User talk:Favonian/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Favonian. 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.

hi

i have not yet had a chance to state why this is significant. Please give me a chance to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xmas01245 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

It would appear [1] that you have tried before. The article gave no impression of ever contributing anything useful to Wikipedia. Favonian (talk) 11:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

hi sorry about the advertising on the campile page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theheavym (talk • contribs) 22:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Quite alright. I truly think you are the first editor to ever apologize to me for such a minor transgression. Much appreciated :) Cheers, Favonian (talk) 10:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm the composer of the T-Mobile ring tone -- who in the world would I reference? Its registered in BMI and ASCAP as "Hello, Ola". I composed it in the late 90's as part of the Deustche Telekom Tour de France bicycle team theme music.

Obviously, my work did better than they. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Masseylt (talk • contribs) 05:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry for removing a significant part of Talk:List of sovereign states. It was a technical malfunction of some kind. Hellerick (talk) 13:01, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, in fact I should probably apologize for notifying you with a template, as you are an established Wikipedian. Cheers, Favonian (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Sie haben vorgeschlagen, dass mein Artikel zu löschen. Ich bedauere sehr dass Sie so wenig verstehen, nicht als Sprachkompetenz, sondern als Mensch. Sie beleidigen Luminita Soare in Ihren protokol, dass sie irgendwann und irgendwo verletzt wurde und dass ich mich um sie da mich beklage und peinlich wäre. Sie behaupten sogar dass ich meine Autobiographie schreibe. So sind ja die Mathematiker die so wenig von der Kunst und Politik verstehen. Wenn Sie ein humanisten wären, könnten Sie die welt aus anderen Perspektiven betrachten. Aber sonst, verlieren Sie sich und verschwenden Sie sich in Protokolen die über anderen lustig machen und Sie glauben sich ein grosser Humorist zu sein. Sie sind kein Humorist, Sie sind nur ein arroganter „Herr der Ringe“ oder der Wikipädia der sich wichtig macht und über die Leichen läuft, mit Gummistieffen falles es in London regnet. Und wenn ich Luminita Soare wäre, was könnte Sie da stören, guter Mann? Sie können nicht verstehen was Dissidenz bedeutet. Lachen Sie über den Zustand einer Frau im Alter von 18 Jahren die fast tödlich von der brutalen Täter einer Diktatur geschlagen wurde? Lachen Sie über eine ausgenützte, arme Künstlerin, die lebt in der Dunkelheit und dient als Modell für den anderen Künstler? Was für proeminente Persönlichkeiten suchen Sie denn? Sie ist keine Proeminenz. Sie ist eine Persönlichkeit ohne die anspruchsvolle Krone der Proeminenz. Sie suchen in Ihren Snobismus nur Menschen mit Geld und Schein, in der Raampe der Presse und der falschen Medien! Na, dann löschen Sie, machen Sie ihre barbare Arbeit. Luminita Soare braucht nicht „Herren der Wikipädia“. Sie erzählt über die Monstruosität des Kommunissmus, sie macht Ihnen keine Konkurenz! Na, machen Sie was sie wollen. Falls Sie Zeit finden, lesen Sie ihr Buch. Sie können auch bei Ihnen in England finden: CIORANS APOKALYPTISCHE PHILOSOPHIE: DIE INTERPRETATION DER EWIGKEIT DER WELT UND DER ZERFALL DER MENSCHHEIT (Paperback) by CLARISSA FERENCZI (Author) No customer reviews yet. Be the first. ________________________________________ RRP: £45.00 Price: £38.25 & this item Delivered FREE in the UK with Super Saver Delivery. See details and conditions

You Save: £6.75 (15%)

In stock. Dispatched from and sold by Amazon.co.uk. Gift-wrap available.

Want guaranteed delivery by Friday, November 6? Order it in the next 16 hours and 13 minutes, and choose Express delivery

Clips hat sie, sagen Sie ironisch. Ich würde Ihnen auch wünschen etwas zu erlernen und als Arbeiter zu strahlen, falls Sie über Luminita Soare lachen. Ich habe da einige Beispielen:

http://deutsch.agonia.net/index.php/author/0006081/index.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mcsG31csWs

http://www.clipser.com/watch_video/729824

http://www.clipser.com/watch_video/729903

http://www.clipser.com/watch_video/729916

Diese ist die Luminita Soare. Ich kann nicht mehr Zeit finden um zu übersetzen, aber suchen Sie eine Übersetzung Maschine, und übersetzen Sie selbst aus der deutsche Sprache: Angenehme Übersezung wünsche ich Ihnen! Noikilia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nokilia (talk • contribs) 21:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear

