Please assume good faith. If any of my edits have seemed unconstructive, please keep a cool head and notify me of my mistakes promptly. I try to be helpful and if I cause a problem, it is purely accidental; in no way are my edits meant to be offensive to anyone. Besides myself.
Please sign your posts. Sign with four tildes to record your username and timestamp. Sinebot is watching, you know.
Respond to all messages at the place where the discussion began. Meaning, if I post a message on your talk page, respond to it there, and if you post on my talk page, I will respond to it here, unless you specify otherwise.
Nonsense gladly accepted. I like receiving messages, and I promise not to bite. Even if you think your questions are trivial, they may not be, at least to me. :)
Place all new messages at the bottom of the page. Clicking on the link below will do this automatically for you.
My page is constantly being monitored by dedicated talk page stalkers. Some of them (I probably don't know them all) are The ed17, IceUnshattered, Juliancolton, Nutiketaiel, Sonia, and Little Mountain 5 off the top of my head. Most of the time they lurk in the dark, but some of them might respond to your comments before I do. Don't be alarmed though; they might provide you with better responses than I can.
Email me if the matter is confidential. But please include the word "Wikipedia" in the e-mail title so that I won't inadvertently delete it or have my spam-eater destroy it.
Going pretty good - as I guess you've seen, NawlinWiki got my page protected and some of those edits oversighted. Bad times...I don't even remember how I got to be Grawped in the first place. —LaPianista(T•C)16:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give me any tips on how to make my userpage better...? It just seems to be pathetically short and anything I add to make it longer seems to be pointless and just drags on. I've thought of adding book reviews like yours, but I want something else too. Any ideas? Oh, and I want to think up a colour scheme that goes with my sig, but I've tried that ([1]) and it just seems girly. Any ideas? Your and Ed's userpages are so good! TopGearFreak19:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Add some useful links (to pages that will be useful to you, ones you're involved in), and maybe add DYK, Featured pic, Featured article of the day - things like that. Chamaltalk02:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, all right, all right. :D I'll grudgingly take a co-nom - and I'll watch the FLC page this time. I missed the GA page for one of Eddie's articles in the past, so I won't do it again.
The image looks great to me, but not sure how they'd take it. I'll see if I can dig up some images from Flickr etc, so don't work on the other images yet. Chamaltalk01:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the welcome back, I'm glad to be back. I meant to tell all of my friends here that I was going to be away for 3 months and couldn't be on Wikipedia in that time, but I didn't have a chance to. Well I'm glad to be back^^ Nice to hear from you again. ♥Tory~♥Amulet♥Heart♥ 18:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You were here when she was! I brought her into WP. Maybe not officially but you were here before me . You arrived at least a year earlier. Chubbennaitor18:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :) Don't be too annoyed if I break the page by accident trying to fix something ... w/o Calvin to help me, Holly Short would maybe still be screwed up now. Icy // ♫20:50, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Needs references though, and some more information would help. See similar pages like Mario Bros. (GA) and Space Invaders (FA) to see what kind of things should be included in an ideal article of that type. Try to find some info on it's developing and reception. Good luck with it :) Chamaltalk01:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done; but not much to work on, though, honestly. Like Chamal said, I think references are needed - there are none at all right now. A little bit more information on the history of the game would be nice, too. —LaPianista(T•C)02:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well... before I edited the article all it said was "Clowns was a similar game to Circus Atari in which the player controlled a seesaw to propel two clowns into the air, popping balloons situated in three rows at the top of the screen. The game was available on cartridge for VIC-20 home computers." But when I edited it it became this... well you get the picture, anyway, I've been looking all over the web (for only 15 minutes...) and found nothing, this game was on the atari and it's pretty old so I don't think I'll find any references... well maybe...--Spittlespat02:20, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you have trouble finding online references, you could check your library for video game encyclopedias or something similar. Just a few tips. :) —LaPianista(T•C)02:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm too cool to go to the library.. no just kidding for your information I don't even think I'm cool. BTW what if I don't find any references???--Spittlespat02:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't find many references it might not be notable enough. That's only my premonition - I don't know much about the article-building process. I'll ask Chamal for his opinion in my edit summary here. —LaPianista(T•C)02:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, right. The article. Facepalm I think you'd first check with your sources - normally, reliable sources will tell you the little wording details. —LaPianista(T•C)02:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
