User talk:Corpx/archive3

Already blocked; thanks for the update :). ck lostsword • T • C 23:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry you felt the need to gve me warnings about my revisions to these pages.

You are mistaken. I did not add the links. I discovered these links (to my website) and found that they linked to incorrect pages. I merely updated to correct links.

I thought the links might be useful because there is a lot of information available there which is not available on Wikipedia.

Doug

he does too have cum stains on his shorts - I saw them, now I need to know how they got there.

p.s. this is his wife

Hi Thanks for your help in this article. It appears that Video professor owners are trying to change this article into an adverisement. Most of the offending edits are form Colorado (Headquarter of Video professor)IP addresses (e.g. 71.212.195.94 and 67.190.37.160) and they are editing only this article.162.82.215.199 09:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Corpx, The unreliable resources that you use should be considered vandalism, not mine. The article that you posted in not unbiased and doesn't give any information on the company, itself. Please consider both sides to every story before you post. Thanks :) alb10506

You have removed the link to Cherie's fansite, run by me claiming there are only 9 members. For your information, there are 458 members to be exact.

Norum 05:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• I stand corrected on the membership of the group, however according to the Wikipedia External Policy, links to "Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums" are supposed to be avoided. The Yahoo Groups page in question would definately fall under this criteria. Corpx 05:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• And where did you get the number 9 from?

Norum 06:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• I think I mistook it for the # of members joined in the past 7 days Corpx 07:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• Ok, now I know what you mean. So the total number stands at 458 at this point.

Norum 07:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I added links to a speech given by joyce carol oates and khaled hosseini. I do not understand why this is spamming. These are simply links to reports of speeches they gave. Please let me know what is spamming, and what links are allowed, and what are not. Thanks.

• According to the external links guidelines, you're not supposed to link to blogs Corpx 19:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Corpx Can you please un revert my edit where I changed the URL to bigyak.net.au You will find if you do a before and after test of the two urls, you will see a much improved version of the bike trails in gmaps. If you want to see a bit more about the maps click on the google earth link instead. If you see any complications let me know. 124.191.115.9

• Done! Sorry about that! Corpx 02:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
• No problem. 124.191.115.9

Well you reverted my edit I made but don't worry, it might be back up there later today or tomorrow. Look in the Inland Vally Daily Bulletin in Southern CA and you will see something like: Local College student takes his own life. It's up to you if you want it up there or not. Thanks.--76.171.9.67 17:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you. Anas ^talk? 18:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

if a link about game site adds the enjoyment of a game then where is the harm? If ther is a page about the other company on wiki then i could add it to "see also" there not (becuse it would be pointless). so why not? i know we are tring to keep out spam but if it ads to the gam is it spam? I am a newbee so i know i may be worng on this; just tring to help.

• No, unfortunately, wikipedia is not a collection of links. Unless the link is directly relevent to the article and adds extra content, it shouldnt be there. WP:EXT expands more on this policy. Corpx 01:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you condone allowing people to put what they are doing as a busines allowed in wiki when there are exactly 50 or even hundreds of other similar providers out there and you are but one small vendor trying to use this to get your link in wiki so as to get google to increase your ranking? Smartvirtualoffice