I would ask you that you mean account to delete. I find discrimination there, simple Ingnorierung of the person. Do not make a concern, I there never come back yourselves, in my life. I am disappointed, because there is so little transparency, tolerance and real attention it. There no Trenung exists between an interpreter and a composer, everything which I to arumentieren became, became deleted. I thank you however for the patience and trouble me two weeks there to tolerate. Luminita Soare needs no Wikipedia, it was natural so stupidly me to announce there… I believes democracy and respect for the victims of the coming university mash. I believed into my ignorance that the dissidents its ways am locked up, because of diktatorischen governments with communist color or because of the mafia families thirstily for money and Proeminenz are, or because of incompetent artists the sthehen with the mirrors and with the photos in the face to it blindly and Paranoid becomes and those to copy gesturing and Mimik after that models from the darkness and shade and believe that it is… I would like me with you and your UTC colleagues to excuse, if I have you me my inquiries excited. My kind is not to be done. Ask, because I am not been versed, delete my account. I do not feel there not well, I get stomach pain and I am ready as to the desert alone to be traveled and me with the sand to be artificially respirated. I need to be able to breathe freshness air, I want somewhere where freedom and democracy am. Nokilia/ CC/PCR/UTC memory —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nokilia (talk • contribs) 10:34, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

"What other articles?" Wer ein Gehirn hat, sollte des Denkens fähig sein! 119.94.207.13 (talk) 11:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Mind your language, also in German. You justified your edit by referring to "other articles". Which ones? There are more than three million to choose from. And while we are at it, my edit to the Dönhoff article was hardly unjustified. Wikipedia has a manual of style which defines the preferred way of presenting various bits of information, including dates and years. Specifically, this section explains that dates and years should not be linked unless there is a really good reason for doing so. Favonian (talk) 11:33, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

(Didn't you state, you understand German.) Thank you anyway for your answer (at least you answered unlike Dan Geist). About religion: A "Roman Catholic" is describing a person, not the religion itself. "Roman Catholicism" states a religion. It is more logical to state religion in the way of "Roman Catholicism" rather than "Roman Catholic". (Exceptions are for e. g. Baptist. Baptism is not a religion, but a process to become member of the Christian religion)That was/is my matter. -- 119.94.207.13 (talk) 13:10, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I understand German reasonably well. "Mind your language" refers to your style of edit summaries and talk page comments. An example like "are you playing ignorant?" [2] is not in agreement with Wikipedia's etiquette. Favonian (talk) 17:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for your message It has taken me all day to find out how to use this site to build a page its harder than building a website ha ha several hours later looks like i have problems according to your message. I have put a draft of the actual page in my user page like you said for you to proof read it.

Would be grateful for any help. Thanks

Jane Webb (talk) 18:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jane. The problems are not as big as the somewhat scary template messages make them out to be. What has to be done is organize how the various sources back the claims made in the article and to cut down on the "enthusiastic" wording used in a couple of places. I'll have a look at it some time tomorrow. The thing about keeping it in user space is mostly for articles which are not yet sufficiently fleshed out to be published. This one is—it just needs polishing. Cheers, Favonian (talk) 21:47, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for the reply,ha ha glad to hear it. not sure if I am responding the right way here. Did you get a chance to take a look at my page to see what I need to change? thanks again for your help Jane Webb (talk) 11:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 11 november 11.40am

hi, favonian, I'm not an affiliated of The Centre of Health design. I reffered to it in the article beacuse they are the most active at the moment in this area, and because they have on their web site a lot of helpful articles.

I'm researcher, I have not any direct interest in The Centre's activities Virginia Serrani —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virginia.serrani (talk • contribs) 13:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, if you say so. It just seemed like a bit of a coincidence that you authored a short-lived article about the center, and your recent edits to Evidence-based design have added some 17 references to it. As another editor has pointed out, the article in its present state has fairly serious problems. Favonian (talk) 13:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note on the sources. I actually appreciate when others note things that I've considered as it confirms my own suspicions. I intend on remedying that when I have a moment, but for now the easiest and fastest way to get the article up and running is the primary source so I went that route. The primary article I'm concerned with is List of private spaceflight companies which is chronically redlinked so I've been furiously trying to update sources and links when I have the time. I'm glad people are enthusiastic about adding content to the page, but the workload to maintain it has been daunting. aremisasling (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand your predicament. Keeping up with that rapidly expanding market should keep you occupied through the long winter evenings—assuming you live on the northern hemisphere that is. Regarding the note, I certainly appreciate when editors actually read them instead of discarding them when they think I'm not looking. It can be quite difficult to find the elusive reliable sources for these very technical endeavors. Lots of luck, and happy editing. Favonian (talk) 19:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

