User talk:CanadianCaesar/5

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave a new message
Please sign comments (~~~~)

No doubt at all

I wouldn't say there's the slightest doubt about it. I know he's been very active on the site in the last few hours, it's one of those 71. addresses, and resolves to California. Also, if he reverts to the version of another 71 edit and you look at the contribs for the other IP, it usually becomes very obvious. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 21:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Back

Kinda. Been really busy lately. Thanks for the welcome, however.Habsfan|t 12:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sulphur bath

Hi. I was just wondering why Sulphur bath has been deleted when the AfD decision was a speedy keep? Thanks. — RJH (talk) 17:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to delete the page because I incorrectly capitalized but appear to be unable to -Skatefan 23:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charter sections

Sounds good. If you don't mind I'd like to take a look at section 9. It's an interesting one. I don't have any of my books with me this summer and I don't have the desire to go to the law library if I don't have to so I may not be totally on the ball with this section but I'll try. BTW I'm still game if you want to collaborate on improving one of the other Charter sections this summer. Let me know. --PullUpYourSocks 02:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I please work on the articles that you people deleted?

Look, I apologize for disobeying the rules. It is just that everytime I do do something for Wikipedia, everyone just rejects it. May be it is because of my rebellious nature, but that is irrelevant. Anyways - Master Numbers, the numbers 11, 22, 33 are important, at least in numerology. Can you please allow me to work on the articles?

--Lord X 03:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)User:Xinyu[reply]

My RfA

Thanks
Thanks
CanadianCaesar/5, thank you for participating in my RfA. Unfortunately, a great number of oppose voters felt that I lacked experience, and a consensus was not reached (the final tally was 30/28/10). Perhaps I will try again in another few months when I have a few more edits under my belt. If I do, I hope I can count on your support. Thanks again! Cool3 talk 20:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and congratulations

Thanks for the support for the Halloween III FAC. I hated to have to leave while it was still in the process but things in the real world were piling up with the end of spring semester approaching and the beginning of summer semester looming on the horizon. Congratulations on Gremlins becoming featured! I noticed on the Horror Wikiproject today that it was up for FAC, but when I went there it had already been promoted.Dmoon1 21:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GNAA

I'm indef blocking those involved in it (Fmnlj and Fortre), and requesting a checkuser on some other similar names (see the admin's noticeboard, near the bottom). I'm not sure if we log IPs when they create accounts, but it's worth a shot. Ral315 (talk) 02:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just leave the other ones unblocked, I think, and watch the accounts. Ral315 (talk) 02:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Korn Kovers

While I don't oppose the no consensus outcome, I would appreciate it if you could elaborate on your tally. I'm counting 4 clear merges (Strothra, Dead, B.Wind and myself; 2 favouring a redirect after the merge, 2 favouring deletion) and 1 contradictory delete (Metropolitan90). -- Hirudo 22:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolitan90 was counted as a delete (per B Wind's argument "not-released albums don't merit their own pages", only that led the two to different conclusions; the two I had trouble with were these:

There are not clear merge votes at all. Delete and merge is illegal under the GFDL. The result of a merge is a redirect, not deletion. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 22:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I keep forgetting about that GFDL requirement. I'd probably count them as plain merge votes myself in that case, but you've made the safer choice of not assuming anything which I can definitely accept. Thanks for the explanation. -- Hirudo 22:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


AfD

Hi, I noticed that you just closed the Korn Kovers debate. Could you also close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diplobrat as it is past due? Thanks! --Strothra 01:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not sure how I'd approach that one. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 02:08, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Main page

I knew about it, I thought I might wait until closer to October to nominate one of the Halloween articles. Thanks anyway. Dmoon1 18:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steven W. Taylor Photo

I noticed that you recently edited the Steven W. Taylor article using the edit summary "fixed pic". I was wondering if you read my comments on the article's talk page regarding the photo's "obselete copyright tag". If so, do you know how to fix that problem? For more details, see Talk:Steven W. Taylor. --TommyBoy 04:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terence Ong

