User talk:VampWillow/Archive2

Sysop

Congrats - you are now a sysop - I suggest you read Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. Secretlondon 15:09, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks ... read it a couple of weeks ago but will keep an eye on it too ;-) --VampWillow 15:12, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

LibDems in NI

I recently rewrote your edit on LD activity in NI. You can find more here. iHoshie 03:16, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Pornocracy

Hey, I might not have nominated you for Adminship had I realised you were a deletionist ;-) Seriously, though, pornocracy was a perfectly valid article, and definitely not a candidate for speedy deletion. Have a look on Google. -- ALargeElk | Talk 14:46, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

As a WP article there was very little in it other than the title and, in checking terms, 'porn-' wasn't in my lists of '-ocracies' or '-archies'. Googling appears to give mostly porn links (surprise!) but otherwise treats it as a modern made-up word. Between the two points (concept, validity), being created by an IP address-only user, and the text "the popes were under the influence of corrupt women" without quoting any source for that assertion it appeared an adequate candidate for speedy. I note it has been recreated with further details, although no sourcing for the content (which, therefore, continues to worry me). --VampWillow 15:30, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Try Googling for pornocracy pope - you'll find plenty of references, including the Encyclopaedia of World History (via Bartleby) and the 1911 Brittanica. I agree, though, that we should all strive to cite sources more. -- ALargeElk | Talk 15:42, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

A little more info and a reference added. I might stick this one on Article of the Week! -- ALargeElk | Talk 16:12, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, it is certainly being an education! --VampWillow 16:21, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Those articles

Feel free to delete them if you want. I've been putting my fair share of articles up for speedy deleting too - I just decided to err on the side of caution in those cases, particularly considering recent VFD precedents. Ambivalenthysteria 11:03, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Old Street Station talk

discussion thread with 'anon' at that location

Beiderbeke affair

Yes, good point... does it need the reference to cubs at all? Its just a (extreamly) minor plot point. I will try and work out a rewording when I have a chance. 10:26, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

European Union Olympic medals count for 2004

Hi there, I wonder would you consider reversing your decision to delete this article. I have substantially rewritten it. A united EU team is not going to happen. I've discussed potential EU co-operation towards the olympics, and kept the table. I believe the table is valid, for us Europeans/EUians to see how the area has fared as a whole. Please comment on my talk page if you still feel the article should be deleted. zoney | talk 00:58, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

um. I haven't made a 'decision' but have indicated (along with others) that I see this article as personal theorising and having no place on WP. "how the area has fared as a whole" is meaningless as the area hasn't competed "as a whole". POV-based rubbish. --[[User:VampWillow|VampWillow]] 08:59, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, certainly the original discussion was - and I'm sure my edits can be improved. But as regards keeping a tally - I see this as perfectly useful and interesting information. The area hasn't competed "as a whole", but it's consistuent parts have competed. Hey, part of the UK doesn't even compete with the rest of it (NI with Irl, not GB). So having a Europe-wide tally is interesting. However, thanks for the reply. zoney | talk 11:12, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

er ... all constituent parts of the UK are competing together sfaiaa; we just use the correct international abbreviation (GB not UK) as opposed to what we do online. --[[User:VampWillow|VampWillow]] 12:52, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

How confusing. GB isn't an accurate label in that case - Great Britain is the island beside Ireland, it doesn't include Northern Ireland. UK does. (Hence "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"). Do EU numberplates for Northern Ireland use GB? It's pretty ludicrous if they do! I had assumed that because of the "Great Britain" label for the Olympics team, Ireland included Northern Ireland, just as in Rugby. zoney | talk 13:02, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ah. Just did some searching. It seems NI folk can be on either team. This time, I believe most are on the Ireland team. Again - how confusing. zoney | talk 13:05, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Registration Marks (number plates) do indeed use 'GB' for the whole area. btw. I dislike your miss-appropriation of the Irish flag in your sig as, sfaiaa, you are not authorised to respond on behalf of that country. As such please do not use it on this page (at least). --[[User:VampWillow|VampWillow]] 15:27, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Implementing WP:VFD decisions

Hiya.. I noticed there were a bunch of red-links on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old (Genesis (web comic), Oceanwalk Mall, Trina S. Newton, Lochap and many others), and checking the Deletion log, I see you deleted them to implement the VFD decision. That's great, but you might want to have a read of Wikipedia:Deletion process - when you clear out an article, you need to remove the listing from the VFD page and link to the discussion on Wikipedia:Archived delete debates. Thanks! —Stormie 02:25, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

yeah, by the time I'd finished reading all the discussions (and in two cases the whole article histories too!) and getting through just that day's list I was too shattered to finish doing all the archiving of discussions (did some though). Thanks for the reminder though! --[[User:VampWillow|VampWillow]] 09:17, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I will not stop re-uploading it. The discussion certainly conveyed anything but a consensus in favor of deleting this image, which is one of perhaps hundreds of other images listed under similar fair use status. 172 13:02, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Kim Phuc Phan Thi

Excuse me, but where is the notice about why this page is locked? Could you at least have the courtesy of putting this up if your going to stop us from editting pages?!? - Ta bu shi da yu 15:27, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

172

172 is a sysop, so protecting the pages has no real effect. I suggest if you have a concern, you join the ongoing discussion on the mail lists. — マイケル ₪ 15:36, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

The image is indeed copyrighted, but note the comments regarding fair use status on the VFD page. 172 17:22, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Why was the image deleted? Putting aside the question of fair use, there was no consensus to delete. I believe that it is considered highly inappropriate behavior to delete without consensus. Dan Gardner 17:32, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

On top of that, this user even considered protecting pages or blocking my account, and improperly used the Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress page for a bogus alert. These abuses call into question the fitness of this user for admin responsibilities. 172 19:09, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

VfD discussion of "Phantom mobile device vibration"

On 17 July, you deleted this article with the comment "Deleted after VfD discussion: Neologism". I am trying to close out the discussion and finish the archiving according to our deletion process and need to discuss this one with you. Personally, I agree that the article was a neologism but neither of us voted. Counting only the votes on the page (and discounting the anon vote), it's a tie. When failing to reach a clear consensus, our default is usually to keep the page. Can you please come back to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Phantom mobile device vibration and justify your decision? Thanks. Rossami 22:40, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

WikiCommons

Please be invited to join in at http://commons.wikimedia.org - Andre Engels 13:30, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hello?

Did you disappear? I saw your name somewhere and realized you hadn't been around. Hopefully you're not gone for long -- I recall enjoying your ideas and approaches to things, even when we didn't agree. Have a nice vacation, Jwrosenzweig 22:51, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)