User talk:Vacuum/Archive

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello "Vacuum" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

• Peruse Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers and associated pages, such as
  • Wikipedia:How to edit a page
  • Wikipedia:How to write a great article
  • Wikipedia:Naming conventions
  • Wikipedia:Manual of Style
• You can experiment in the Wikipedia:Sandbox.
• Sign talk page entries with ~~~~, which is automatically converted to a name and date.
• If you have any questions, see Wikipedia:Help, or you can a question to the Wikipedia:village pump.
• I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian -- Infrogmation 15:57, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

.

I hope you don't mind that I have redirected wikipedia:biased phrases to Wikipedia:Words to avoid, as they seemed to be about the same subject, and the latter is already linked from many places on wikipedia. DanKeshet

.

Over at the Wikipedia:Reference desk, I have answered your question on incompatible mother/child blood types. →Raul654 07:07, Feb 8, 2004 (UTC)

Edit attribution

Hi, Vacuum. Edits from your IP have now been reattributed to you. Regards — Kate Turner | Talk 05:10, 2004 Sep 5 (UTC)

Spamming move?

Could you post some explanation of why you moved Spamming? The new name doesn't seem especially worse to me, but it doesn't seem better, so it would be good to explain the move on the Talk page so other editors are not confused like I was. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! JesseW 02:16, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Dialogue with JesseW (posted from User talk:JesseW)

Hi. I moved Spamming because of the general Wikipedia convention that nouns should be used instead of gerunds for article names. Thanks, Vacuum 03:30, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

There are plenty of articles with gerunds as the title, though -- e.g. jogging, running, eating, drinking, singing. I don't have a problem with the change you made; I'm just not sure about the convention you refer to. WillNL 15:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Your user page

Your user page should not be a redirect to an article. It violates common practice, and makes contacting you much harder. -- Netoholic @ 20:17, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)

So? You were able to contact me. It's my user page, and I can do what I want with it. Vacuum 20:21, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:User page#What should I avoid?. I agree with Netoholic, it is very confusing, particularly for new users. And no, I didn't get to you via your user page but via recent changes. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:27, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

OK. I'll include the article with double braces. I still maintain that it is inappropriate to modify other people's user pages without their consent. Vacuum 20:29, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

In most cases that's true, but not absolutely always. →Raul654 22:12, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Dialogue with Netoholic (posted from User talk:Netoholic)

Netoholic, please don't modify user pages without permission. You didn't even leave a message on my talk page as to why you changed it. Vacuum 20:09, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Netoholic. My user page is no longer a redirect. However, it is still against Wikiquette to edit other people's user pages without their consent. If you think that there is a problem with someone's user page, please mention it on their talk page before making any unauthorized changes. Thanks. Vacuum 21:25, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Netoholic

Hi! I just would appreciate your participation and views on the above.--Jondel 10:35, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

-otomy and -ectomy

Hello, I read your request at meta:Requests_for_queries. Since you are selecting article titles based on the title only, you could perform the task yourself, using the file "all_titles_in_ns0.gz" from the download site: Just do a grep on it. Since I have done just that, I upload the lists at User:Vacuum/ectomy and User:Vacuum/otomy. :-) --SirJective 13:42, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikinews demo up and running

Hi!

I'm writing to let you know that the Wikimedia Board of Trustees has approved the first stage of the Wikinews project. There's now a fully operational English demo site at demo.wikinews.org. This will be used for experimenting with various review models and basic policies before the site is launched officially in about a week. demo.wikinews.org will become the English version later.

You voted for the Wikinews project, so I'm asking for your participation now. Everything is open, nothing is final. What Wikinews will and can be depends in large part on you. There already is a global Wikinews mailing list for discussing the project. If you are interested at all, please subscribe -- coordination is of key importance. There's also an IRC channel #wikinews on irc.freenode.net. Realtime discussion can help to polish up articles.

If you're looking for something to do, check out the articles in development and articles in review. Or start a new story in the Wikinews workspace, or ignore the proposed review system - it's up to you. I hope you'll join us soon in this exciting experiment.--Eloquence* 01:58, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Image:Iiit-b-logo.jpg

Hi. Image:Iiit-b-logo.jpg didn't seem to upload properly. Would you mind uploading it again? Vacuum | tcw 03:36, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Vaccuum, I uploaded Image:Iiitb-logo.png thereby making Image:Iiit-b-logo.jpg redundant. Feel free to remove this image. Thanks. -- Sundar 06:07, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Editing templates