You know what, my french isn't great, but this hardly seems notable anyway, and there's no sources, so why don't we speedy A7 it?Cathardic (talk) 21:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to kick the editor's francophone posterior, but there is a claim to notability, and as I have been frequently reminded, this precludes a speedy deletion. Am contemplating a PROD or AfD though. Favonian (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Behold! It turned out to be a copyright violation. Favonian (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Hooray, you definitely deserve the "avoiding the hassle of afd/prod" barnstar for "tirelessly checking every speedy category against an article you know doesn't belong" ( : Cathardic (talk) 21:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Sniff! Thank you, I shall wear it with pride. Favonian (talk) 21:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Howdy. You declined a db-foreign speedy deletion request for Beit Yaakov (Jerusalem) on the grounds that the topic is notable. Where does the guideline specify that WP:CSD A2 applies only to non-notable topics?

As it happens, I have a separate question that I'm going to post to WP:CSD, regarding whether db-foreign applies when the article appears in a foreign language on another Wikimedia project but it isn't the same article. In this case, for example, the article that was posted here is not a copy of the Hebrew Wikipedia article he:בית יעקב. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

As it happens, I discovered that the article is a copy of he:בית יעקב (שכונה). —Largo Plazo (talk) 13:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

You are absolutely right about the CSD-A2 not saying anything about this—or anything else for that matter. I recently had a nomination similarly contested and after some soul searching had to agree with the editor. In my opinion, if the topic is notable, then adding the copy of the article with the aim of having it translated should be acceptable. There are even templates available for stating that an article is a translation from a foreign-language Wiki or contains material from it. The article in question uses the {{Hebrewtrans}} template, and has an Interwiki reference to the original, so it's not like (s)he is hiding anything. In conclusion: whereas I'll happily use A2 to get rid of articles I don't think serve a purpose on the English wiki, I don't think it should be used just because it exists. Others may well disagree, and I look forward to the discussion. Cheers, Favonian (talk) 13:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

You say "there are even templates ... stating that an article is a translation". Yes, to be put on an article that is here in English. That doesn't have anything to do with an article posted here that is not in English.

The guidelines say specifically that if you want someone to translate an article from another language Wikiproject into English for this Wikipedia, it should be done through WP:Requests for translation. The purpose of A2 is to keep from cluttering this Wikipedia with articles that are already available on the appropriate one. Since the purpose of A2 is not to dispose of articles that don't "serve a purpose on the English wiki", so there is no reason to suppose that serving a purpose on English wiki, if it were in English, overrides it. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi I have added (or tried to) an article re: Bream Fishing. This is an article I wrote myself and have it on my website. Twice I have violation of coyright notice saying it will be deleted. How do I get round this? I am the copyright owner. Thanks Jim Boswell

I have replied at Talk:Bream fishing. Favonian (talk) 23:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Favonian,

Thanks for the quick reply.

I have already looked at the page you say to look at. Thats why I edited the article the first time. It is NOT blatant advertising of my site!! Peple are interested in fishing for bream and other fish and I have other articles on fish species and fishing for them to add to Wiki. Are you refering to the link to my website? I inserted the link so that people could, as your terms of use say, attribute thie article to myself.

Kind regards Jim Boswell —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishukjim (talk • contribs) 23:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The phrase "website for all anglers" used to tag the external link rather tastes like advertisement to me. At any rate, even if you follow the guidelines for making the text from your website available, there remains the issue of documenting notability of the material. This has to be done by references to reliable, third-party, published sources and would probably require a major rewrite of the article. Favonian (talk) 23:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

PS: Leaving the discussion at this point. It's very late in my timezone. Favonian (talk) 23:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful edits there. Once one looks at something too long, one cannot see the meat for the potatoes. It is great to have another pair of eyes look it over.

I took off the orphan tag because it seems to me to be useless. So what if it is? It says kinda "this article stands for itself". Well why shouldn't it? I don't disagree with the tag itself, but the implied deprecation. Perhaps this is just my way of looking at things, but these tags I think can be unhelpful as then a bot or deletionist goes prod or speedy when the article has not had a chance to stand on its feet. What do you think?

I never heard of the guy either, but surely that we have an entry for him, assuming it is not all bollox, is better rather than worse?

