sorry. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?}

21:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, not too concerning, but I'm not too good with code. Sadly. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 21:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The page, Rangárþing ytra, should not be deleted. I was planning to add more information to it later. Also, Rangárþing ytra is quite a notable municipality in Iceland. It's the eleventh largest in area in the whole country, and one of those communities that have been merged together lately. Isn't that notable enough? ReDeHydrate ^{Talar þú ensku?} 21:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

This page is about the founder of PriceWaterhouseCoopers and must be the most famous accountant in the world. Have you any suggestions how I should establish his notability more clearly? Dormskirk (talk) 22:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I removed the db tag from the Jammulapalem because all villages in the world are considered notable by default. I did add an unsourced tag, though.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 22:27, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem.  :) See

22:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

It is okay to be a deletionist, but as far as I know all villages in the world are notable. As most parts of Freiburg, the city, are also villages, surely this must be notable. Also, it would be ashame not to translate the long articles available on the German wikipedia and lose the history of these places. Poeloq (talk) 22:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Please read up on guidelines a little bit more, for example

Wikipedia:OUTCOMES#Geography. This would save many editors time, because instead of creating/editing the next article, I have had to write this. Still, thanks for your work and a merry Christmas :) Poeloq (talk

) 22:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Poeloq (talk) 22:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, again. Don't think I'm singling you out, we just seem to be hitting the same articles. I've removed the speedy deletion tag from Sant singh sekhon because the first deletion was due to a copyright violation, so this isn't really a repost, and it doesn't qualify for a speedy deletion because there is a claim of notability - winning a President's prize. I have no idea if the prize is notable or not, but if you still think it should be deleted after my removal of the speedy tag, go ahead and list it at AfD. Corvus cornix_talk 23:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, don't do that! You're doing a good job.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 23:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ex-CEO of Arthur Andersen should not be speedily deleted, should he? =) Nshuks7 (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi - and Merry Christmas! I wonder if you could remove the "speedy delete" tag on this article as it is being developed by User:Ardfern as part of the Ireland WikiProject. Ardfern is a very experienced editor with +30k main-space edits. Regards (Sarah777 (talk) 00:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

I'm not an Admin so I don't like to mess with tags!! - Sarah777 (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

It's OK - an Admin has popped up and removed the tag - thanks Kannie. (Sarah777 (talk) 01:04, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

Wow. Just seconds after I submit, you request speedy deletion. You don't even give me a chance to build on the article, and obviously didn't bother finding out what Mixx is. You could have added a stub tag, maybe just a simple deletion, but there is no reason to request a speedy deletion, especially this early on with an article of this nature. --Mikco (talk) 03:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Check out the comments in the discussion page. This speedy deletion stuff is making me rethink whether i should spend enough time on wikipedia. Maybe block me better so that i don't spend my time and get thrown out again and again. Gp1973 (talk) 17:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kannie. I think the user created this page, is doing a good job. This page is specifically for a city in Philippines. So how is the merging proposal? It would not be possible to hold all the info here to street children article. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Street children in general gets more attention. But as you can see the from the article, that gives a worldwide view, and that can be said the mother article. Just like Poverty, and then comes Poverty in United States, Poverty in Pakistan etc. etc. I am specifically telling it because it is specific of a particular geographic location which would have unique characteristics and different from a general worlwide view. Moreover you can see the new article is quite long enough and have a wide range of issues like Drugs, Health Problems

Legal Action etc. etc. which is too limited to a geographic boundary. How these huge specialised info will stay in the mother article.Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Yikes! I didn't know speedy deletion was within hours! I really need the page back...I need to work on it more...TheListUpdater (talk) 18:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

How is it that you do not think that the History of the Sheriff is not important? The second most powerful political position in the USA?--Tomtom9041 (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Plus their was a request for it in the talk page for sheriff.--Tomtom9041 (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Here: Copied direct from Sheriff Talk page. Reason to keep History of the Sheriff. I have reinstated the article.--Tomtom9041 (talk) 19:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I have reverted the speedy deletion warning you put on my talk page about Soma House for a very simple reason: I am not the author of that article. Please do not write speedy deletion warnings to people whose only contribution to an article consists of copyediting, wikifying, or tagging. Thank you. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 04:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. What does this mean: "13:10, 27 December 2007 Kannie (Talk | contribs) marked Single Subject Design patrolled". What does "patrolled" mean? How do you "mark" it (hopefully not like a dog - laff)? Thanks. --Alfadog (talk) 17:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Kannie. Thank you for your message. I guess you are right in speedy delitions request of the page, but I still contested it. Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Kannie. I just created the article on Martin Jean - it doesn't quite seem fair to put a speedy deletion tag on it so quickly. Random Pipings (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)Random Pipings