and what's those games could where it never ends and you just beat your highscores or is there not a name?? (wow this might be my second discussion on a article)--Spittlespat02:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure - I'm not much of a gamer. :) You could ask WP:RD/M if you want. You'll get a response in about a quarter-hour if you're lucky or, at most, an hour or two. —LaPianista(T•C)02:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Geeeee..... I'm not experienced in GA's. You know, I'll ask Ed to help - I really want to do it. Perhaps he can just breathe down my neck while I work, eh? So I won't screw up or anything. :) —LaPianista(T•C)04:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, WWW. Just had a look at that article - it doesn't look too good, I'm afraid. The expansion tag is a problem. You'll need to expand that section first. I don't have the time to give it a good look - maybe sometime Wednesday or on the weekend. In the meantime, I'll bother Ed for a min. Cheers! —LaPianista(T•C)04:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just breaking the ice. I've begun the process of looking through your contributions to see if you have admin quality talents, depending on what I find I may offer to nom you after Ed's rfa concludes. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not butting in or anything, but I'd suggest La Pianista to wait another month or so. Just let people know that you know how things work around here... participate in discussions and stuff like that. You know the drill :) A lot of people are not going to worry too much about admin qualities rather than contributions and experience in admin areas. It's for you to decide of course, and Tom knows more than me. Chamaltalk12:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be critical here - Pianista don't take it personally - she's personally <<implied>> that she's not perfect for an RfA yet, and I agree some. There's already some disagreement in Ed's current RfA over whether he's had enough experience with the tools. Certainly Pianista's work with Huggle would count, but whether she's been active in other admin areas I don't know. Icy // ♫21:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep - Icy's got it down. And, not to sound sentimental or anything, but I'll probably only really consider getting nommed for adminship if Ed passes. Interpret that as you will - his RfA kinda gives me an idea of how mine would look. :) —LaPianista(T•C)05:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly my problem. And, being a gnome, I don't have much to stand by my name, there.
Ah, well. Maybe not. I don't know. Maybe? Ick.
Well, good luck, Eddie - I've figured that the less you say, and the more concisely you say it, the better. (Though I want to say more! Arg! Must shut up, must shut up...) —LaPianista(T•C)05:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@ Chubbennaitor: The community needs to know that. They should see it themselves. They are not going to take the candidate's or nominator's word for it at an RfA, trust me.
@ Icy: My opinion is, looking at how RFAs go these days, huggling counts for nothing. Any support vote saying "good vandal fighter" will not impress most poeple. Using an automated tool for a large percentage of edits is not going to help either. If I didn't know La Pianista and seen her knowledge of policy etc, my !vote in her RFA would be an oppose (Don't take it personally, Pianista. Just my honest opinion. ). Being an admin doesn't just mean you're a good editor, it means you have qualities that make you qualified to be one. But if you don't show those qualities, they are no use to you even if you have them. That's why the community has a high regard for someone who has taken part in discussions etc, since they show that the editor can handle pressure, settle disputes without any problems and things like that. Chamaltalk11:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I would ...vote if she decided to run now, meh. Chamal's point is better than mine. Sounds like it's a loooong road for me if I ever feel like going for RfA... but then again, I think I've known that for some time. Icy // ♫14:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know, guys. In fact, if I would oppose my own RfA. True. Think about it - I've only participated at XfD about three times ever, and my only experience in article building is copyediting and vandalism reversion, which, in effect, amounts to hardly anything. I have resolved a few IP disputes in the past, but I find that work really stressful and pointless, especially when the editors refuse to agree.
