User talk:Kannie/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Performance by club in the Commonwealth of Independent States Cup

Please check articles before voting next time, cheers. BanRay 12:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion/Redirection

I had started creating a separate page on the GNU Unifont. I went back to add more information about its font coverage and saw that you deleted an image for lack of content. This image had been on Wikipedia in the "Free Software Unicode Typefaces" section. Another editor deleted it because he felt it broke the flow of that particular page. That page covered several fonts besides the GNU Unifont. He explained his reason when someone else complained about the deletion. I mentioned adding it on a separate GNU Unifont page in that discussion group, and there weren't any objections in the discussion group. Can we add it back? Also, there is a redirection of "GNU Unifont" to "GNU_Unifont#GNU_Unifont", which is the same as the "Free Software Unicode Typefaces" page. Do you know how to undo that? There was no link originally, so I created the GNU Unifont page. However, it is possible that "GNU Unifont" was the original name of the Free Software Unicode Typefaces page. I'm new to Wikipedia editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ph9000 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, the image does disrupt the flow of the article. This is mostly of its' size. Maybe you should read this article, which describes how to shrink an image, and also think about whether and how the image enhances the article, and how that can happen. --Kannie | talk 20:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Trilobite stubs

I'll be making the template very soon. Until then, please let the flood of stubs be. Thanks for being on the ball, though. <3 Abyssal leviathin (talk) 18:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! :D <333333 Abyssal leviathin (talk) 19:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The best way to thank me is to give another person a barnstar. --Kannie | talk 19:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks very much for the barnstar! Omnedon (talk) 18:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Barnstar

Thanks! I nominated an article for AfD just a couple of minutes ago actually- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CatharticLament. Anyway, thanks very much, I'll put it on my mantlepiece. J Milburn (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Help!

A few days ago you sent me a barnstar for my contribution on rivers. Unfortunately your opinion is not shared by everyone, and it has been suggested that the articles be deleted. The discussion is taking place regarding the Bella River, but is not limited to this river and if a consensus is reached for the deletion this would be applicable to all the other rivers. It would help if you would participate in the discussions. Otherwise, I might keep the barnstar but there would be no more articles on the rivers.Afil (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The barnstar was more of a tribute to your boldness than anything, actually. Please continue to create articles on rivers pending consensus. On the other hand, towns are included no matter how large (or small) they are, and articles on schools, again regardless of size, are allowed pending consensus. So you can argue that the articles on Romanian rivers should allowed per the above. --Kannie | talk 20:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course I can make the argument. But it would carry more weight coming from somebody who is not directly involved.Afil (talk) 20:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to void my vote per canvassing rules. I think the fact that you contacted might've influenced it. However, I have kept my comment, and I need to be honest. It may influence other peoples' votes. --Kannie | talk 21:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I was not aware of the rules and had no intention of breaking any. But I find it difficult to understand what is going on when I get messages from some wikipedians that what I am doing is right and from others that what I am doing is so bad that it has to be deleted. I think that it is extremely unfair that this discussion is opened after I have worked for over eight months on the project and have produced several thousand articles on the matter. Before starting I notified the River Project. After that I get a message from you in which you send me a barnstar - making me believe that you encourage me. Thereafter somebody else suggests that all the articles be deleted - without any explanation on why this was not done before. I contacted you with no bad intention, only because you have initiated the contact before and gave me the impression that you considered that what I was doing was OK. Your response never indicated that what I was doing was canvassing, which I ignored. You could have informed me that there were such rules - knowing that this was not appropriate I would have understood this. But I really consider that the entire process is extremely unfair.Afil (talk) 21:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I know you didn't intend to break any rules. This is about me. I think you may have tripped up maternal instincts, and that may have influenced my vote. You won't get in trouble for this. Don't worry. I was encouraging you. I wasn't aware at the time of WP:OUTCOMES, but I admired your boldness and still do. That was what I was encouraging. The gist of the geographical features rule is all of them are notable, rivers included. I'm sorry this is happening to you. *hugs* --Kannie | talk 21:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:CANVASS

Hi. I noticed that you struck your own comment [[1]], which I didn't quite understand. Did somebody canvass you? Sorry to be nosey, but it just interested me. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I felt that the comments above, under the header Help! may have influenced my vote. That's why I voided my vote. --Kannie | talk 21:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

{{talkheader}}

Hi, Please don't put {{talkheader}} templates onto blank talk pages. As you'll see if you click on the link, "Using the template is suggested for talk pages that are very active or have had policy violation problems. This template should be used only when needed. Do not add this template to every talk page. In particular, it should not be added to otherwise empty talk pages." Thanks. --kingboyk (talk) 17:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the Stub advice

I'm new to this wiki thing, so any advice is gratefully received. Grantus4504 (talk) 10:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Grantus4504 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Not my article

Thanks for the heads-up, however, Wackerbarth-Palais is not my article. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 19:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 22:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Same here thanks for the barnstar. BTW, it made my day. Really appreciate it. Cheers, LAX 01:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the award, much appreciated. Simply south (talk) 16:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Herbal Detox

I'm new to Wiki, and I understand if my writing style wasn't up to par. I do however believe that defining Herbal detoxification would be of some value. Currently there is you page that vaguely explains detoxing, and there is a page for Diet detoxing. However there is no page for the most common form, Herbal detoxing. Mind you that the Diet detoxing page makes no real reference to Herbal detoxing, and the UK study debunking Diet detoxing has no bearing on Herbal detoxing, because that one informal study made no mention to the use of herbal supplements.

I hope to do better in the future, with creating, and editing. Could you please better explain what the page was lacking?

Fashionpolicex (talk) 20:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

First off, I would like you to read this, and reread this.

What I was worried about most was not only was it unneutral, but it also read like an persuasive essay. This isn't approriate for Wikipedia. For the most part, Wikipedia is not a respository for essays. In an ideal situation in a perfect world, when you create an Wikipedia article, you need to pretend you are submitting something to Brittanica. You probably won't end up writing something of the quality of something that you would read in Brittanica, sure, but you wouldn't write something in an essay-like manner, either.

Maybe you can add a section to the detox page talking about herbal detox, and have it talk about the pros and cons of it? Add studies that both support and debunk it? Then maybe create a whole article about it. Remember, you can always be bold, but sometimes in life you just need to ease in. --Kannie | talk 22:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Kawaii Noir

I stated my reasons that the article shouldn't be deleted on its talkpage: Talk:Kawaii_Noir I am also new at creating articles, so any help is appreciated. --Grrrlriot (talk) 03:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)