Tagging an article for speedy deletion 2 minutes after it was created could be considered rather rude, particularly when the article in question, about a boxer with a significant professional record, seems to have sufficient indication of notability. I have removed the tags and expanded the article - maybe you could give editors a chance to build articles up for a while before tagging them for deletion? Thanks.--Michig (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kannie, This is my first article and I don't want to destroy anything. I just wrote the article "lexical markup framework" that is usually called LMF, for short. But the problem is that LMF is already an article: it's an old Cantonese music band. It's a short hand for "Lazy Mutha Fucka". I inserted a sort of choice table in the beginning of their article, but it's not very nice. May be the best way could be to create a specific page for "Lazy Mutha Fucka" and create a specific page presenting the two choices? What is your opinion? Francopoulo (talk) 22:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kannie, Thanks for your reply, in fact I'm as hesitant as you. If I create a disambiguation page and a move of the content of the "Lazy Mutha Fucka" page inside a new page, the HK fans are not going to be very happy. Don't you think so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Francopoulo (talk • contribs) 22:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the page

) 23:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thestationx1 (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Hi, I was in the process of putting on a page for an artist I like called Station X, and it was removed before I had a chance to finish it. He has had records out, charted and got on BBC playlists and done european tours, so I think that it completely conforms to the guidelines set out for artists and bands.... I am angry that it was taken down so quickly whilst I was actually sat at the computer updating it! I can't be bothered to do it again, but just wanted to let you know that it's pretty lame that people are going round deleting things to readily without actually checking the references posted, because I posted links to outside sources too... And I was about to post more references too, but didn't get the chance. Is there anyway you can get back what was on there?Thestationx1 (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

what is rong w/ this it is a REAL micronation and is similar to others like the more popular SeaLand.

Mackmgg (talk) 02:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)mackmgg

David Gerstein Is a good artist, considerable popular in US and Europe. In hebrew he has hes information in wikipedia. I wanted it to be abailble also in English. Please answer me!!!! --Taly.i2 (talk) 10:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)taly.i2

You deleted the page

) 23:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

You answered this: I do not have the power to delete a page. However,

admins do. --Kannie | talk

16:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It isn't helpful to destroy other's work, even if you don't do it yourself finally. But you propose speedy deletion. Many things can only be understood from the context. Company mergers are such a thing that isn't easily understood from outside. So you may have your reasons to propose the deletion of a page. But please don't propose speedy deletion in such a case! With a normal deletion proposal it can be discussed, what to do. --Gürbetaler (talk) 01:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I had noticed that you had repeatedly place speedy deletion warning on pages that are newly created, I appreciate your effort to make wikipedia a spam free, advertisement free, neutral encyclopedia. However, please refrain from adding that tag too fast to a newly creation page as it may still be a stub without expansion and clean up, it may be okay to add in the warning two weeks after the page is created and not improved up to standards as deleting a newly created page from a new user may severely discourage him/her from creating any new pages in the future, also you could bring the issue to articles for deletion section as it may be a good idea to test that you opinion is correct and that may let the author knew more information as for why the page had been deleted. Thank you for your effort and I wish that you would excerise more caution in putting a speedy deletion tag.--Quek157 (talk) 09:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC) Note: his comment was written out of goodwill.

03:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)~~ Hello My Name Is Eugene F Plum III you locked Air Pennsylvania This was my Dads company and my legacy please give me some time to correct and add information... its late today and I just found this page so please just bare with me thank you

Gene03:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)03:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)~

Thanks for the warm welcome. I'll come to you if I have any questions.

Elephantissimo (talk) 05:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that woulb be OK. But the

was added at 05:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

contesting speedy deletion

Sorry - not sure if this is 'at the bottom' - apologies if it's in the wrong place and feel free to delete if it is! I am contesting the speedy deletion of my page on the grounds that there are over 36,000 hits on google for Lynn Huggins - Cooper as a well known children's author. Thanks! Lynn Huggins - Cooper (talk) 16:57, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The criterion for speedy A7 as a non notable person is no assertion of notability. if notability is asserted (claimed or implied) then if you think it insufficient, it must be done via WP:PROD or WP:AFD. Please re-read WP:CSD, and WP:Deletion policy. Even if it is clear that it won't pass Afd, if any good faith notability is asserted, it passes speedy. I have therefore declined several of your speedies, as the reviewing admin. DGG (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I see other admins have declined some also. Please learn from that. DGG (talk) 17:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Not a joke - quite a popular BBC journalist. I know the article is brief so I'll add to it later. --AYBGerrardo (talk) 21:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for warning me! I will go back and fix them.

