This is an archive of past discussions with User:Go Phightins!. 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.
I think it's in pretty good shape now; I made some edits and commented at the review page, but I think the only major thing that needs to be addressed now is sourcing in the financial troubles and dogfighting sections. I don't think it should be tough to address, given how heavily these things were covered. Happy holidays! --Batard0 (talk) 06:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Terrific. I should have some time to find a few sources, and then we'll be good to go. Also, I finished the Lou Rymkus review that was started in November that I completely forgot about. Merry Christmas to you as well! GoPhightins!15:10, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas (and a Happy New Year!)
Clockery is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Clockery 12:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockery (talk • contribs)
Hi there! When using certain templates on talk pages, such as welcome templates and user warnings, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:welcome}} instead of {{welcome}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. If you need any further help on the matter just ask me on my talk page. Cheers. ·Add§hore·Talk To Me!17:57, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
You popped up in one of my reports of welcome templates posted but not substed :) It showed a few instances of various welcome templates that were placed but not substed. This is just a quick reminder really! ·Add§hore·Talk To Me!18:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Go Phightins!. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi! I was wondering if I was alone in feeling that this is really not an appropriate response to a question at Teahouse? If you agree, I will be happy to correspond with the editor involved, but I wanted to check myself before I did. Thanks! Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:40, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for the info, I was unaware of that page, I was just going through earlier bowls from this year trying to find templates. Again thanks a lot. Eh Oh Canada (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Outstanding! We can always use more hosts. Basically, you need to welcome the user whose question you're answering to the Teahouse, answer their question concisely in "Plain English" avoiding linking to too many policies, and then leave a Teahouse Talkback Template on their talk page by clicking the subscript "TB" next to their signature. There are guidelines, I believe on the Teahouse Host Expectations page with some more specific direction, but that's the general gist of it. Let me know if you have any questions. GoPhightins!20:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Nopes. No questions. Just that we have way more hosts than guests trying to find help. How about sneaking hijacking help requests away from the help desk ;) ? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
But literally dozens of requests there go unanswered. Not to forget that almost all answers there are not friendly, something that new users will benefit from the most. WP:JARGON or Technical words does little to help them understand the small little things. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
I am not in disagreement with you. My concern stems from a regular at help desk who came to Teahouse a few days ago and answered a question in a rather bitey way. I called him on it and I am afraid if we start answering their questions, a turf war may result. He was less than happy with me, I think. There is a message a little further up this page about it; you are welcome to look for yourself. Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:22, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
The reason people go to the help desk is because a place by the name of "help desk" seems to be the most obvious place to search for help. Maybe if we could figure out ways to get the Teahouse displayed in common places(Like pages where you get links on what to find where(esp where to find help) and other such stuff) or broadening the scope/quantity of our invitations, it could do the trick. All we need is to get to the correct places where new users would look for help. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:34, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
I always use the WER project welcome templates. They include a Teahouse link. So does the Welcoming commitee's templates. But I agree, it should be mentioned in other places. I don't have a clue as to how to make that happen. Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:45, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
I found out that the mood feedback tool contains more 'help' questions than the help desk or the teahouse. Many go unanswered or badly answered though. Maybe if that could be a part of the hosts' agenda - Keep an eye out there; then we might be able to connect better perhaps? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey. Saw your message. I was hoping no one would send that message 'cuase I made sort of a promise that if anyone told me to edit something, that I would leave Wikipedia because over 3 people had told me that and I said if that discussion had to happen again, that I would quit being in Wikipedia. And a promise is a promise, sorry. I'm too scared to make any edits. So I guess no more Wikipedia if that whole discussion starts again. No more Wikipedia for me. RaidenRules!RaidenRules!23:37, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Deidra, why are you scared to make article edits? Be bold, not apprehensive! Why don't you take a look at one of the video games you mentioned on your userpage, and look at its article, and see if there's any way you can improve it. Perhaps you could take a look at The Legend of Zelda. It's setting section is tagged as needing more citations. Based on what I've seen from you, I think you know how to cite sources, so perhaps you could find one or two and add it to the article. Whatever you do, don't leave the project. We need more people with enthusiasm like you! Merry Christmas. GoPhightins!13:29, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for re-posting that. Appreciate it. Well I'm about to edit Siberian Husky because it has no citing and I double checked, and most of the information is wrong. I'm going to redo most of that page. It really needs citing, and most importantly- correct information! PS-I got Black Ops 2. I can take a look at that page later. RaidenRules! (talk) 23:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Hoping that most of your Christmas wishes came true. I'm going to go get my encyclopedia about dogs book and head off to the article. Thanks for the support. For me, it seems as if the only thing I'll be editing is dog articles because I don't know what happened to my game informers magazines......hopefully their not in the garbage. Well, I heard that I can cite from websites as well so I'll see if I can find a trusted website. Thanks. :) RaidenRules! (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