• No, wikipedia is not the place to promite your site(s). Besides, wikilinks have nofollow tag, which means it wont index in any searches. Corpx 01:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I normally seen you around doing good work in AFD (which is rare lol) and I'm considering to nominate you for adminship. I need a list of articles that you wrote or expanded so I could look at it to check if you are fit to RFA. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 03:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry about the late reply, but I thought about it for a day or so. I've looked at some previous RFAs and I dont think my edit level might not be enough to pass AFD. I also dont think I'm quite "ready" to have those extra powers. I'm just getting more familiar with some of policies here and I dont think I'd be a good admin now. Thanks for the offer though! Corpx 07:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Note that I'd second the support. Your thorough discussion in recent AfDs are proving very beneficial. We need more AfD participants like you. Bulldog123 05:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the information. I'm still relatively new (May '07) to Wikipedia but it's an interesting community. Mandsford 16:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support in my recent RfA. However, it was unsuccessful. I am in no way disheartened, and I will hopefully succeed in a month or two. If you have any further suggestions or comments, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page, and I will be happy to respond. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 02:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think you should help others when they request it. I don't understand where the 'article for deletion' listing went for Anton Bohdal but I don't think this article should exist and I'd like a vote.Ryoung122 02:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Your !vote in favor of keeping the article Father Michael Goetz Secondary School at this AfD was ignored by a closing administrator who decided that your vote did not properly explain why the school was notable. While many people think that all schools are notable, we need to make specific claims that the specific school (or anything else you're !voting to keep) is notable. I strongly encourage you to review the requirements of Wikipedia:notability and to consider modifying the justification of your decision to keep an article in any future AfD, school or otherwise. If based on your review of Wikipedia policy and a particular article you feel that the school is indeed notable, a variation of the text "Keep because notability is demonstrated by citation to multiple reliable sources that discuss the subject significantly", (as suggested here), will clearly state why you feel that the article meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. If you do not properly support your vote, you take the risk that your participation will be ignored if the closing administrator so chooses, as has already happened to your vote at this AfD. If you feel that your !vote should not have been ignored, you may want to visit the deletion review to express your thoughts on the subject. Alansohn 17:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I removed the warning from this IP's talk page because this edit seems to be a good faith attempt to remove vandalism. Cheers Kevin 06:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

As I said when closing it, the consensus was in favor of keeping not necessarily per se but to facilitate a possible cleanup, merge or redirectification. That discussion should be continued on the talk page, not at AfD. I suppose if no one follows through, after a period of time it could be nominated again. Daniel Case 15:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello! I seem to see you on numerous AfDs with delete votes or nominations, etc. Anyway, I encourage you to consider also contributing more to improving articles as well. For a short time I got caught up in the whole AfDs and it didn't get me real far as sooner or later the admins will frown upon extreme deletionism or inclusionism, which is why I'm trying to make sure that I make more article edits than AfD edits. Anyway, just a quick suggestion, so you don't experience what I did. Also, please just reply here. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• Na, I just believing in adherence to WP:NOTE, WP:NOT and other policies. Corpx 02:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

user Pak21 who doesn’t play DDM is trying remove all the images there. Now he has two of his mates who don’t play DDM helping him. Add your voice at Wikipedia:Fair use review ~LG~

i know it's not a good idea, but what to do? i dont know. Pak21 wont talk about it on any of the image talk pages but insted he is trying hide what he is doing. now he is tring "pad" the consensus by having his mates back him even tho thay have never edited on the DDM page before. could you speek to him about it? ~LG~

because that's how it is correctly spelled. [1]

Hi Cockrpx,

You just reverted a fix I made to an external link on the slovak page. The link as it is now is broken, this is why I thought I should put in a "good" link which seems very similar to the original one. The best may be to delete that link altogether but I don't want to mess with it any more, since I am not a slovak expert.

Thanks, Fruzsina veress@bu.edu

• The link you modified to is in violation of WP:EXT, as was the one before. Corpx 19:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

These edit reversions are inappropriate. No intention to violate any policies, rather an effort to beef up the entry by adding facts and links that are wholly germane and can be independently verified. TY.

• What exactly does http://www.mcclelland.com/ (a commercial book sale site) have to do with Walkerton Water Tragedy? Corpx 03:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Apologies. Put it in as a standard bibliographical reference. It is one of Canada's premier publishers.

• You should cite a book used, not the publisher's website. See WP:CITE for more info Corpx 04:01, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Understood. TY :)

