User talk:Irishguy/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Murph Murph

Feel free to leave any comments below. Thanks. IrishGuy talk 22:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh thanks for that... I didn't even notice! It took me ages to make that page!. Out of curiousity, do you know who Nancy Dell'Olio is? I know it's a stupid question but it took me ages to convince some people that she was actually quite well known!

Thanks for your help... no hard feelings! Murph murph 23:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't think I had until I began reading your article (and well done on that) and then I recalled that I had heard of her, but didn't really know much beyond little things. IrishGuy talk 01:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that link... a delete notice hasn't appeared yet so I assume it will be allowed to stay! Murph murph 22:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Stem Cell revert

Sorry for the wiki vandalism on "stem cell" 6/18/06 (addition of the church link)...I told my sister the wiki would be fixed in 5 mins, you corrected it in 2! good job. Don't worry I would have deleted it after 10 minutes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.187.163 (talk • contribs)

Halloween Man

Hey man. Lots of comics are self published and underground in nature. That doesn't mean there's no interest in them or that they're undeserving of a "wikiarticle." You have to look at it sort of like an underground band or cult film. I hope you'll reconsidered your stance on the Halloween Man article, because we've put alot of work into it. And hope to have the chance to continue to improve it. Plus the comic itself hasn't just been a self published venture. Though that's been apart of it's history, it's also been published by atleast two small publishers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bubfan (talk • contribs)

Yes, there are many self-published and underground comics...a very small number of them are notable enough for an encyclopedia entry. This, unfortunely, isn't one of them. IrishGuy talk 21:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Look up Across the Pond studios and you'll find that they've had titles out through Image, Dark Horse, etc. Type in "Halloween Man Comics" into google and you'll that there is a interest out there for this character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bubfan (talk • contribs)

As I noted here and on the AfD page, interest isn't sufficient. There are basic outlines for what does and doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Notability must be established and it must be verifiable. Halloween Man has neither. IrishGuy talk 22:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If you're not willing to look beyond Alexa how can you be sure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.0.250 (talk • contribs)

I did look beyond Alexa. I merely used Alexa as evidence of the non-notability of this subject. IrishGuy talk 23:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, how could I edit the article to meet your needs? I've added more links and will add more if that helps prove my point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bubfan (talk • contribs)

Yo, irish dude, allow me to point out the absurdity in your actions - you call for the deletion of the page, stating, "Delete The article itself makes it abundently clear that this is a person who is studying to be a possible internationally known artist...but hasn't really acheived anything of note just yet. If and when he does, then he might deserve an article. At this point, less so. IrishGuy talk 21:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)," and yet when I, the author of the article, attempt a speedy deletion, you try to prevent me from doing so. Illogical? Absurd? I think so. Thanks, my man, for your charm. Steveh1023 03:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I never tried to stop you from placing a speedy tag on it. But you must leave the content of the article as it is otherwise the review cannot be completed. IrishGuy talk 18:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

McDonalds Revert

You wrote on my talk page:

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. IrishGuy talk 03:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Listen, you didn't check my changes. Some jerk had really vandalized the McDonalds article. he wrote "I Rule" in a totally random spot! I simply erased it and then, as I was reading it, noticed a place where a link was missing and might be a good idea. I'm reverting back so the changes I made will stay.--200.44.7.123 03:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I noted the revert of the line...I also noticed where you blanked an entire section of the article [1]. IrishGuy talk 08:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Lists

Please don't remove items from lists just because they are red-linked. This is one of the advantages of lists over categories which cannot show links to articles yet to be written. Rmhermen 18:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Grace Hartigan

Just wondering why you removed one of the external links at the end of Grace Hartigan but left the others (in fact I see you've removed it twice) -- is there some kind of rule about what's OK and what's not in an external link? Thanks! --Bookgrrl 11:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Because it is linkspam [2]. If you look through this user's edits, they are all the same. [3], [4], [5]...etc. IrishGuy talk 20:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

You mean he's trying to draw traffic to his own website -- is that what linkspam is? But what if they're actually good useful links? For example I work at a library that has collections of a lot of artists' and writers' papers; if I link each of them to the appropriate information about our collection of their material, would that be linkspam? And the NMWA is a non-profit (it's a real museum) so it can't be a money-making thing, right? Bookgrrl 03:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

When a user's only edits are adding links to the same website in myraid articles it is, by definition, linkspam. If that website has pertenent information, then that information should be incorporated into the article. Not a simple link. IrishGuy talk 03:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. Bookgrrl 02:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Mary Cassatt

Why did you remove [this link from the Mary Cassatt article? -- backburner001 14:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Because it is linkspam [6]. IrishGuy talk 16:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. -- backburner001 17:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Keanu Reeves