Oops - thanks for pointing that out. At least I screwed up in a neutral way :-( Dlyons493 Talk 22:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linkspam Q

Hey, just found you on recent changes. Anyway, would links such as this be considered spam? Judging from his userpage he's only adding them to promote his site, although I was hesitant to remove it as there are lots of other fansites already under External Links. None of the content on his website is original or unique - it is all available on the numerous other websites in that section. Thanks. -- Steel 10:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking that out, and I do (partially) agree that arguing over external links is somewhat petty. -- Steel 11:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just point out that these pages were linked to from the infobox. Now I'm just updating the links after they were deleted from the Wikibooks Pokédex. Gerard Foley 11:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rewritten numerology articles

Now check out the newest articles that I wrote! By the way - I did use my old sources, but most of it I wrote it myself, you can't go against that! Anyways, thank you for the random lesson of the day back then - silly memories on Wikipedia? --Lord X 22:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)User:Xinyu[reply]
I didn't copy down the original thing, and just threw them on the page, I instead cited it. Just go on to their respective pages and see...and could it be possible to remove the DO NOT REMAKE THIS PAGE on 11 (numerology)? That article is, by nature, 11 (NUMEROLOGY)...? Also, remember, I cited whatever the internet wrote, pretty much 99% was written by myself, but I needed some sources anyways to support my point. I don't think the articles do fully meet the NPOV thing...do they, or do they not? --Lord X 22:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)User:Xinyu[reply]

Fuck off

Don't leave shitty messages on my page. Thanks --Julien Deveraux 04:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC) - give me a break and get a life!--Julien Deveraux 04:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is not constructive, I've left User:Julien Deveraux a note about personal attacks. — xaosflux Talk 05:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pic deletion

(copy from Image talk:Cum.JPG and Talk:Ejaculation) I just deleted that image from it's nomination on WP:CSD as a copyw unknown image over a month, but may have done so in error. If anyone still has the image and reuploads it with a valid copywrite status, I will not delete again. — xaosflux Talk 04:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortuantly I missed the tag removal before deleting. I have restored the history, and another uploader has already uplaoded a new image to that file name. — xaosflux Talk 04:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Which was a copy of Image:Ejaculation.gif and has since been deleted itself. There was an edit war going on over this image.... Secretlondon 16:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unanimous

If you really mean "all", you are going to run into probably more than 200 of them. I track just the record unanimous ones. Remember in 2004, an RfA may have had only 15 to 20 votes. In 2003, as few as 5 votes (done on the mailing list). With such low numbers, lots of people went through without anyone willing to say "oppose", so unanimous approval was a lot more common than it is now. If you must know, you will have to go through them all (listed on WP:RCA). NoSeptember 21:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Give me liberty or give me death

Im only surprised when Americans have heard quotes from other nations' histories. *sigh* youngamerican (talk) 03:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo-Pantheism

Hmmm, have you found your new pandeism? CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 05:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Naaah. Pandeism I was attached to because I started the article (and I knew it to be a legit topic). This, I have no idea, but there seems to be some support, although certainly not as written. bd2412 T 05:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

Hello.

Apologies for crashing in on this page, but you very kindly helped me when I posted my first entry, so I though you might be able to assist me again. I have in fact posted a "helpme" tag on my own talk page, but that was over a week ago, and nobody's responded yet (did I make a mistake somewhere?).

Anyway, here is my question: Last month I contributed a list of contemporary Greek photographers, with dates, under the new heading "Greek photographers" (I had previously confirmed that this category did not exist). A week ago, I found that the entry had been deleted with the following annotation in the "delete log": 03:07, 31 May 2006 Bookofjude deleted "Greek photographers" (closing undisputed prod dated 26 May 2006, already exists as a category).

First off, I'm confused about how to respond, as Wikipedia seem to offer no relevant guidance (or at least nowhere I looked), and clicking on the deletion entry itself doesn't provide any further information. Secondly, I don't understand why the entry was deleted; it certainly isn't the case that it "already exists as a category", since doing a search on that category turns up a blank. So what happened?