) 22:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible for you to remove the "speedy deletion" thing? Ty —Preceding unsigned comment added by AYBGerrardo (talk • contribs) 23:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Early this morning I have received a message from you talking of proposed deletion of my contributed article. I was alarmed to that because I thought that my contributed article will be of waste immediately. By the way I am aa new user here in wikipedia that's why at first I was testing the tutorials and certainly I wanted to make an article about the Confraternity.

I want to know if my contributed article is still subject for proposed deletion?

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirrodz (talk • contribs) 13:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I am a new user of Wikipedia and am not 100% sure what is happening lol, no sooner had I added my page it appeared that you deleted it (I think) I have made alterations where I think I need to make them but with some of these tutorials they appear not to be very useful. PLease can you tell me exactly wat I need to do in order to remove this article from deletion? I have linked the page from several other pages (I think) and have added a reference in. May I reitterate the fact that this cartoon is not yet released and the information gathered is from discussions with a member of the production company and currently the focus group testing is proven to be a success and will be hitting UK TV screens early this year Crackcartoon (talk) 21:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Another editor has added the "{{

) 04:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

awards: speedys and assertion of notability

Artesia Digital Media Group

had qa clear assertion of notability when you placed the speedy--another admin quite properly removed the speedy. " Artesia was named one of Computerworld’s 100 Emerging Companies to Watch in 2000[1]" That's abut as clear as it gets. (Whether it is enough for notability is a question for a possible AfD)

Clyde serda

also asserts awards, and is therefore not speedy either. Yet another admin correctly declined the speedy.

Asserting an award is an unmistakable assertion of importance, even if you think the award not significant. Please be more careful. 16:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

An idle query

Thanks, belatedly, for your message, Kannie. As a non-American, I can't help but wondering - where does a Dean democrat turn in these tumultuous days? Of course, I'm being inquisitive. Regards, Ira Jai (talk) 04:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC) Mdnote (talk) 16:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC) thanks Kannie for the alert, I'm not actually sure if I deleted that page, but I will try. I'm just starting out on wiki and every tip helps! p.s. no critters for 3+ years, you can do itMdnote (talk) 16:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I simply pulled the material from HarperCollins and referenced the material back to the website. It seemed wholly more reliable that the previous material on Lott's book, which was rather partisan in nature, yet was permitted to remain. Thanks for the note.Indiangaming (talk) 00:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

What Wikipedia is not

").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

sign your comments

with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk

) 04:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Your essay

Hi, I have moved your essay to a more appropriate title in the proper (wikipedia) namespace. I have also changed the title from "must" to "should" as it is more reflective of its nature as an essay and not policy. I figured it was appropriate to let you know.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 19:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC) The new location is Wikipedia:Why you should be nice to people who vandalize, which should have been updated in your watchlist as a result of the move.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 20:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

NSA warrantless survalience edit

...ummm. the statement "Warrantless wiretapping violates the Fourth Amendment" is NPOV It is a fact, and thus NPOV. Acccording to the Supreme Court in Katz v. United States, listening to a private conversation is a "search" per se. THe fourth Amendment specifically protects

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

In other words, The government cannot initiate a "search" of any non-public place without a warrent describing the place searched and the object or information they are looking/listening for. Facts: THe FOurth AMendment protects nonpublic areas from search by the government unle4ss they have a warrant. A telephone conversation is a non-public place and is protected by the fourth amendment. The NSA is listening on Telephone conversation without a warrant. Conclusion: THE NSA warrantless survailence program violates (for the majority) the Fourth Amendment.

please, feel fre to debate.

Actually, I generally agree with you. Warantless domestic spying goes aganist the sentiment of the constitution. However, there are several people who think otherwise. For example, I'm sure a few people in the government do agree, and a lot of people feel strongly about it. For this reason, such a statement would need to have

an inline citation. --Kannie | talk

03:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

..There are also several pyschopaths who believe in killing lots of people. just wanted to point that out.
I would also like to point out, for the benifit of others, that Amadenhijad (iranian president) thinks otherwise about the Holocaust.
...lol. quote-worthy! "Your point-of-view on whats non-point-of-view depends on your point-of-view."-ME
Citations, gotcha "My Aimbot's on Legendary" (talk) 04:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the barnstar! I appreciate it very much. Cheers! - IceCreamAntisocial (talk) 02:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm trying to commit one 'official' act of wikilove a day when I'm on wikipedia, whether it's putting {{subst:smile}} or {{subst:cookie}}, or giving out barnstars. I like to pat people on the back for constructive contributions. --Kannie | talk 02:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the barnstar. It is comforting to find out that somebody finds my efforts useful. Afil (talk) 02:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)