My very best wishes and thanks. Si Trew (talk) 01:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure! Don't worry too much about the orphan tag. It may look a bit ominous, but I'm quite certain that no article ever got deleted just for being an orphan. I have tried to remedy the situation a bit by providing a link from Catholic University of Leuven#Notable alumni. Another obvious candidate would be to add a link to Josse Mertens de Wilmars. The only reason I haven't done so is the lack of a good source for their relationship. The eulogy, which is currently the only source, doesn't mention it, though it's difficult to tell since it's a scanned document and therefore cannot be searched. I've located this website, which seems to confirm the information, given that Josse's real name was Joseph, but as sources go it's a bit light-weight. Do you have a better one? Favonian (talk) 10:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

This source looks slightly better, so I've added it to the article, and will provide a link from Josse's article. Though this does not quite live up to the strictest requirements for being a non-orphan, I choose to remove the orphan tag. Favonian (talk) 10:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help there. I agree with your edit summary. I am not sure we can get much farther, but we have done our best, the three of us. Si Trew (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me a solution so I can place the article for Kaiser records online and keep it there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.207.182.142 (talk) 08:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

In my personal opinion, there is no place for this article on Wikipedia as it stands. The company simply doesn't meet the requirements for notability. When and if the company becomes the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, you can write a new article documenting this. Favonian (talk) 12:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Would you prefer to reply to my question here or on my page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmy Heat (talk • contribs) 12:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I have just replied on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Zhongjun Cao. Favonian (talk) 12:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Mark Todd (policeman), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Todd (policeman). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Singularity42 (talk) 19:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Please stop stalking my edits, thank you. I can see you revert my edits on Cassie but Flo Rida isn't very popular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeyonceFan03 (talk • contribs) 23:05, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

You remove contents from articles about artists you don't like—is that it? It's considered vandalism, so stop doing it. You have been warned repeatedly. Deleting warning from your talk page doesn't really cover your tracks. Favonian (talk) 23:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello!, Can you ask for the protection of this article?, has been recreated in several times, this user is the only editor. Arkane was recreated too in Spanish Wikipedia, and is protected against all recreation. --Ravave (talk) 15:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. A request has been added to WP:RFPP. Thanks for the hint regarding the Spanish wiki. Favonian (talk) 15:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You're Welcome xDD. --Ravave (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I de-tagged list of internet marketing gurus because you corp-tagged it and it's not about a company. Repropose it under notable if you need to. I'm working on this topic area as it's badly covered on WP atm so I'd appreciate a bit of space whilst I build up coverage. Andrewjlockley (talk) 21:49, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, but you got the wrong editor. I PRODed your article after you removed the other editor's speedy deletion notification. Favonian (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear Favonian,

Just to let you know that I have completely overhauled the text of this article to get round the copyright issue. It is now considerably longer than the original text, and as far as I can see bears no resemblance whatsoever to the text published in EOCE. Hope that does the trick.

Djwilms (talk) 02:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It most certainly does the trick, and more. I am glad we got that rather silly misunderstanding out of the way, and congratulate you on your excellent contributions to this area of Wikipedia. Favonian (talk) 10:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I just lost my temper. I just want him to be called Piccolo Jr., please. And I want the biography of Piccolo Jr. back to the way it was I had written it. Please forgive me and call him Piccolo Jr., please. Eh, Eh. Weighted Namekian shoes he wears. Not brown light-weight footwear or shoes. Weighted Namekian shoes. They're weighted. Weighted Namekian shoes that he never wants to take off. He’s keeping it a secret that they’re not weighted and never wants to take them off during a fight and have his bare feet shown, because it would embarrass him if he took them off. --71.239.23.70 (talk) 15:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

OK. Just make sure that you learn to control your temper, at least when you are editing Wikipedia. You are currently one disruptive edit away from a block. Regarding the Piccolo (Jr.) problem, I have no opinion or insight to offer, so that's going to be a matter between you and other editors interested in that article. Favonian (talk) 14:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

But I really want him to be called Piccolo Jr., please. That's his real and right name. --71.239.23.70 (talk) 15:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Since it would appear that at least one other editor disagrees, I would suggest that you bring the matter up on the article's talk page. Favonian (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

OK. I had done that. Friends. --71.239.23.70 (talk) 15:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey there. How're you doing? Can you give me your email address so I can show you some stuff I have, please? --71.239.23.70 (talk) 14:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, that's good to know. Thank you for writing to tell me, it's early and I ought to have looked at more than just the "diff" part Peter Deer (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I am new to this, so I don't quite know how to go about having the article deleted. I have also contacted the friend of mine who put it up as a joke and told him to do whatever is required to take the page down. Thank you very much for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdika (talk • contribs) 18:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, "with friends like these, ..." Probably not much he can do at this stage, but I guess the article will soon be put out of our collective misery. Cheers, Favonian (talk) 18:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The first line of the article on Electronegativity is incorrect. It states:

"Electronegativity, symbol χ, is a chemical property that describes the ability of an atom (or, more rarely, a functional group) to attract electrons (or electron density) towards itself in a covalent bond." 

