User talk:Haemo/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am new and in need of some help[edit]

I have created my first article, it is on Mary Styles Harris, and I am feeling a little confused. There are some problems with my references and I can't figure out how to link my article to others. I would appreciate any help you can give me. Thank you Jaymes10

It looks like someone else (The ever-helpful Ariel Gold) helped you out already :). To link you articles to others, "Wikilink" the name of the article you want linked to using two of these "[[" on each side of the name. For example, [[Water]] links to water. --Haemo 02:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help[edit]

Thanks for banning that user. You might be interested in this. Apparantly he wants to help you out. -- Scorpion0422 03:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware, but he's not banned, only blocked. I don't know what's going on here, beyond you getting harassed by these guys, but I think it would be best if you just ignored it. --Haemo 03:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a long story, DefianceofTheGood (talk · contribs), who I am fairly certain is a sock of NomeKing (talk · contribs) has been trying to add speculation to the page Husbands and Knives [1] [2] saying that a store in the episode is based on the real life Meltdown Comics & Collectibles. His source is the stores blog, which claims the episodes writer is a regular there. Either way, the user didn't appreciate being reverted and has since made multiple threatening posts in which he claimed he would "identify" me, so I gave him a fake name. I was going to register at the forum and reply, but I figured I shouldn't feed the fire. -- Scorpion0422 03:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually... he is banned, not just blocked.--Isotope23 talk 13:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, we'll see. I'm not really sure what's going on here, so I'd like to at least give him a chance to explain the situation if he needs to. --Haemo 04:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay. Cirt 13:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Regarding the name of Drew's employee[edit]

I'm fine with the rewording of the paragraph about Grills, except about the part about not needing her name; the name has been reported in reliable news media, and she was clearly involved in the incident. Why do you feel that the name is not that important? WhisperToMe (talk) 23:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's at best peripherally involved. As our guidelines indicated, we should "first, do no harm" when we write about real people. The subject in question here was an 18 year-old girl who was goaded into participating in something by an adult, and her employer, with no reasonable knowledge about what the ultimate outcome would be. The event in question was not even criminal — it seems perverse to bring a relatively unknown child to attention in an article about the suicide, because she was loosely involved in the situation, with extenuating circumstances. Let's not ruin this girl's life over this — keep the article focused on the main subjects. --Haemo (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Continued on the talk page - and, (EDIT:)If she was 18 at the time of the incident, please refer to her as a "woman," as 18 is considered legal adulthood in all aspects except alcohol in the USA :) EDIT: Grills was 18 at the time of the incident. Also the prosecuting attorney believes that she had a major role. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Virk case[edit]

You said: "The press disclosed the names, originally in the Virk case — how do you think they would feel if they were indelibly associated with the murder on a Top 3 website"

I'm curious about this - did the media later retract their names? How many of them were proven innocent in trials? How many of them were not charged?

If the media did not retract the names (i.e. if it did not stop publishing the names), I don't see how not publishing the names will prevent additional exposure. Also, how many media sources published the names? I cannot add them as I would rather wait for consensus and I do not know where to look (in terms of reliable sources, anyway) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only two of the children were charged, both as adults. The rest of the children who engaged in the "swarming" were not charged — the media never "retracted" their names, but honored the requests of the Virk family and the police not to drag out the crime into the public eye. --Haemo (talk) 01:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]

Thank you for granting my wish. I used to be a powerful genie, but this new-aged stuff has me so confused, and stuck in my bottle. Thanks again! - Jeeny (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello..?[edit]

Is this thing on? :o) Thanks for the comment on my page... or whatever page that is that you left that comment on. I can barely figure out anything on this website, so hopefully this is where I'm supposed to reply. Anyway... thanks for the feedback. See you around. WATYF (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're in the right place. You seem to be getting the hang on it :) --Haemo 00:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tzvi Hersh Weinreb[edit]