And thirdly, can anyone delete an entry at whim? Thanks in advance. Charadras 11:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)Charadras[reply]

Movie articles

Are you interested in working with me on getting the Back To The Future article to FA status? — Wackymacs 14:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Normal user

I ask myself the same question every day. All I know is, I had to do it, and it is done. No more, no less.--SB | T 01:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry...

Sorry about the personal attacks. I might think that I was mistaken... --Bigtop (customer service - thank you for your cooperation.) 03:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry you felt the need to delete my page

on the one year diet. It is a real plan, and i needed to credit it somewhere on the web. I took a screenshot, and someday I will send it to you CanadianCaesar- good luck and god speed

anti-canadianism and the left

I like how you decided to remove my entry saying "unsourced", but left the stuff you like that has no source. Firstly, where is your source on the CPC's position? And how exactly do you figure this position is "anti-Canadian"? When someone is criticising the government in power for not fully protecting soverignty, this is called nationalism and is usually considered more patriotic than anti-country. So how is this position "anti-Canadian"? Also, the CPC hardly represents most of the left, nor most of the radical left in Canada for that matter. Most leftist will tell you that the CPC's position is pro-imperialist and anti-working class. If you want the source on KKKanada, well MIM is one example. Any Trotksyite group will tell you they loath the CPC position... Also, most revolutionary first nations consider Canada to be built on stolen land, the borders bullshit, ect. but you removed this. Do you deny this? Well, anyways your descion to wipe that shit was POV and saying it was unsourced was an excuse. You seem to think that article belongs to you and not wikipedia. --Mista-X 10:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gremlins 2

I think the way you have it right now is acceptable. Certainly, I think it would be better if comparisons weren't made at all, as it looks like you're trying to excuse the 32nd place in terms of gross profit. But again, it's acceptable right now, and I think it can be your discretion. (There is a chance that I may mention this again on the FA nomination page alongside a more detailed review, but I may not have the time.) Best to you CanadianCaesar! --P-Chan 02:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greenland

what??? no, i dont copy it from another website.... it is from a BOOK, And i know wikipedia is not allowing to copy in another websites... --Zerwell 12:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Page design

I saw your post about needing a new user page. Why don't you go here which is a wikiproject that designs user pages. So far their is myself, Moe Epsilon, Georgemoney, and a few others that will design you page. Give it a try! Thetruthbelow 00:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gremlins 2

Good to hear from you again. I haven't had the chance to give Gremlins 2 a good look over yet. If/when I can I'll leave a note on the FAC. Good luck with the nomination. Dmoon1 06:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the intro

I'll be sure to sign the articles that I change using the four tildes from now on. :-) Doc Daneeka 13:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dos

could you tag User:MY NAME IS JIMBO STALES as an {{AOLdos}}, I keep hitting an autoblock when i try to--152.163.100.71 02:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My page is immature spam huh?

Well the game actually exist, that event with I-Mockery actually happened. The game might be immature, but I'm just letting people known about a ROM hack that actually exist and that almost got into some LEGAL ISSUES with the company who made the characters.

Canlii

Yeah, I just noticed a few more cases added. It now goes back to 1970 but it's very sparse. --PullUpYourSocks 15:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quote

Right. Most times, my memory is accurate. To be honest, I don't really trust snpp.com at times. They do not have every single line or even every episode (it may take many years, long after the show will end). But if you look at all the quotes I've done, you will see that (usually) I'm off by only a few words. As you said, it might be a petty issue, but I try to have the quotes as accurate as possible.- JustPhil 17:12, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I didn't use the right words. I do use a source at times when I have to post a good deal of quotes. I try to make them as accurate as possible. I do also correct quotes which are incorrect.- JustPhil 17:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I want to be an admin SOON

Hello, I know, I know...most people are now gonna hate me due to my still present rebel nature. Look...once I have been here for at least a year, editted at least 500 times, and may be more...can be an administrator? Cause I like that job...thanks. ps. I hope my stupid reputation has not been ruined YET...--Lord X 04:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)User:Xinyu[reply]