While it is not totally incorrect, there are other types of chemical bonds other than covalent. Covalent bonds are one of the 3 types of bonds that are influenced by electronegativity. The 3 are: Ionic(Molecular bonds), Covalent, and Polar Covalent. Simply stating that Electronegativity only affects covalent bonds is incorrect. It should either include all three bond types, or simply state: "Electronegativity, symbol χ, is a chemical property that describes the ability of an atom (or, more rarely, a functional group) to attract electrons (or electron density)"

Sources: http://www.chemguide.co.uk/atoms/bonding/electroneg.html http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/E/Electronegativity.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_bond http://dl.clackamas.edu/ch104-07/electron.htm http://www.gly.uga.edu/schroeder/geol3010/3010lecture13.html

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.208.39.16 (talk) 23:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I apologize most humbly for having so rashly reverted your edit. Having spent hours scraping vandalism off Wikipedia articles, I jumped to the conclusion that an anonymous editor removing a handful of words without leaving an edit summary had to be yet another vandal. I was wrong and should have jumped into bed instead. Hope you can forgive my rashness. To compound my error I didn't even give an edit summary myself (something I'm usually quite meticulous about), so reminding you to do so in the future seems a bit lame. Favonian (talk) 16:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Team touchdown, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Team touchdown. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me, but it looks like I slept through all the fun. Happy with the outcome, though. Favonian (talk) 11:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

With hindsight I kind of wished I'd left your A7 on there in the first place :-P Gonzonoir (talk) 12:30, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Look at the bright side: since we are not paid to do this, no money has been wasted. Favonian (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I always like to tell myself that worse things happen at Sea :) Gonzonoir (talk) 12:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

This is a shared IP adress, none of them were my edits, thanks.--201.230.66.86 (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Right. Only one reply to that: sign up for your own account. It's free, and it'll save you this kind of hassle. Favonian (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Your fascist censorship of Wikipedia is unjust and is against everything American.

I love 'Merica, Hot Dogs, and Beer! Go back to whatever Naziland you come from (I'm guessing Canada). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.161.1.67 (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I saw your well-reasoned and insightful message above when I was leaving my own message, so I thought I would respond:

1. Removing vandalism (such as your edit here) is not censorship. Wikipedia is not censored, but this does not mean that anyone can do what they like to articles
2. This is not "American Wikipedia" but "English (as in the language) Wikipedia"
3. Removing vandalism is not "against everything American". Where in the Bill of Rights, the United States Constitution, or in either federal or case law does it say that you have the right to vandalise? Yes, you are entitled to freedom of speech as outlined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, but nowhere in that Amendment does it say that you can vandalise. What you did was equivalent to removing pages from a book, and scrawling a note on it - in America (as well as anywhere else in the world), that would not be counted as "freedom of speech", but as an illegal act.

Anyway, I hope that your future edits will be constructive to the encyclopedia. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page this morning, it's very much appreciated. They are obviously a member of Team Touchdown!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. If that team puts as much effort into their game as they do into disruptive editing they will go far. And while we are at it: thanks a bundle for leaving a reply to that other, rather less imaginative vandal. I couldn't come up with anything other than a rather lame disclaimer regarding my nationality. That guy probably wouldn't be be able to locate my native country on a map anyway. Favonian (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear Favonian,

this is to inform you that i updated the Peter Ibold article, with more neutral sources (i.e. The Encyclopedia of Yacht Designers, with their kind permission).

I also added references to other (paper) reviews and articles, awaiting their permission to upload scans of thos articles).

Hoping this will make the whole article more acceptable, i wish you a very good day.