Thanks for the tag cleanup on Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, I figured since I was the one who speedy'd it and then changed it to a prod, I shouldn't refactor another user's comments. Mbisanz (talk) 03:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. That's a case to ignore all rules. No one objects to more time. --Haemo (talk) 03:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna WP:AGF, but I and the author disagree on the notability of this person. He's now gone and removed the PROD with a summary ("You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason." OK then, ill improve this when I have time). Should've gone with my first instinct and left it a CSD. Look forward to seeing this on AfD in a couple of days. Mbisanz (talk) 15:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User: Thirdman[edit]

I don't get it, not trying to be rude here, but are you saying that all the articles that Thirdman wrote are good articles that gives information to a reader? it won't even fit into a stub class, because all it has is a single sentence saying that it is somewhere in New Yorkshire. That will most certaintly not give a lot of info to the reader about the village. At least add a picture, geography and maybe a bit of history to it. Fattyjwoods (talk) 03:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's an issue for cleanup, not deletion. Villages may, or may not, be inherently notable — I'm not going to speak to that concern. However, a simple stub articles stating X is a village in Y is not "empty", nor does WP:CSD#A7 apply to towns. --Haemo (talk) 04:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what's going to happen now? Is it going to sit there as a one sentenced encyclopadedia article? It dosent look like Thirdman is going to add much to it. Maybe turn it into a 2 sentenced encyclopadedia article.Fattyjwoods (talk) 04:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's exactly what it's going to do — until someone else comes along and expands it. --Haemo (talk) 05:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Celerino castillo III[edit]

You declined to speedy the above article writing that you couldn't find any copy vio. The first three paragraphs are copied word for word from here starting at "a 20-year veteran..." Can you please look again? Thanks. KnightLago (talk) 03:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry; I was looking at the body of the text. I've trimmed the copyvio material; I think the rest is okay. --Haemo (talk) 04:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

help writing to meet wiki criteria[edit]

we were hoping to get your help to write our article because as it was posted it did not seem to meet the wiki criteria for publication and was speedily deleted - the entry in question, the baan dek montessori, was posted on december 8, 2007 - we are at a loss to see how our entry failed to meet the requirements when we read a similar article, such as this one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_Montessori - our purpose is not to advertise, it is to relate the historical facts of this school - looking forward to your response - all the best —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreamduke (talk • contribs) 17:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to assert notability as defined under the guidelines linked. You should also ensure that you cite reliable sources to back up the statements of notability. Because the article in question was speedily deleted, there is no prejudice to recreation, so go for it~ --Haemo (talk) 20:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. G[edit]

What's Mr. G's beef with you?[3] Or should I be reading that as a compliment? Rklawton (talk) 02:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compliment. We get along very well. --Haemo (talk) 03:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deleted article[edit]

Hi Haemo, I would like a copy of the talk page of the deleted article Evolutionary theories on the origin of religion. rgds Muntuwandi (talk) 15:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted it here for you. --Haemo (talk) 00:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Permission[edit]

Hi Haemo, I was wondering if I can add your comment made at WT:SLR here and add it to here. Thanks Watchdogb (talk) 20:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead. It's relevant. --Haemo (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Broken sigature[edit]

Hi Haemo! I've answered on my talk page, but I noticed that you have only partially signed your post - was that intentional or an accident? If the later, would you mind fixing it? Thanks! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I typed five tildes instead of four. Whoopsie. --Haemo (talk) 08:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Opposing conspiracy theories[edit]

Oh, I didn't think of that until now.

I'd imagine most people will understand the meaning considering the other heading is "Supporting conspiracy theories", but then again maybe not. I just thought "debunking" wasn't NPOV. The conspiracy theorists think they are the ones "debunking" the official theory.

--RucasHost (talk) 09:19, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not "Criticism of conspiracy theories"? I think that conveys the same meaning, without being non-neutral and doesn't run the risk of being confusing. --Haemo (talk) 09:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Response to your comment[edit]

Hi Haemo,

I have added a reply to your comment on Talk:Snuff_Pop_Inc.

Thanks MadsOlsen —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadsOlsen (talk • contribs) 21:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied there. --Haemo (talk) 22:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Haemo[edit]

I just responded. Are you able to see whenever I answer or will I have to return here every time? :-)MadsOlsen (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I have watchlisted the article, and will keep an eye on it. --Haemo (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! MadsOlsen (talk) 22:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi hemo[edit]

I saw that you were adopting right now, can you adopt me please?