My Vow and Oath to Wikipedia

Okay, so, I have messed around with the administration several times. First, with neologism, second with self-proclaimed administrator, and third with copyvio. First, I must say, I apologize to all collaborators who are currently working with me, and who now probably doesn't trust me any longer. Secondly, I hope that all my collaborators are able to reconcile for my vices, and rulebreaking status, currently. Once again, I am really sorry for what I have done. Thirdly, and lastly, please realize that I am not the most perfect human being alive on the planet, and that I would not cause any more disasters, vandalize (as they say), and create all out mayhem. This is my vow: That I would be the best, most rule-abiding Wikipedian possible. Thank you. Please trust me out on this one. --Lord X 01:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)User:Xinyu[reply]

Hi dear Caesar!

Hi, my dear Caesar! Sure think, I'll have a go at your userpage. In fact, you're next in the list! ;) Now is the perfect time for you to express any preferences you may have, i.e., color or a basic layout idea... or you can leave it entirely to me! ;) Btw, it was a true pleasure to see your name appear in my Talk page; I think I had not seen you since your RfA back in February, and I always liked your name!

Hope you're doing fine, hun, I'll catch you later - hopefully with a design for you under my arm ;) Big hug, Phædriel ♥ tell me - 22:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Caesar, I've just finished a design for you - hope you like it! You can see it here. If you happen to like it, just copy the code straight into your userpage. Otherwise, let me know if you want me to enhance it any further. Please take good care, hun, and see you later! Big hug, Phædriel ♥ tell me - 23:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chaka

Hello. I noticed that you were the editor that apparently blocked the article Chaka (The Lion King). I don't know the history on this article, but there is an editor who continually attempts to re-create it (see Chaka(The Lion King) (which i redirected) and Chaka(Disney)). Honestly, I am not sure why the article can't exist, but since you are familiar with the "case" I thought you might be interested in handling it.--Esprit15d 13:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

username

I'm blocking on bad choice of username regardless of your block. -- Longhair 06:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your block. What I meant to say was, regardless of if your indefinate vandal block was in doubt, they'd be blocked infinitely for username reasons anyway. Feel free to zap usernames of that flavour on site. They're rarely ever solid good contributors. -- Longhair 06:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I'd have done the same. Unsuitable content is also another reason to watch closely if it appears with an otherwise good account. Keep up the good work. -- Longhair 07:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hollywood Barnstar

The Barnstar of High Culture
For moving two films up to FA status (Gremlins, Gremlins 2: The New Batch), you get a well deserved Hollywood Barnstar. So far, you were the champion on 12% of the Feature Articles on the Wikifilm project. That's amazing. I look forward to seeing more of your work.--P-Chan 17:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cameron Elementary School

I didn't put the speedy tag on because it was a school, it was because it had no context whatsoever. Nothing about students, or its importance, or even where exactly it was located. Hbdragon88 01:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Realize

That I never said hello. New user page looks great. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 07:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:WoWzors!

Gladly! Thanks for the heads up! —Kf4bdy talk contribs

Anti-Canadianism

I haven't had a chance to look at this too closely (my own revert wars to worry about ;). I'd suggest: do track down sources. When you source it it will be much harder to justify a revert from the anon or anybody. Marskell 21:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crime Library

I just created the article Crime Library that you mentionned in an AfD discussion. Nice site indeed. GrAfFiTTalk Contribs 23:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some usernames to block...

Thanks

For reverting vandalism on my user page. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 08:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Canadianism

Who are you to block me?? Canadia, 10:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow this is absolutely insane. Are you telling me that your version is any better than mine? Where is your authority to say so? Canadia, 10:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3rr

I'll revert the next one. This is silly. --Marskell 14:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must also say that IMO you should not block him yourself but take it to the noticeboard. Marskell 14:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canada Day

Thank you, and happy Canada Day to you as well. --PullUpYourSocks 03:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You too, eh ;). Marskell 16:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey CC! Have a Happy Canada Day!--P-Chan 03:49, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ayr Academy