Best regards,

(MarineSurvey (talk) 11:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC))

Thanks for article-issuing that - I had just declined a no-longer-appropriate A3 speedy and was off checking for copyvio: it looks very like one, but I couldn't find a source for all of it, and now I see you had tagged it copyvio previously, so perhaps they have rewritten it enough. They could have de-peacocked it while they were at it! Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

One of our brethren found the source for this new copyvio. Why won't these people learn? Favonian (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello Favonian, I started a new page on "William Francis Roantree" which was deleted soon afterwards stating it was in breach of copy right giving the National Graves Association website www.nga.ie as the source of the information provided. As a member of the National Graves Association I would like to have this page reinstated, how do I go about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by National Graves Association (talk • contribs) 17:49, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Even if you represent the National Graves Association, you cannot just put contents from their website in Wikipedia. If you wanted to do that you should have a look at these guidelines. In the present case I think you would be better off rewriting the article in a more encyclopedic tone, for instance avoiding such rather subjective terms as "colourful". Also, and more importantly, you would have to ensure that the notability of the person is documented using reliable sources. Favonian (talk) 18:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Just wondering, how is a 'true crimes' website not verifiable? (that's what you put when you reverted my edit) [[3]] It says 'true' so I don't get whats wrong with putting some info from it down... Dancemaid062 (talk) 18:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"True crimes" is a literary genre of the lighter sort, which is reflected in the rather lurid prose. If you want to include information from this website, I suggest you discuss it first on the article's talk page. Favonian (talk) 18:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Dancemaid062 (talk) 16:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I come from a small religious community. We have culturalized around theatre and the dramatic elements to of which follow. Antigone is one of our widely used plays that we examine. We have just lately obtained computers and use wikipedia. However, we have and use a different language then most. We cannot use this website for Antigone, but would gladly like to. If there is any way to add our language so that i do not have to translate for my people it would be greatly appreciated. Thankyou for your time. -Freaut Beatlesone Beatlesone (talk) 19:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)beatlesone

I see. The problem here is that the language code, "zl", is not found in ISO 639, and there is no Wikipedia in that language, which makes it futile to add an Interwiki link like [[zl:Antigon (Sophocle)]].

Another problem is the reference you added. It linked to an auther, Fruel LeDesane, who doesn't have an article, and gave an ISBN 9870335408932, which doesn't seem to be valid according to this lookup. Since I have been unable to locate the book using Google, that reference has been deleted. Favonian (talk) 20:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi! You just removed my link as spam. I would very much appreciate your comment why the page is using text from our homepage? Isn't that a violation? What's more, the link you just removed is a link to a graphical explanation of the text. Can you explain why you removed this as spam? Can you explain why you have a pretty similar link on the page "Regenerative thermal oxidizer" to a company named Anguil? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctp-airpollutioncontrol (talk • contribs) 16:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

To start from the end: you are absolutely right about the inappropriateness of the external link in Regenerative thermal oxidizer. It has now been removed and the editor has received a caution. In general, however, the existence of inappropriate contents elsewhere in Wikipedia cannot be used as an argument for including more of the same. We do what we can to keep it out, but we are few and human. Regarding your original link, it's a link to a commercial website and be the diagram ever so educational it constitutes an advertisement. Furthermore, your user name does rather tend to indicate a certain conflict of interest. Finally, if the text was lifted from your website, please give me a reference to the precise location on the web. I'll then decide whether to edit the article to get rid of a copyright violation or nominate it for deletion. Favonian (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, I found it here. Favonian (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

according to the websites ive looked at and sourced he has been sacked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.163.123 (talk) 23:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

But you don't have a source. The Sun have nothing about it and they would certainly report it. Favonian (talk) 23:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. 'Indef' and '3 hours' are next to each other in the drop-down list... EyeSerene^talk 18:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi thanks for noticing. I started many stubs, they have articles on Persian wiki but it needs fa: wiki links and translation later by someone, I don't speak Persian. They are the main towns in each province.Starzynka (talk) 11:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Good work! I noticed that you also did the copy edit on this article. Favonian (talk) 11:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I didn't understand adding why editing anil kumble was inappropriate, i have read the terms & i feel it was not violating. could you please explain? 14:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC) 27 Nov 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heartbreakklassie (talk • contribs) 14:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

