User talk:Mike Halterman/archive11

This archive is for notes addressed to me, written from October 11 to November 6, 2004.

Request re: Haydes

Hi. Would you please block User:Haydes for some small amount of time? I think he is a young person who is easily agitated. I am trying to point out to him that he can use his user page for the articles about himself and his friends/relatives instead of adding Kelly's and Megan's in articles. Instead he has blanked everyone's comments on his talk page and redirected his user page to my user page. I don't think it is appropriate for me to block him after that last action so I request that you block him for some small amount of time to make things clearer to him. An hour? Let me know if you disagee. - Tεxτurε 21:46, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Gina Tognoni

Yet another substub for you. See the page history. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 22:55, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

Guess it was deleted. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 01:32, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

LETO ATREIDES

Leto Atreides: Undelete "The Brotherhood" it is not patent nonsense. I wasn't finished yet. Put it back on then, I will save all the information to my pc so it is not lost. Undelete it, or at least send me a copy of the page Thanks

Explain it, then. Mike H 03:12, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

Done. Mike H 03:29, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you

Huh?

The Brotherhood is obvious patent nonsense, why did you undelete that? Terrapin 15:06, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

My nomination for adminship

Thank you for supporting my nomination for adminship. I will do my best to serve Wikipedia. --Slowking Man 00:04, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia study

Would you be interested in being interviewed about your work on the Wikipedia?

As part of a research project conducted by the Electronic Learning Communities group at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, we are conducting a study of the Wikipedia. The purpose of this study is to explore the online community of the Wikipedia by investigating who contributes to the Wikipedia and why.

To that end, we would like to interview people who write, edit, and comment on the articles that make up the Wikipedia. Study participants agree to be interviewed about their experiences with the Wikipedia. The interview can be face-to-face (if you are in the Atlanta area), on the telephone, or via email, whichever is most comfortable and convenient for you. Participation is voluntary and can be discontinued at any time with no reason given.

If you think you might be interested, more information about the study, including how to volunteer, is available at:

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~susanb/wikistudy.html

If you are not interested, there is no need to reply to this message, and we thank you for your time. Ikenindy 23:20, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

List of catch phrases

As a matter of interest, in the UK it's usually written "Catchphrase" - in fact, we have a TV game show called that. But this is about the list. It's long. I like it, but it's long. How are we going to make it shorter? Deb 09:30, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Years in television

Well, it seems like my cleaning-up endeavor is almost over (I still have to review 2004, but that's it). Hopefully, that was useful at least to some people.

It is amazing, though, how all Wikipedia projects I start seem so easy and fun when I start tinkering with them, and how fast they turn into barely manageable mess that feels more like a chore than fun. I was on the verge of quitting this whole cleanup thing, but then your barnstar made it impossible for me to quit :) So, for what it is worth, you saved this particular little project :)

Looking back at the articles now I, however, see major problems with them. The "Popular shows" sections is awfully long, and it seems to list every single major show, which kind of defeats the definition of "popular". I remember you said you'd want to go through the articles when I am done and delete the shows that were not popular in particular years, but that, I think, would introduce a problem of a different kind. It may be easy to do with soap operas and sitcoms (one would only need to look at the ratings to determine whether a particular series was popular or not), but when it comes to other types of shows, it is often not that easy. Talk shows, game shows, news reports—these are popular among some, while others may not even know they exist. Cartoons may be popular among kids, but definitely not among adults. Once you start deleting stuff, people will start questionning the validity of your judgement.

Another problem is non-US shows. I realize there are not that many listed now (with the exception of British ones, maybe) to substantiate moving them to separate articles ("1975 in Greek television", anyone?), but maybe (just maybe) it would make sense to split the existing articles into different sections? UK shows will stand out this way (there are plenty of those), and people may actually start contributing entries for, say, Australian or Canadian TV shows. It would be easier for them to do it if there was a section like "Popular Canadian TV shows" (I'd rather see that "popular" word go away, though, for the reasons outlined above). Plus, it would resolve the problem with franchise shows like "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire", which is run under the same name in many countries, but is not the same as the US show.

Anyway, if you are wondering why I am writing all this on your talk page—it's because you seem to be one registered user who contributes the most to these articles. Plus, I am mighty tired of cleaning those articles up, and you seem to be the perfect candidate to delegate this task to :)) (not that you can't refuse, of course). I am still going to leave the articles on the watch list, and fix a link here or sort order there once in a while, but from now on I'll leave all strategic decisions to you and whoever else is interested in this series.

Thanks very much for your help and support on the way. I really appreciate it.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 14:33, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

Hi

Heres the Thing People haven't added cast lists of anything like it i'm sorry if i've caused any harm or discord i'm trying to make it as imformational as possible.

I'm sorry for linking the Families pages. I'm hopping to add some Family Information in time.

The B&B thing its Better to have another capped on the Title 'The Bold' and 'The Beautiful' is just simpler.

I have added families and Casts in GH, DOOL, OLTL, TB&TB I'm planing to add Cast lists to AMC and Passions soon.

If you have MSN please i would like to get intouch with you to talk Soap Operas PM me soon.

With Regards

Peter A. Ker

Family Trees

I'm Planning to add Family Trees into the Soap Pages for some more information.

Peter A. Ker

comments

"he is wont to make controversial decisions and then act on them unilaterally, with minimal discussion." I think the only time we ran into each other was the TV naming. I will say that in the first place, that was discussed at length prior to its implementation, and second, it was a long time ago, now. Hope you won't hold onto that forever, as I definitely took away some lessons from that early discuss, and I'd be happy to talk more. -- Netoholic @ 07:25, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

---

Yep - i have to put up with female members of the family hogging the TV to watch their precious soaps! PMA 06:27, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yeah they can be interesting despite the fact they are aimed at women - i wonder if i would be as devoted as my mother and the others had i been born a girl? I also agree about the names - but is calling someone Samantha Gene rather than Samantha Jean any worse then those real life parents who call their kids Mahreea Katylen or Jordin Moonbeam? PMA 06:43, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

---

User page protection

I am sending this message to a group of seasoned users whose opinions I respect. My aim is not to draw you into a dispute, but to canvass opinion on a contentious area of policy. If you have a few minutes to spare, please see the debate currently under way at Wikipedia talk:Protection policy, with particular reference to user page protection. For some reason, I seem to have fallen foul of a group of sysops who have made it their business to stamp out the practice of protecting one’s own user page. A sensible (in my opinion) proposal has been made to amend the policy, and I would be grateful if you would add your view, assuming you have one. Cheers. Deb 13:18, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Anus

Re this edit - that user's comment was probably a result of the goatse vandalism that took place on Image:Male_anatomy.png - IE, what he was seeing wasn't just a 'diagram', but a rather disturbing picture. →Raul654 08:28, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)

Anything to avoid posting under the previous topic!

Thanks, it's nice to have a favorably disposed audience<g>. - Nunh-huh 21:26, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

First guests: Jim Carey and Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog. Question: Grey Poupon. Neither grey, nor for you to poop on. Discuss among yourselves. - Nunh-huh 00:25, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)