What kind of things are you interested in? Hopefully if you adopt me, we will at least have some common ground to edit with? Thank you

Pollypenhouse (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, I mostly write articles about British Columbia, and keep tabs on my watchlist. For instance, I'm currently working on this article, but have run into a brick wall filling out the rest. --Haemo (talk) 22:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the delete thing[edit]

Heh, it was a total blond moment. :P I was speedying RockAzn and Twinkle got carried away when removing backlinks. It's all fixed now. Sorry for any confusion :D --slakr\ talk / 22:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay; I was just wondering. I'm a little blond too, sometimes. --Haemo (talk) 22:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Ferring[edit]

Df is a well known fantasy author. Check out 'Konrad', 'Shadowbreed' & 'Warblade' in Amozon n stuff. HE IS AN AUTHOR OF NOTE so the article should stand.

You need to cite reliable sources asserting why he's notable in the article to ensure that it is not deleted. Merry Christmas! --Haemo (talk) 03:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Matan Uziel - Value[edit]

Hello. I was wondering why this value was deleted. There are similar values to this like "Kevin Rose" or "Gurbaksh Chahal" for example, so why it was deleted?

thanks, steve —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whadv21 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article did not assert notability and was deleted under WP:CSD#A7. --Haemo (talk) 18:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see these values - "Kevin Rose" or "Gurbaksh Chahal" .

This is the same!

I feel it is not fair to delete something which is the same. There is nothing about advertising the group.

Can you please recover it?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whadv21 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was not deleted for advertising. It was deleted for not asserting notability. The fact that other articles exist does not validate the inclusion of articles which fail our standards. However, since this article was merely speedily deleted, there is no prejudice to recreation. If you would like a copy of the deleted article, I can provide one. However, I cannot undelete it in its current form. --Haemo (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Can you please provide me with the wrong sentences or how can I improve the value so that it will be approval?

Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whadv21 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs to assert notability in order for it not to be deleted. I have userified it, for you. You can find it here. --Haemo (talk) 20:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot. Much appreciated.

But I'm not sure about the notability - what does it mean?

Thanks,

S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whadv21 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you read our notability guidelines, you can see that notability is defined as follows:

Will you make a favour to me and fix this value so that I could learn for the next times?

I'm willing to write alot of articles, it depending on how much you can help me to do that on the right way.

Thanks again. Much appreciated.

S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whadv21 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to, but I don't know anything about the subject, so I could not properly write about it in a meaningful way. My usual method of determining these things, Google News brings up no hits. If you would like an example, I wrote the articles on Sweatshop Union, Leslie Satcher, and Harold Keke which demonstrates what notability is, and how to assert it even for subjects who are not "famous". --Haemo (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Thanks. I will use those materials. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whadv21 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Good luck, and Merry Christmas. --Haemo (talk) 21:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi![edit]

I just read WP:Tutorial and have learned some a lot of things about Wikipedia! Like how to use a talk page. I think I'm doing it right... I don't know... Thanks for your help! Blurple (talk) 22:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are doing it correctly. Merry Christmas, and enjoy your time here. --Haemo (talk) 22:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

I saw your edits on one page and noticed how in your replies to discussions, your name has the '(talk)' bit behind it after you sign it... how do u do this? (soz bout this, im nu) Wikikoolkid (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yours does too :) It's the new Wikipedia's default signature, I believe. --Haemo (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oh yeah silly me hehe. *blushes* lolz... so... how do some people have like personalised signatures? sorry to ask so many questions... :S Wikikoolkid (talk) 22:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Click here and edit the signature thing using HTML or Wiki-markup. --Haemo (talk) 22:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks a lot Haemo... im kinda nu to this whole thing so i just had truble undrstanding sum of it :S

I guess ill just have to learn things from my mistakes hehe

oh and one lassssssst thing... I promise lol! how do you get the link in html to see anothr users contributions... u know... like how the thing to get to someones talk page is 'user talk:.....whatever'... so what is 'contributions'?