It looks better! Just remember that you need to write from a neutral point of view. Be careful; some of what you wrote sounds a little too positive, but you're definitely on the right track to becoming an outstanding content contributor. GoPhightins!00:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
TheOriginalSoni (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hello Go Phightins!, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed1718:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Just so you know, if you ever see anything like that again, go ahead and pull it right off AN or ANI, and flag down an oversighter. (Since the edits were suppressed, it's probably best not to discuss what the thread contained). Thanks! --Rschen775408:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, Go Phightins!, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.
CURTAINTOAD!TALK! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I think your message on my talk page may have been meant for someone else, since i dont really need any help with YFA. Thanks anyway though- Ryan shell (talk) 21:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
sorry for not answering in a while but it hadn't occurred to me to check back here. and no: i did not leave the helpme template on any of my pages. Ryan shell (talk) 01:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
That one wasn't a huge deal. I don't know if you read my last edit summary, but I'm headed to bed for now, so I'll check back tomorrow (probably afternoon) to see how it's going. GoPhightins!03:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
AfD
I just recently started working at AfD. I just reviewed Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arun Panchariya. It is very frustrating, as I took the time to thoroughly review the article and the sources and took the time out to write out exactly what i found to be the problems with the article, something I have noticed is usually not done. Not 2 minutes after I posted the review, the article's creator began adding unreliable sources. I am guessing it is somewhat an ESL problem. My question is this: When and how do you tell an author that their article isn't going anywhere? Gtwfan52 (talk) 08:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Well this plot thickens. The writer of this article has been emailing me constantly ever since I answered her question at the Teahouse (during which I told her the sources were unreliable) and she seems like a good faith contributor (though undoubtedly working for some company). I don't know what to tell you, as AfC can be frustrating. At this point I agree with Ryan that the point is relatively moot as the article is a copyright violation, but in the future, I'm not really sure how you tell someone their article is a dead-end without driving them off the project (though in this case she's probably a corporate contributor, so it's not like she'd have stuck around afterward). Good luck though. GoPhightins!11:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, thanks for your attempt - no matter how it turns out. I have some faith in him, but of course complete faith in you. Any failure on this one won't be your failure in an way, shape or form. You honour the project your work with folks like this (✉→BWilkins←✎) 00:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The last comment I can find on this GA review page is that you were about to pass the article on December 26. Was there something wrong? Is something still needing to be done with the article before it qualifies? It would be nice to get this completed; it's the fifth oldest GA review. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to you. I completely forgot about it; it was one of those things I planned on doing in just a second (right after I said I would) and then I must have gotten sidetracked and then I forgot. Thanks for the reminder. It is Done. GoPhightins!01:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Good to know! I'm happy it worked out. (I've also done a ping for the Michael Vick GAN on its review page which I hope wasn't premature. I'm trying to check on all those reviews that have been ongoing for over a month.) BlueMoonset (talk) 01:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Not sure if Batard0 thought my updated referencing was adequate or if he wanted more. That one is under some special circumstances...no need to elaborate but it's not exactly a typical GAN. GoPhightins!01:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you have Craddock1's talk page on your watch list, but if you don't, you probably should and also be aware that I have given him his one and only warning about not breaking the conditions of his unblock. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. I even told him at the top of the page he wasn't to edit anything other than his talk and the adoption page. His answers to my first set of questions was also pathetic. Not sure this is going to work out. Thanks again. GoPhightins!11:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
As a peripheral observer, it seems to me that the unblock condition should have been to not edit anything to do with this Amirite thing, i.e. to demonstrate that he's not here just to promote that product. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 15:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Go Phightins! I just wanted to let you know that I borrowed the code for the format of your userbox table. Thanks! JHUbal27 (talk) 11:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Sysop?