Hi: Could you please both preview/test your changes to important templates and—most importantly—propose your changes on the template's talk page before editing it? Your changes to {{test2}}, {{test3}}, and {{spam}} have all been reverted several times (and not just by me). You've been doing these unilateral template edits (intermittently) for several weeks now. Your recent edit to test3 actually introduced an error. Please understand that these templates are used on thousands of pages and should not be changed on a whim. Template edits should be discussed beforehand and you should wait a reasonable time period for input from others before proceeding. Thanks for your consideration. -- Hadal 04:10, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dynamic signature

According to Sunborn there appears to be some limitations on the sig template. Sunborn says the template will only work five times per page. You can use your dynamic sig if you change Vacuum c to this instead:

Vacuum [[User_talk:Vacuum|(tc)]] [[Special:Watchlist/Vacuum|w]]

Here is my result with four tildes: [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas (tc) w]] 03:53, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Talk page

Please do not "archive" (i.e. erase) your talk page. Yes, the comments will be preserved in the page history, but the history will be erased if the database changes software again. Plus, you are "archiving" your talk page in order to sweep critical comments under the carpet. Consider this portion of the page history, in which you wiped it four times in the space of 3 hours and 21 minutes:

1. (cur) (last) 22:23, Nov 11, 2004 Netoholic m (archiving) -deleted comment critical of your 'archives'
2. (cur) (last) 22:21, Nov 11, 2004 Ta bu shi da yu (I'm not trolling)
3. (cur) (last) 22:18, Nov 11, 2004 Netoholic
4. (cur) (last) 22:14, Nov 11, 2004 Netoholic m (archived to page history) -same
5. (cur) (last) 22:10, Nov 11, 2004 Ta bu shi da yu (Archive4?)
6. (cur) (last) 21:28, Nov 11, 2004 Ta bu shi da yu m (Edit summaries)
7. (cur) (last) 20:44, Nov 11, 2004 203.35.154.254 (Edit summaries)
8. (cur) (last) 20:44, Nov 11, 2004 Zen-master (Archive4?)
9. (cur) (last) 20:35, Nov 11, 2004 Ta bu shi da yu m (Edit summaries)
10. (cur) (last) 20:34, Nov 11, 2004 Ta bu shi da yu
11. (cur) (last) 20:12, Nov 11, 2004 Netoholic m (archiving) -same
12. (cur) (last) 20:03, Nov 11, 2004 Ta bu shi da yu (Edit summaries)
13. (cur) (last) 19:02, Nov 11, 2004 Netoholic m (archiving) -removed critical comments related to adminship.

Ironically enough, three of the erasures removed comments criticizing you for blanking your talk page. Because you have been accused by many people of trying to hide criticism, it would do your already-poor reputation a favor by setting up an actual archive page in chronological order, not in order of favourability. Vacuum c 16:19, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

I appreciate your views, but I think they are a bit over the line. I am allowed to manage my user space, in particular my talk page, as I reasonably see fit. If comments are left which are trolling (provocative, insulting, or the like), then I will remove them. A user's talk page, unless they wish it, is only for transient communications. Once I've "gotten the message" and done everything in response that I wish to (like ignore it), then I can and will remove it to the page history. This is not about "hiding criticism", and I do not feel that anyone who is truly impartial would call it that. -- Netoholic @ 17:13, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)

You just deleted our discussion which was ONE HOUR old. If you really were 'archiving' your talk page, you would have just moved the page to a subpage. Vacuum c 17:28, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Our conversation is through. -- Netoholic @ 17:32, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)

Stop trolling. My user page is not the place for you to make a point. If you disagree with my handling of it, bring it up in an RFC, or archive it yourself, but DO NOT revert war on it. -- Netoholic @ 02:58, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)

You added this material to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Netoholic/Evidence. I hope you'll consider withdrawing it from that page, since I think you've seen many people don't consider it a problem. Thanks. -- Netoholic @ 17:29, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

Neto RfC 2

I have deleted these comments to prevent confusion and misunderstanding as there is currently no record of the relevant page ever existing.

Netoholic RfC 2

I have deleted these comments to prevent confusion and misunderstanding as there is currently no record of the relevant page ever existing.

VfD

In general pages should not be removed from VfD early. There have been a number of cases where articles on VfD were speedy deleted, only to have that decision later reversed. Removing pages early also interferes with the proper archiving of the discussions. There is also no rule that allows the removal of pages that almost everyone believes should be kept, though I feel one should be introduced and have been discussing the idea at Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion. - SimonP 18:23, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)

Vanity pages

Vanity pages are not, in themselves, candidates for speedy deletion. As such, Template:Vanitypage is completely wrong. -- Netoholic @ 18:43, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)

I have already reverted to the Oct 20 version for use on user talk pages. Vanity is not a CSD, unless it matches other valid CSD reasons also. We have Template:Unencyclopedic for marking articles of questionable value. -- Netoholic @ 18:55, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)

I've redirected it to Template:Vanity. -- Netoholic @ 19:03, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)