Wikikoolkid([[User:Wikikoolkid|User]])([[User talk:Wikikoolkid|Talk]]) (talk) 22:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the toolbox in the sidebar to the left. --Haemo (talk) 22:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see it... :( Oh im really sorry, i'll stop bothering you after Im a bit more experienced. Wikikoolkid(User)(Talk) 10:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fetus[edit]

Hi there. I noticed that you protected the Fetus article. Not sure why you did that. You froze the article two hours after it was reverted by OrangeMarlin. No one sought to undo what OrangeMarlin did. No one has ever reverted OrangeMarlin at that article, as far as I know. What's up?Ferrylodge (talk) 07:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty clear that this edit war won't be settled overnight — I'd prefer to ensure that any shenanigans (which I might add, for the record, believe were pretty provocative against you, personally) not escalate the situation. I don't have any opinion about the subject, and generally agree with most of the points you've made on the talk page — but, I hope you can see my point here. Anyways, it's only until there's a clear consensus, or a week — I reckon you could have this settled in a day or two with some luck. --Haemo (talk) 07:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll give it a try. Please note that I will now be accused of having gotten the article frozen, and the freezing will be used as grounds for banning me from the article. So, I may need to get back to you when that happens. Thanks for your genuine interest in the matter.Ferrylodge (talk) 07:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it was protected on the version you disagreed with, so that should mitigate any such concerns. If anyone, however unreasonably, brings up the subject as a reason to ban you from the article, then you can just tell them that my reasoning was not based on your actions alone. Indeed, if it had not escalated by previously involved parties making it their business, I would never consider protection at all. Your presence alone, and a minor edit war (frankly, totally non-disruptive in my opinion), is not any reason to ban you from anything. --Haemo (talk) 07:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks.  :-)Ferrylodge (talk) 07:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiKoolKid[edit]

Just to alert you, this is another account from a group of kids who have been disrupting Wikipedia for months. The sockowner just emailed me and confessed to this account. Jeffpw (talk) 11:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I figured. I just treat everyone like that since it's just easier. --Haemo (talk) 23:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted article: Oakley Holidays[edit]

I noticed you don't mind providing content of deleted articles. If there's nothing wrong with it (and judging by the delete summary, there doesn't seem to be), I'd love a copy of the above article. It's from the 27 August this year, don't know if that makes any difference (too old?). Many thanks, alex.muller (talk) 00:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've userfied it here --Haemo (talk) 20:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very much appreciated. alex.muller (talk) 21:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NASA[edit]

Hi again Haemo.  :-)

Just thought I'd mention (if you weren't aware) that someone at NASA has kindly responded regarding the Arctic shrinkage pic. See here. Maybe you could respond to him? Thanks.Ferrylodge (talk) 18:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware, but have given him a brief reply. I think s/he might misunderstand the nature of the objection a little. --Haemo (talk) 20:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again, Haemo, and it looks like NASA has responded just now again.Ferrylodge (talk) 22:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of user space page[edit]

I just want to alert you to some recent drama at the Fetus article, here.Ferrylodge (talk) 20:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's nonsense. Bring it up on ANI — using your tools like that, instead of going through proper processes like WP:MFD is pointless and creates this kind of stupid drama. I'm busy with New Years' celebrations, so I don't have time to deal with this, or send you the revisions you want, at the moment but I must register my disapproval. There is no requirement that editors refrain from creating draft articles when the main article is protected, nor are the reasons given for why this page is inappropriate compelling. "POV-fork" is not a license to use the delete button like that at all — it's clear the decision is contentious, and it should be discussed. I would bring it up on WP:ANI with the request that it at least be brought to WP:MFD and allowed a discussion, and that your revisions be pasted. --Haemo (talk) 00:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. I'm going to pass on ANI for now, and will instead see how things go at the fetus talk page.Ferrylodge (talk) 00:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year! When you get a chance, would you please check here. Do you think there is now sufficient consensus for reinsertion of the images, or do we need to go to dispute resolution/request for comments/mediation/arbitration/whatever? Note that the person who deleted the images immediately prior to page protection has now agreed to allow the images.Ferrylodge (talk) 07:07, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Also note that there are new captions and footnotes for each of the three images.Ferrylodge (talk) 07:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please also consider a different summary. --IronAngelAlice (talk) 15:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if there is a disagreement, it's best to talk it out to prevent conflict. --Haemo (talk) 01:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted articles[edit]