Your recent edit to Keanu Reeves was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 19:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I think rather than reverting, you simply ought to have edited the first sentence to read Keanu Reaves (born September 2, 1964 as Douchebag McGee) is a Canadian film actor. He is perhaps best known for his role as Neo in the action film trilogy The Matrix and also for roles in Speed and comedies such as Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. But perhaps that simply because my cousin spent two-thirds of Speed telling me how freaking hot Keanu was... :) Joe 04:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, possibly some citations for the Douchebag McGee assertion would have been in order :) IrishGuy talk 07:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. IrishGuy talk 19:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, glad to be able to help you out!  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  19:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

tb2 reverts

I've fixed it, and you won't be bothered again. joshbuddy^talk 20:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Lou Pearlman

I don't understand your removing the external links to BBB reports. BBB is not even a consumer protection organisation, it's more like a Business by Busines watchdog. I find them not always a reliable source in the short run, but in a long run, especially when they provide critical reporting, it really is accurate non-biased information. 82.73.143.81 20:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah. I looked it back over. My apologies. When I edited, I looked them over briefly as I was paring down the external links and I thought they said BBS, as in a web forum. Please feel free to add them back in. IrishGuy talk 20:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I see you already did, thanks. 82.73.143.81 20:58, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Again, my apologies about that. I should have read it closer. IrishGuy talk 21:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello, it's me (now with a login instead of a blind IP.)

I saw you had sent three talk messages to me before I had even noticed that there were messages directed to my attention. I apologize for setting off Spam radars -- I just finally had a large chunk of time to myself and an archive of interviews (and I type pretty fast, so I can go through a load of them in a short amount of time.) I had added links in the past, but only ever had time for one or two at a time, and did not realize that external links were frowned upon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HPrice (talk • contribs)

External links aren't frowned upon, but they must meet WP:EL and putting links to the same website in various articles is spam. IrishGuy talk 02:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Stevie Ray Vaughan

Hi Irishguy, It was just a list of free artworks (like the list of bootleg by Willmot)... do you think it's a viloation of wikipedia rules? Thanks. --87.8.124.132 07:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see WP:EL for guidelines on external links. Thanks. IrishGuy talk 07:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok! I come form italian wiki, where the rules should be a little different... I rollback to my version tooking away the link to cover list ok? (and sorry for bad english ;-). --87.8.124.132 07:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. There has actually been a bit of a discussion on various talk pages about the guidelines and some think they should be expanded to include more fan sites. It could happen at some point, but for now the guidelines are fairly restrictive. IrishGuy talk 08:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Hemmm... reading the WP:EL the link seems to be acceptable (paragraph "Occasionally acceptable links", point "3", and the link could be useful)... ;-) --87.8.124.132 07:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

True, but the occasionally acceptable links are in cases where other links aren't available. The article already has quite a few links and therefore the occasionally acceptable ones cease to have a good argument for inclusion. IrishGuy talk 08:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

A free list of art-works is not a good argument? :-D Well, well, ok, no problem! I just thought it could be useful (like the link to the willmot's database I inserted some months ago)... See you. ;-) --87.8.124.132 08:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC) Just to let you know who I'm, I'm the principal author of this voice it:Stevie Ray Vaughan: it:Utente:Lucas. Goodbye. ;-) --87.8.124.132 08:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

You know...

y r u deletin my edits? i am just tryin 2 b helpfull--86.41.217.12 08:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

An edit like this [7] isn't helpful. It is blatant vandalism. IrishGuy talk 08:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

68.194.14.35

The above user has been blocked for forty-eight hours as per your request on WP:AIV.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  20:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. IrishGuy talk 20:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Turtles

Sorry about about adding of the tmnt links in the movie pages. I wasn't sure as i have done this before but only a couple of times and so not come here regularly, and my links have remained there. I am owner of "TMNT Review HQ", and was doing it for more traffic on my own site. A reply would be appreciated if you have the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.143.47.35 (talk • contribs)

As I noted on your talk page with the various warnings, spam isn't tolerated on Wikipedia. If you want to drive traffic to your website, use a search engine. Wikipedia isn't for advertising. IrishGuy talk 01:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Careful...

Please be careful when reverting using popups. This edit chopped out some actual good changes along with some iffy ones. Just be careful. Thanks. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 18:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

RHCP EL

I can see how you'd think my post was suspicious, no problem. I just wanted to see if it would get the reaction I thought it would, and it did. maxcap 19:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Ann Coulter

Hey, what's wrong with following "some find (her) to be biased, offensive, inflammatory and (full of misrepresented facts)" with "Others find them to be refreshingly candid and at least as factually based and footnoted as most popular, non-scholarly books?" You deleted the latter on POV grounds, and I think they were put in there on the same grounds. If the latter is pulled, so shouldn't be the former? Lou Sander 21:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Because there are references within the article which illustrate that her books aren't completely factual and properly footnoted. To assert such unquivically is unencyclopedic and false. IrishGuy talk 22:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

User:24.90.38.125

He vandalized John Constable again twice, and you already gave him his last warning you need to block him.--^TheNation 02:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

No worries. He got a 24 hour ban. IrishGuy ^talk 02:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)