Go P, thank you very much for the praise. I've had a few editors come to me and offer to nominate me for RFA, but have never taken them up on the offer. For a long time I didn't feel a need for the tools; with my position as FLC director, the ability to edit blurbs would be nice, but there aren't too many other areas where the tools would help me. I'm not really involved with ANI or AFD, and most of what I do is normal editing that doesn't need any tools. There are also practical considerations as to why I don't feel the urge to run: I'm straining to keep up with my regular editing schedule and can't take on an admin's duties, and I'm unsure whether the greater community would vote for me. They want people with more hands-on experience at admin processes than I have. To be honest, I don't have a strong need for the tools anyway, and those processes bring drama that I don't want to be a part of. Unlike many others on Wikipedia, I get to edit in peace most of the time. I'd like to keep it that way if possible. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. --NickPenguin(contribs)02:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Just as an irrelevant comment, to remind us all that people actually do read these articles, I've had the Sousa page open plenty of times (not as much recently), listening to the audio clips of the marches with my brothers. I think I might have added portal links to the page or something like that. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 04:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
A user has started demanding an article layout be changed according to his desire against the vote of everyone else who has reverted the changes. It is really odd. I am a new user and have no idea how to handle the situation. And is this type of thing a regular occurrence?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_people_who_have_been_called_a_polymath
Hi and thanks for coming by. It seems to me that a Request for Comment has been started, so I would advise you to hold off until consensus is reached there before you do anything else to the article. These types of conflicts can be frustrating, so I'd suggest you just work on something a little less stressful for a while...there always have and always will be conflicts on Wikipedia, so I guess it would be fair to say disputes are a regular occurrence...we do have a dispute resolution process to resolve them, but all of those things take a little time. Thanks again for dropping by and feel free to let me know if you have any other questions. GoPhightins!20:04, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
In here you may find my comment. I could go on and on forever, but in case there is still any doubt, let me know. Also, I'd like to make it clear that I requested a third opinion and that Noleander accepted the role. He agreed with me and complained that Cambalachero never presented any sources (despite being requested to do so in five different moments). When he finally did it, he brought books (he didn't tell what were the pages nor what were their titles or year in which they were published) written by self-described Revisionists who have been dead for the past 40 years. The sole author cited who is alive is not even a real historian. And these are books that you can not find either online nor mentioned anywhere as sources in other books. --Lecen (talk) 03:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Historians are not the owners of history (as much as it pains me to say that).
Phightins, please (if you have not yet) read pages 414 and 415 from the following book: [1].
Good day. Be aware that Lecen is lying when he says that Pacho O'Donell is not a historian. That man heads the department of history of the university UCES, and was a minister of culture of Buenos Aires in the past. Lecen took the info from here, and the info he concealed is right after the one he cited. It has all been explained at the dispute resolution, but as he's repeating this lie everywhere, I must clarify it. Sorry to take your time for this. Cambalachero (talk) 16:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Cambalachero please strike out your accusation. I also not that Lecen's note on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Argentina was not neutral. I have not recused myself from this dispute but have kept my distance due to a very difficult and lengthy similar dipute with a similar subject. I will keep my eyes on the DR/N filing but will not get involved too much.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:35, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm not quite aware how these things work. What is the next step? Where should I go? Am I the one who is supposed to do it? Or you or some of the others is supposed to? --Lecen (talk) 03:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
No problem. Enthusiasm is good; we just need to get him to direct the enthusiasm to content creation, not necessarily becoming an admin in six months. GoPhightins!11:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