As a rule Wikipedia wants to limit the use of external links to commercial sites. The link you added belongs to the domain weebly.com, which is on the "black list" for the bot, which generated the first two warnings. When you persisted, I added the next two. Could you please explain why it is necessary to add this link? Favonian (talk) 14:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure!, anil kumlbe is my favorite player & i do see that this link had many details about this cricketing legend. so i thought this would be appropriate content for this fans like me. 27 November 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heartbreakklassie (talk • contribs) 14:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, the site looks like a typical fan blog, which doesn't have much relevance in an encyclopedia. The "hard" facts like his statistics are already in the article. Favonian (talk) 14:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

ok, thanks anyway for the response!. --Heartbreakklassie (talk) 14:55, 27 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heartbreakklassie (talk • contribs) 14:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Why are you blocking the posting of a link that updates the old outdated version of a video which is already linked to on this page? It is relevant, more than you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeuman (talk • contribs) 00:06, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Favonian. You have new messages at Shadowjams's talk page.
Message added 11:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shadowjams (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, you are disruptive, in a way. Shadowjams (talk) 11:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I prevent a few hard-working vandals from doing an honest day's work. Have to check with Dante to see what awaits me in the next life. Favonian (talk) 11:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi.

sorry about all the attempted changes its just that i was only putting down the full and complete translation of the artemis fowl the lost colony book and i couldnt quite understand why you wouldnt let me so if you could please just think about why youre letting people read the wrong and not complete translation leaving them to believe that it is the correct one. But if you let it be and give people false information thats your problem not mine. good day. Shankingchicken (talk) 19:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

There is a copyright issue if you copy longer portions of a book to Wikipedia. Favonian (talk) 19:30, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

so ur just going to leave it there. its not even correct for the most part. well if you wont have it on there right now what could i do to get the full and complete translation code on there so people arent being misled? Shankingchicken (talk) 19:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Post your concern on the talk page of the article. Favonian (talk) 19:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

i will do so. thank you much. Shankingchicken (talk) 19:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

We cannot post celebrity twitter, myspace and facebooks on wikipedia, even if they have been verified? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Americandream17 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Celebrity or not, these websites are basically useless as sources of reliable information and are therefore included in the external links to avoid guidelines. Favonian (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

hey would i be able to edit the page by putting a link to the full and complete translated code since i cant put the whole thing down? Shankingchicken (talk) 20:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

do you know how to talk or are you just ignoring me for the fun of it? Because i will just do it constantly AGAIN untill i receive an answer from you. just sayin... Shankingchicken (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Mind you manners! I am not you servant. An external link is created by including

[http://whereever.com/stuff explanatory text]

in the article—replacing of course the URL and the text with appropriate stuff. Favonian (talk) 21:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! Sophus Bie ^(talk) 00:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure! He was more persistent than imaginative. Favonian (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for your excellent anti-vandalism work, and particularly for reverting the vandalism to my talk page yesterday. It was much appreciated. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 14:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Any time! Glad we are still a few left to fight the vandals. Favonian (talk) 16:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Boy_Better_Know?diff=328617712 how is that vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharpshooter118118 (talk • contribs) 17:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Offensive language. Favonian (talk) 17:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

OK so i rephrase if without offensive language its ok right.

Correct. Favonian (talk) 17:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

it is not vandalism to say that a place in the Israel occupied territories is in the Israeli occupied territories, though it may be vandalism, and a lie, to say that it is in Israel. 166.217.214.229 (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I stand corrected and apologize. You, on the other hand, should learn to moderate your language as exemplified by this edit summary. Favonian (talk) 19:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I typed that bats can fly, and your getting mad at me???? I believe bats are able to fly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesus-O-Bot (talk • contribs) 21:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

A rather irrelevant remark, especially at that place in the article, and having looked at your talk page history (blanking the page doesn't really hide anything) I issued yet another warning. Favonian (talk) 21:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Excuse my past remarks on any page that has been edited by me. I just created my account today and my friend used it to vandalize. I am truly very sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesus-O-Bot (talk • contribs) 21:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Right, and your dog ate your homework. Favonian (talk) 21:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Well thats a little rude of you to say. Anyway, please believe me. Even if you don't, things like that won't happen again because I won't let my friend use this account anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesus-O-Bot (talk • contribs) 21:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Now, that is a good idea. Favonian (talk) 21:53, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

thanks for understanding--Jesus-O-Bot (talk) 22:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Jesus-O-BotJesus-O-Bot (talk) 22:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll stop. Probably. It's still kinda fun to mess wit stuff. But if you insist then i guess i will restrain myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by China Jesus (talk • contribs) 22:26, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You can't even begin to understand how happy that makes me! Thank you, thank you! Favonian (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

History of your Talk Page shows an unauthorized deletion of texts without your consent. Is it legal at wikipedia?--Newbiex (talk) 07:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I responded to the duplicate question here. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 07:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You are much more quicker than me, close to ClueBot!