Hey, thanks for the revert on my user page! --omtay38 04:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Greetings, I was wondering if you could go to this Afd and provide any input possibly? Thanks. --sumnjim ^{talk with me·changes} 12:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'm trying to decide on a consistent position for assessing "in popular culture" articles in AfDs. I notice that you are very consistent and seem knowledgeable but post quite tersely. Is there an "in popular culture" article that you do like? Or one that you have seen progress from trivia into an on-topic keeper? I'm not trying to knock your position. Just trying to learn as a newbie. Thanks! Canuckle 20:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Probably not :) I look at WP:FIVE and it says WP is not a trivia collection. I consider any article that talks about "subject x in tv shows/books/movies" as trivial information. Corpx 21:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Hi. Thanks for the quick reply. I forgot to watch the page for your reply so just got back to it now. I've since found some info such as Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles but they're not as helpful as I'd like. Take care. Canuckle 20:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Battlefield 2 ss.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but my edit was not spam. I will now revert it to what it was. It was a link to a review of the game, similar to the one that was already there, which is perfectly sanctioned by Wikipedia's policys. You do not appear to be a moderator, so I'd leave the moderating to them. Thank you. 76.24.50.242 02:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC) You may also contact me at Doshindude 02:06, 14 July 2007 (UTC), as I was not logged in.

After Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot of Les Misérables closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Wikipedia rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 14. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Wikipedia rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with WP:CANVASSING and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. Noroton 04:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Battlefield 2 ss.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, the characters from that will not receive articles. They already had articles that were merged to that list. At most, they'll be receiving one or two paragraphs of the main article. TTN 19:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for commenting on the Articles for deletion of the Chaos Space Marines page. I never did anything like that before, nor ever found a reason to need to make an account. I normally just go through random articles and comment, but when I saw the mess caused by the one article, I had to put them through the process for deletion. I hope I did it correctly. NobutoraTakeda 05:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• You really shouldnt go around thanking people for their comments on AFDs. Some might look upon it as canvassing, which is looked down on wikipedia. I think its a valid AFD, btw. Corpx 05:46, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chaos_Space_Marines If you look at the Chaos Space Marine page, I spent a few hours and tracked down some reviews and other pages talking about the history of the Chaos Space Marines as part of a notable game. However, there are no pages talking about the individual subpages, so they lack notability. I stand by my original assessment, but I am leaning some to Haemo's idea of merging the pages into the one and removing all fan fluff and fancruft. What do you think? NobutoraTakeda 22:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Yup, there were several people arguing delete. You can't speedy that.--Crossmr 05:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Friend,

I need to refer User 70.181.10.95 to you for flagrant reverts of the above page, despite helpful comments from me and other users not to do so.

User 66.210.114.195 is also up to the same tricks, so I wonder if the first IP address isn't the second in disguise?

Anyhow, can you warn the first and or/block them from further reversions of that page?

Thanks,

All the best,

Patrick (bigpad) bigpad 12:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You said "I would argue that most pc games are 100x more complicated". You might want to read the 352-page book Secrets of Rook Endings by John Nunn. The entire book is about positions involving only a king, rook, and pawn versus a king and rook. And consider that is only one relatively simple combination of pieces out of many. The rules of chess are not complicated, but chess is. Bubba73 (talk), 14:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Chess is about probability. If you look down at the basic math level, I think most RTS games and "pro" matches have much more possible outcomes. 14:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Chess is not about probability. If your misconceptions about chess are this great, I respectfully suggest that you should recuse yourself. Bubba73 (talk), 15:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

If I can map out every single outcome of every single move and the following ones, I would be unbeatable. Maybe probability wasn't the best word I was looking for. Maybe "number of possible outcomes" Corpx 15:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a big "if". If you could do that, but you can't. No one can, and no computer can. Bubba73 (talk), 15:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Give me some supercomputers and a couple of years and I think I could. Maybe even a SETI type project to distribute the load Corpx 15:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if that is true, then maybe chess is a complex game after all :-). Peace. Bubba73 (talk), 15:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Yea, but I dont think those supercomputers can crunch out every possible outcome for an RTS ;) Corpx 17:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You know, there are many orders of magnitude more chess positions than there are atoms in the universe. So even if you could convert all of the matter in the universe into one giant computer, and if you could store a position in only one atom, you could still do only a very tiny portion of the positions. So good luck with getting it done as you describe. Bubba73 (talk), 22:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I found there was an AFD for Highland Village (Houston).

