User talk:Delicious carbuncle

Template:Archive box collapsable

Page move

I moved /User talk:Delicious carbuncle/Archive 4 to User talk:Delicious carbuncle/Archive 4 where i assume it should have ended up. Just in case you need to update any links :) Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 16:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Somehow I manage to screw up making user pages every time. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, thats what automated archiving and User:MiszaBot are meant for. You might want to give it a try. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 16:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind doing the archiving myself when I feel like it needs it, I just need to be more careful creating user pages. Thanks for the suggestion, though. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I can't follow directions at the top of a talk page

You want to delete 'Fakin' Da Funk'.

This was a film on USA Networks that was one of the highest-rated films in 2000.

I'll have to dispute this with an administrator. Wikiusernewyork (talk) 17:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiusernewyork (talk • contribs) 17:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, if I wanted to delete it, I would have nominated it for deletion, which I haven't. You are welcome to bring this up with an admin, but I don't believe we have any dispute. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

We don't have a dispute - I just don't understand the coi tags. I don't think fans should be included in the coi. Otherwise, who would do Tom Hanks, Tom Cruise, Saving Private Ryan, Lost in Translation, and scores of other films and filmmakers? We should coi everything then. This is why it's not clear to me. Wikiusernewyork (talk) 02:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, please see the discussion on the article's talk page. This has nothing to do with "fans". Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

re The Genius Club

Okay...you are right...now how do we correct the article to eliminate NPOV problems?....let's get it right so we can delete tag. Any help on your part is appreciated... My best -- Lou Luigibob (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The article's creator has a conflict of interest, which is exactly what the tag says. I don't believe the tag should be removed as it alerts readers to that fact. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

That had been bugging me for a bit. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Losing the word for something happens to me more often than I'd like to admit. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:AFD closing for Tim Chey

When closing the AfD, I saw that the only full delete comment (the other was a weak delete) only took into consideration one month's worth of google news hits. This new search revealed decent media coverage ranging back a few years, and notability is not temporary. I would argue that the articles help the subject to meet the first "criteria" for notability, especially if you take into account the last clause:

• "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.

By showing that the subject had received significant (though not necessarily exclusive) media coverage, I reasoned that the delete comment did not have all the information necessary to make a decision. If you still disagree with my closing after receiving explanation, I will gladly get another administrator's third opinion, and will not be opposed to changing my closure. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 19:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

If you actually look at the articles found in that search, you will see that the significant coverage guideline is not satisfied. Almost all references to Chey really are just passing mentions. Would you mind getting a second opinion? Please consider my nomination of the article as a !vote for deletion. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

While I disagree with your stance, I will agree to delete the article. Most of the News items do only give passing reference, so I can see why you believe it lacks notability. Sorry for the confusion. Malinaccier (talk) 01:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a closer look at the sourcing, and for reconsidering your original close. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 10:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet record

Hi DelCarb,

I'm actually just curious if you have any idea where I might find out the record number of sockpuppets held by one user. I know I'm probably nowhere near the record yet, but I'm still curious.

Thanks :) Meffed (talk) 20:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi, I just wanted to tell you that I enjoyed your edit summary with "colon is not a pipe, even if a colon is a pipe" -- very clever! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll let you know when the tshirts are printed. ;) Delicious carbuncle (talk) 10:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

YO BITCHA (kiss my ass hole)

you're a right fuckin' shitbird ain't ya? did you erase al the way gooder information i put up about al pacino? HIS REAL NAME IS AL GROARKE! believe me doctah! its fuckin' dead righ' so piss off and mind ur own bleeedin' business, cuntybaws!

Yor mama is a ho