 Merlion  444  10:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a bundle! I suffered from anti-vandalism performance anxiety until I started using Huggle. Favonian (talk) 10:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Me too, but I'm not quick enough.  Merlion  444  10:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Again you did the same thing as what I did to your user page.  Merlion  444  11:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Point of honor :) Favonian (talk) 11:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reverts on my talk page!  Merlion  444  11:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

No problemo! Though to tell the truth, this vandal is getting tiresome. Favonian (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for this - good to know I'm not being pathetic! Smartse (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, no I don't think you're the one with the problem ;) Favonian (talk) 18:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I had links to MAJOR NATIONALLY RESPECTED NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS deleted off of the mental health sites that I was editing. This was a lot of work and the individual that deleted them didn't bother to stop and evaluate any of the links.

When I complained to that individual, they said that I should only link to organizations with Wikipedia articles. ALMOST EVERY ONE OF THOSE LINKED NONPROFITS DO HAVE THEIR OWN WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES. They never bothered to check!

Listen to me-- I am a former Counseler-- people COMMIT SUICIDE because then can't get the help they need for those psychiatric issues.

DON'T DELETE RELEVANT, HIGHLY REPUTABLE NON-PROFIT LINKS FOR PEOPLE WHO DESPERATELY NEED HELP OR I WILL MAKE GETTING YOU BANNED A MAJOR PROJECT.

DO YOU HEAR ME? YOU COULD BE KILLING SOMEONE BY DELETING THOSE LINKS. DON'T DO IT.

75.253.216.114 (talk) 18:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia DOES NOT provide medical advice. And threatening to engage in a witch hunt to have people banned is REALLY not the way to get off on the right foot- especially when you want someone's help. Also, WP:ALLCAPS. Please communicate like a normal human being. --King Öomie 18:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

... and please stop shouting. Favonian (talk) 18:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

IT IS NOT MEDICAL ADVICE. THOSE ARE HIGHLY RESPECTED NATIONAL NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. THERE IS NOT A SHRED OF MEDICAL ADVICE IN THOSE LINKS.

STOP HURTING INNOCENT PEOPLE BY BEING SO NARROW-MINDED. DON'T DO THINGS THAT HURT INNOCENT PEOPLE. 75.253.216.114 (talk) 18:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

They shouldn't be at Wikipedia looking for a directory of support groups at all. --King Öomie 19:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh good to hear im danish too :b but Schleswig-Holstein was once Danish and he's the desendent of the Duke from there. I happend to know him personally :D

And should i add more info on the page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, unless he's a descendant in the male line, there's not much of a ducal future in store for him. Providing some reliable sources would be a good idea, and you better hurry, because I don't think the article is going to have a very long life otherwise. Already been delete once. Favonian (talk) 19:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah i will, already started, He's from the family of Schauenburg. They have a family tree i've seen by myself.. but i don't really know how i should make more reliable sources have any idea ? i think it would be a shame to delete the page because it's interresting with this old bloodline still existing.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

You should click on that link about sources. Have some sort of reputable media (assuming they exist) written about this gentlemen and his claim to aristocratic fame and fortune? Descendants, legitimate or otherwise, from ducal or royal houses are a dime a dozen. Favonian (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Whoops! It looks like the administrators didn't buy the idea. Frankly, I think you should go back to doing your homework. Favonian (talk) 20:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

hvorfor slettede i den?... havde jo brugt tid på det nu ;s —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

In English please, you're not just writing this for my benefit. I'm not an administrator, so I don't actually delete articles. Guess they were as unconvinced by the combination of extravagant claim and lack of evidence as I was. Face it — not everyone in the universe is notable enough to get an article in Wikipedia. Stick with Facebook.

And by the way, you don't have to start a new section every time you reply. Favonian (talk) 20:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

But well i think it's actually notable being the descended of the family which was one of Denmark's largest vassals from middle ages undtil the second Schleswig war... And how can you prove that Cleoprata had two 2 childrens with Marcus Antonius... The truth is you can trust the people who say it... just like you can trust me when im saying it.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Just being a descendant isn't notable. Far too many of those. If he had an actual claim to the title, which is what you implied, that would be a different matter, but there just doesn't seem to be any sources reporting this. Regarding the latter part of your argument, you seem to confuse notability with truth. Marc Antony and Cleopatra's brats were notable because somebody wrote about them, not because anyone did a DNA test on them. Have a look at the guidelines about notability. As for me, I'm signing off for now. Favonian (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

And why can't a person with actually a historical importance be on wikipedia when people from the danish MGP... just look up Razz and Nicolai Kielstrup... It's hard to take it really serious then —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Favonian. 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.