Turns out there is a Highland Village, Houston, Texas about the subdivision surrounding the shopping center (I wrote THAT one), so I redirected the former to the latter. WhisperToMe 16:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Please respond:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Peratt Your justification was shown to be dubious. --Nondistinguished 19:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Your website made it clear that distinguished lecturer is not an "award" per se. Please respond at the AfD. --Nondistinguished 16:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The books you linked to are not notable per WP:BK and so they cannot confer notability onto the author. Please respond at the AfD. --Nondistinguished 19:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I should be grateful if you would take another look at this article. The school is a Blue Ribbon School, the highest award to a US School. TerriersFan 20:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I was curious about this ([2]) edit. Do you know more about the contributor than the edit history suggests? Happy to accept a "yes" answer, lol! --Dweller 21:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• No, unfortunately I dont anything else about the user in question. I left a message on the tagger's page here Hope that helps Corpx 21:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree that it's not the usual type of SPA but it's a very odd account. Your edit summary ("established user") is both accurate and inaccurate - the account's only 2 days old, but in that time, they've stacked up a whole bunch of AFD edits, mostly delete. I wonder if it's a SPA deletionist account... not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that! I'm just curious about him/her. The edits read like an established user's. I wonder if it's a sock. --Dweller 21:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah. I see I'm not the only to wonder... (Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#SanchiTachi) --Dweller 21:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• I have no problems dealing appropriately if the user is a sock and actions have to be taken; however, I dont the user is a WP:SPA Corpx 22:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support in my successful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me. Carlossuarez46 22:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I find we agree almost all of the time on this board. I keep posting "as per Nom and Corpx." However, I feel that an article with real promise, and a real premise, such as Early childhood development, ought to be a keep and we can fix it. Anyway, keep on being bold. Bearian 23:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Man, Give me a break, I don't know what the hell i'm doing. I don't know where i'm supposed to leave comments or whatever. This whole site is confusing. Quit treating me like i'm some expert of wikipedia.

If you want to delete my pages, then go ahead, because like I said, I have no idea how to. I didn't know you guys would would throw a fit and have a meltdown over some lousy pages. Jesus christ, you people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BillboardFan (talk • contribs)

• Whoa dude, I was just trying to help you out - You left the message on the talk page and not the actual AFD page. Corpx 14:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey --- seems as though the author recreated the page after it got speedied and the discussion was closed. I tagged it as {{db-repost}} (though technically I'm not sure if that's applicable to an article speedily deleted during an AfD discussion) but the author responded with {{hangon}} and then went to sleep. Do you think the discussion needs to be reopened? Cheers, cab 09:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Bleh, actually I am not an administrator. I just added the closing tags because it was already deleted by somebody else Corpx 14:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Battlefield 2 ss.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Understandable why you want to move it to a neutral page. I guess i should have put a link. . . Oldag07 21:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• It wasn't that I didn't want to leave comments at the A&M wikiproject, I just didnt want to leave the same comments at 3 different places. Corpx 01:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Just fyi, I made some adjustments per your requests. You can find my response here. Jmfangio| ►Chat  23:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hookem back at u

I been closing several AFDs lately and I noticed you voted keep just because of the number of google hits are high. You should know better than that, that it isn't a reason for keeping an article, especially if there are other concerns with it. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 21:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• Those were google news hits :) AFD Corpx 21:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure answers.com *only* takes material from wikipedia? The text in question has its source listed as Encyclopedia of Public Health (by The Gale Group, Inc.) and the author is Lawrence Green. --NeilN 00:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Please see User:Rachack/Zvi Block/Links concerning Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zvi Block. --רח"ק | Talk | Contribs 06:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I've had a couple too many beers tonite, what's SALT? - superβεεcat  07:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

• See WP:SALT Corpx 07:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

oh, WP:SALT, not salt. Thx! - superβεεcat  07:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I could make a case that it is here ;) Actually vandalism was referring to the removal of the AfD content, which seems to be gone again. - superβεεcat  07:42, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Also note the meatpuppetry under the "rebuttle"(lol) section of the talk page. - superβεεcat  07:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

• Heh, I didnt even notice the removal of the AFD tag Corpx 07:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)