So, even though I'm an amazing (:D) Wikipedian, I don't think I'd fare so well as an admin. But I really appreciate all the candid comments from all you guys - I'd rather that then fake "We love you"s and other b.s. If anything, it has put all you all higher in my regard. :) —LaPianista(T•C)19:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Plus that, they have to take a load of crap from people who get blocked/their articles deleted (the personal attacks involved here are unbelievable, there are people that have actually left because of continuous harassment). They are also under a lot of pressure to take the correct decision in tough situations. Basically, whatever you do as an admin, there's a good chance that somebody would try to blow your head off :) Chamaltalk14:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I could take it. Because they aren't talking to my face, t doesn't offend me in that situation. I wouldn't mind being one. I'd like to do what they do. I'm not that good though. Chubbennaitor16:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a look and try to think of something...perhaps my beloved Brahms will be my muse for new mottoes while I'm busy irl. ;) —LaPianista(T•C)05:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I saw it, WWW. And I gave it my honest opinion. Sorry, but I think that's better than if I had lied and said it was great, no? —LaPianista(T•C)05:23, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pianista, it's me, Topgear. I'm in a rush, and can't log in. I've a new blog here, and just wanted to tell you. If you want to tell me anything wiki related urgently, post it there. Thanks, TGF. 86.45.129.161 (talk) 16:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I love the template, and I do agree with the message, but it's a bit too flashy for me. A bit too large. Maybe if it were smaller...perhaps I'd make one myself sometime. —LaPianista(T•C)05:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm losing interest. Would you like to keep the nomination up? I don't think clearing up all those images can be done in a hurry, and I don't really have time anyway to focus properly on it. Maybe we could work on it properly later, go for a peer review at WP:INDIA and then re-nominate it. It's obviously going to fail as it is. Chamaltalk14:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, though I hate to say it, me too. And I also lack adequate time. I agree on the peer review part - it obviously has a long way to go. —LaPianista(T•C)05:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Adoption notice
I'll take that as a compliment :) Well, I do what I can. Couldn't get around to a peer review, though. Too little time. But, I think I'll clock up a few GA's if I can find the time. Even though the adoption didn't quite work out, I'm glad to have found an editor with a sense of humour in the process. We're becoming increasingly rare... Elucidate(light up)17:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
oh..... say, I'm actually ahead of you... I'm ahead fo you in the wikicup... that really surprised me... (OMG! Wat's up with me and those dots!!).....--Spittlespat23:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... but I'm getting a Ga article nominated... (will two friends be ripped apart by a competition?... nah probably not...) I think a have some sort of dot disease........--Spittlespat23:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*shuffles feet* Icy wasn't running in the cup, so I thought I'd leave out that...ah...seemingly unnecessary tidbit of info. Now put the butcher's knife away, Icy. No gory scenes on a section Spittle started. —LaPianista(T•C)05:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
-glare- Now that I've had Ed executed by guillotine, I think you'll get the firing squad. I hope none of them miss - to have a number of tiny bullet holes drilled into that little body of yours should make sure you address me as female. In the afterlife. Icy // ♫22:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's the excuse the idiots over at Wyvern use, chérie. Over here, I expect people to be slightly more intelligent. -sigh- I feel like there's a huge internet organization dedicated to making me change my name to 'Prettygirlypinksomethingcrappyugh' ...gaaaaaaaah ...since when is "Icy" a generally masculine name? Icy // ♫21:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, u can has cookie. One poisoned cookie just for you. Don't share it with anyone.
Chamaltalk has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Heh! I didn't really mean it, but one more can't hurt. Thank you for the kind words, Chamal. Even more so, thanks for letting me know that I can no longer accept confectioneries from you if I wish to see the morrow. Cheers, and keep an eye out for tainted muffins, or rum-filled truffles, since rummy truffles can kill you and give you horrible stomachaches and woozy hallucinations to boot. —LaPianista(T•C)05:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spencer has had 1 successful "In the news" nomination.
From the Judges
This years WikiCup started off great! It's only the second full week of competition, and we already have a lot of content promoted. We have some very close pools, such as Pool A and J. We also have some pools who have not been very active yet, but hopefully that will start changing in the coming weeks.
Garden and iMatthew have also opened a new pool, the "Judge's Pool" where we are competing against each other and following the same rules as all of you. This pool however, will never have any effect on the actual competition, but you can still check back often to see how we are doing compared to yourself.