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback. You might note that there was not a merge tag on the page when I tagged it for CSD. However, your point about expansion rather than deletion is well-taken. A Google search shows that it is a school with a reasonable number of hits, so I should have tagged for expansion. Thanks. Brian 19:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)btball[reply]

agreed

I find that almost any anon that takes an interest in that article turns out to be the person you mention... - Nunh-huh 03:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Badlydrawnjeff and others

Hi,

I'm depressed about that result, but 1) it was only his first go; and 2) he was a bit more argumentative with opposers than is ideal. RfA does have a "wear-down" factor, as it becomes harder to disapprove of quality candidates on their second or third nom, so I'm confident he can get the nod in three months.

On the other hand, I was truly heart-broken to see the diff re:Kappa you provided and note his absence from us. :( There are so few inclusionists left, and we need them as a check in the system to ensure every article gets a fair hearing.

Late Happy Canada Day (which isn't late in a way, since you'll get Monday off!)

Best wishes, Xoloz 14:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canada Day

Thanks for the wishes...trust me, I was stuck in MolsonCanadianville. ;) Habsfan|t 16:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (Atari 2600)

First of all, thanks for helping polish up the article. No, the wells are not water wells. I realize it's a confusing word to use, but its what the manual offically states them as being. They are more often refered to as just "pits" or "holes" but I felt it would be best to try and stick to a semi-"offical" term. --SeizureDog 07:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply...

Yeah, really sorry. It was indeed pure nonsense. I was kind of bored and considering nothing linked to it I wouldn't consider it vandalism. Sorry if it offended you --NicAgent 13:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't Wikipedia made so that people MUST register to contribute, and that their e-mail addresses are included in the registration. It would greately reduce vandalism. --NicAgent 14:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EVE online A&A

As you closed the deletion nomination for EVE Online Acronyms and Abbreviations, you should probably be appraised of Talk:EVE_Online_terms_and_acronyms. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 16:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The willies.

This is UTC -5:

  • [23:46:57] New user Wheeley Willy
  • [23:47:07] CanadianCaesar blocks Wheeley Willy.

10 seconds flat, excellent. Kevin_b_er 04:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedians with articles

Could you explain your reverts (there, not to me). I tend to agree with them, but don't have enough information to do more than concur with you once. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

...for admonishing Asbl. He/she has some talent for organizing material, but IMHO it's often overused and misguided. Also, like so many, seems to believe that "if *I* think it, it's true and it must rule." Lou Sander 20:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Burley

I can't say I'm familiar with it, but I agree, it's an interesting one. From the looks of it, it appears to be one of Canada's longest standing extradition case law. As far as I can tell it's still good law. --PullUpYourSocks 23:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impolite message

You left a rather implite message on talk page. Please respond to my question there. --Asbl 23:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please respond to the questions on my talk page? --Asbl 00:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think all the contributions are by the banned user. I also think you owe me an apology. Can you please address those issues on my talk page? --Asbl 01:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:CanadianBrutus

I'm pretty sure this guy is the same guy I've been tracking the last few nights; comes on about this time and wastes an hour or two of my time while I protect the talk pages of his sockpuppets. My advice would be to protect the talk pages with {{unblockabuse}} rather than deleting, or he'll go on with it all night. I'm going to checkuser and nail all the socks in a moment. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 06:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Farso (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user placed a note on my talk page that someone was vandalising the George W. Bush article and created a link supposedly to the article, but it was actually a link to the "block user" function intended to block you. I clicked it, but since I'm not an admin, it didn't work, thankfully.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 06:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same was done here[1], by Sempit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) —Centrx→talk • 06:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You missed one at Yittle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) -- Gogo Dodo 06:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Elizabeth Morgan

IS this page actually semi-protected? this edit argues otherwise. --Calton | Talk 06:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On July 7, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Re Burley, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

i told you

im here to stay...did you perseive what i was saying as a joke?-armking

Armgod 14:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lmao! >=D

you int slick man your beating your head on an impenitrable wall tryingto slow me down...


im here to stay

Armking14 15:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]