User talk:Crazynas/September2011

August 2011

This is your last and only warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did withthis edit to Millard Fillmore. Reaper Eternal(talk) 02:35, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um... I think you misclicked your warning... I rv the vandalism using huggle````
Oops, you somehow got the warning, not the vandal. :/ Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging of album articles with db-band

Regarding your tagging of On the Ocean EP and Running From a Gamble with {{db-band}}, I have declined the speedy deletion as these articles are about albums, not bands. {{db-band}} is only for artists, not the artist's albums. The related {{db-album}}would not apply in this case either as the artist's articles exist. --Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:16, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, about the incorrect tagging, I reread the relevant guidelines at CSD and don't plan on letting that happen again. Crazynas t 05:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem. On a completely different note, I see you were having some trouble with your talk page header. I think your problem was with this line:
<font face="Times new Roman" color="#FFFFFF">
#FFFFFF is white  . I suspect you meant to use black which is #000000 . You can also just use the word "black" as in<font face="Times new Roman" color="black"> . -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the color issue... but now my section headers seem the wrong size? Do you know what my issue could be with that (feel free to change it if you see the problem)? Thanks for the advice. Crazynas t 15:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tweaked it. Is that what you were looking for? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 16:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JIDAISHIN

I might be missing something (that's what a lot of people think...), but I couldn't see any sign of an author request for deletion. You might have hit the wrong category. Happens. I've declined on the user request one - over to you if you want a second go...Peridon (talk) 22:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think Huggle bugged out on me although It's possible it was human error (Huggle also failed to message the article creator like it was supposed to) sorry for the incorrect tag. Crazynas t 22:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Dragonfly67 message

In response to this, the user was blocked because there were concerns that fall under thechild protection policy. His reasoning, 'the usual', is designed to avoid drawing attention to the blocks. We take this sort of thing very seriously, and there's a lot of private information involved, so I'm afraid I can't be more specific than that. Hope this helps. The Cavalry (Message me) 18:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I understand that private information in general, and in particular concerning children is something that should not exist on here. The vague action summary's made me question what was going on, as part of this experiment thank you for clarifying. Crazynas t 21:34, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A few questions, if you would be so kind. I'm assuming that is an intentional mislink to CP to avoid What Links Here etc? Is 'the usual' used if (and only if) a block is issued as part of this policy?Crazynas t05:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, sorry - that was a mistaken mislink! I've changed it now. 'The usual' isn't something that we always use, nor is it one that everyone uses, nor does it refer to child protection stuff specifically. It usually refers to a situation where privacy is an issue, so a normal summary can't be made. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist

Please RevDel the entries in Particle board until they can be over sighted. Crazynast 00:19, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a BLP article and most comments were not clearly pointed to a certain person (there are tons of such edits in histories around). Why is it important/urgent?Materialscientist (talk) 00:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It seems a violation per WP:oversight... I've already reported it... as referring to possibly real people... but maybe I'm jumping the gun. Crazynast 00:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
per [1] and the like.Crazynast 00:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have mail

Toddst1 (talk)05:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Cattle Dog

The ACD standard states "The length of the body from the point of the breast bone, in a straight line to the buttocks, is greater than the height at the withers as 10 is to 9." As for a "non sequitur" the ratio is additional information not an irrational conclusion.Marj (talk) 03:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I completely misread that paragraph. although it's apparently the standard that is confusing to me (or the wording of it). I didn't realize it was a ratio, I thought it was a simple statement that 10 was larger then 9... so sorry about that. I've reverted myself, but I wouldn't have |cared if you had reverted me.Crazynas t03:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It does need a bit of a re-write. I can see the original editor used the wording of the Standard, but there must be a better way of expressing it. Marj (talk) 03:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just "a ratio of 10 to 9" would provide clarity while conserving meaning? Does this need a citation as a standard?Crazynas t 03:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Thanks. Marj (talk) 06:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WPT:V/First Sentence

{{subst:User:Jerzy/tbcore|WPT:V/First Sentence|new=yes}}

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 13:39, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

Please comment on Talk:W. B. Yeats

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:W. B. Yeats. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasonedconsensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 16:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasonedconsensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 02:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of melodic death metal bands

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of melodic death metal bands. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensusposition, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 11:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ecumenical council

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ecumenical council. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasonedconsensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 00:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Please comment on Talk:Jean-Philippe de Lespinay

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jean-Philippe de Lespinay. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensusposition, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 09:05, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Human

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Human. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensusposition, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 10:05, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:William Lane Craig

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:William Lane Craig. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasonedconsensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is onWikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 10:36, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]