That's it for this newsletter edition, everyone. Any questions or comments are always welcome on the WikiCup talk page, or our user talk pages. Until next time, Garden. and iMatthew // talk // 13:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't wish to receive this newsletter in the future, remove your name from this list.
Current leaders
In this round of the WikiCup, the top three contestants from each pool will advance to the next round. As of this newsletter, the current pool leaders are:
Pool A
Catalan (138)
Gary King (86)
Spencer (67)
Pool B
Sceptre (22)
Spittlespat (7)
Greatestrowerever, Malinaccier (6)
Pool C
Candlewicke (60)
Scorpion0422 (24)
Steven Walling (9)
Pool D
NapHit (27)
ThinkBlue (18)
97198 (11)
Pool E
X! (69)
Sasata (10)
LOTRrules (4)
Pool F
Bedford (29)
RyanCross (21)
the_ed17, Howard the Duck (5)
Pool G
Sunderland06 (46)
Skinny87 (16)
What!?Why?Who?, Pedro_João, Ceranthor (2)
Pool H
Juliancolton (133)
Tinucherian (41)
Ottava Rima (28)
Pool I
Durova (144)
Theleftorium (121)
Wrestlinglover (15)
Pool J
Paxse (78)
Climie.ca (67)
Useight (46)
All scores are accurate as of the time the newsletter was sent out.
Ah. And Californians are too fruity and showy for my taste. Gee, they all smell like oranges there. All bright rind and stuffing without the flavor. ;P —LaPianista(T•C)06:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Created on 10 January - and DYK is for articles created or expanded within the last 5 days. I suggest you hurry, unless you're thinking of expanding it now. Chamaltalk11:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh cr*p! Well...I couldn't have helped it otherwise. Real life can be a pain.
Yes (which means the expansion will have to be 5500+ characters. But 10 January is still listed under expiring noms, so if you hurry and get it over 1500 characters (currently at 1178 chars), you can still go for it. Chamaltalk06:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. My priority was not to make it sound too overzealous, which is a real problem at WP:CM. Some of the analyses of pieces, huge chunks of OR, going on and on about the genius of the piece. So this is really neutral in comparison.
I think the music is old enough to be in the public domain. If that is the case, it'd be all right. I don't know how it is when it's been performed/copied by someone else. Maybe you should ask a pro, just to be on the safe side :) Chamaltalk06:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All right - thanks guys! And, btw, my little rude self has forgotten to tell you how much I've missed you all - Chamal, Icy, Ed, Chubb, everyone (even those I've missed)!
Yeah - and with the end of the weekend comes more work to do. I don't hate this life, though the business is tiring and exciting at the same time. :D
And one last question - who do you guys recommend to check out about that copyright? I'd try Alton, but he's been gone for several days now, but that's normal of him. —LaPianista(T•C)07:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for La Plus que Lente
I am sorry but I had to decline your DYK nom for La Plus que Lente as your submission was past the five day deadline. Please remember that you must submit new articles within five days of their creation in order to be considered for DYK. Also, we don't feature articles with expansion tags or any other tag for that matter, so you may want to handle any tagged issues within an article before submission. Thanks and I hope you have better luck next time at DYK.Nrswanson (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I didn't want you to feel left out, based on your comment on Ed's page. I just joined the classical music project, too. How can I help you there? Pastor Theo (talk) 02:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) Oh, you are too kind! No, I don't really need help - just a reason to bug Ed. Today's one of the few days I can use WP uninterrupted, so I carpe diem to make him feel bad. Horrible, aren't I?
But have a cookie for your troubles - thanks so much! :) (moved to PT's page)
Wow, thank you for the cookie. I looked at your classical music page and I saw a lot of articles that needed cleaning up. I am signing off now, but when I come back and I will where I can help you. Thank you. And thank you, Ed, too. Pastor Theo (talk) 02:47, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You have no such obligation! But if that is what you wish, you may do as you wish. :) Thanks bunches again, for the help. See Ed? This is how you treat a lady. *beams* —LaPianista(T•C)02:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