Can you please restore the following deleted articles to my userspace, along with all subpages:

The purpose is so that they can be posted to subpages of m:Wikicommunity as examples of the content that might be transwikied there. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 04:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you need all of them? That's a lot of work, and it seems that a lot of the pages that they linked to have gone inactive or changed purposes. I've userfied one here for you. --Haemo (talk) 20:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe he intends on merging them all into one big shop. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 19:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's on meta, so I don't think that's a viable option, and he stated they're for "examples". --Haemo (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Meta? Please give me a link. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 21:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He linked it above. That's a link to the meta namespace. --Haemo (talk) 03:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the restoration. Unfortunately I didn't notice it until someone left a message on my talk page saying they had been deleted. It also appears they didn't realize what the purpose for the restoration was. The idea of Wikicommunity is to host community-building content such as the shops that some people (e.g. the consensus of voters at WP:MFD) object to having on Wikipedia. However, in order to make the decision on whether or not to create Wikicommunity, it might be helpful to have some illustrations of what we're talking about. Sarsaparilla (talk) 04:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Unfortunately, since I don't want to wheel war you'll have to wait for either consensus or the deleting admin to give me the okay to undelete it. --Haemo (talk) 04:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like he's okay with it, so good luck. --Haemo (talk) 04:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Sarsaparilla/shop[edit]

User:Sarsaparilla/shop, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sarsaparilla/shop and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Sarsaparilla/shop during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —BoL 04:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mucho Thanks[edit]

Let's see if I can manage to be helpful without getting people upset. Tricky business, but if things were going to be too easy, I would probably stay in bed. But kudos for being an admin who listens, converses, and follows up. I will strive to not be a "well it seemed like a good idea at the time" situation at the very least. Take care and again mucho thanks. -BC aka Callmebc (talk) 18:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Play nice :P --Haemo (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Question[edit]

Hello, I saw that you answered someone else's question on citing legal documents, and I have a similar question. How would you cite something like this. It's a legal document (Ministerial License) that is available at the County Clerk's Office. Thank you for your help. --Dan LeveilleTALK 21:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I'm not sure how you would cite a license like that; it's technically a legal document, but not in the same sense as one would usually use the term. I'd use the generic Template:Citation and fill it in as best I can. --Haemo (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I was thinking, but I wasn't sure if there was a better way. Thanks though! --Dan LeveilleTALK 22:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

homeopathy is the future[edit]

WOULD YOU LIK TO CONTRIBUTE TO WIKIPROJECT HOMEATPHY? GOOGLE IT PLEASE TO FIND OUT HOW YOUC AN DONATE YOUR ITME AND HELP SAVE MILLIONSOF LIFES EVERY SINGLE DAY THROUGH EDUCATION AND WIKIEDITING. Smith Jones (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yo sign up please visit this page. Smith Jones (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, my opinions about the therapeutic nature of homeopathy preclude me from taking part in such a project. --Haemo (talk) 00:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weapons, equipment and vehicles of the Craftworld Eldar (Warhammer 40,000)[edit]

Hello!

On the Warhammer 40,000 Project talk page you offered to pull the text of Weapons, equipment and vehicles of the Craftworld Eldar (Warhammer 40,000) should we want to transwiki it. Well, that day has come! I'm not sure the exact process involved in recovering the text though, so before anything is done what are the options? I have sysop on the target wiki, so I can upload an article (with edit history) if an exported copy can be made, but I'm not sure what exactly can be done on your side.

Let me know and we can work through this! And thanks! --Falcorian (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have userfied the article here. Since you have sysop, it should be relatively easy to export it. For GFDL compliance, I believe it's sufficient to cite the old Wikilink, since it preserves the attribution in the database. If you want me to restore the whole thing, instead, I can do that too. --Haemo (talk) 19:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you could userfy the whole thing, that would be great. My understanding is that we have to keep a list of authors on our page, as WP:REUSE states: "You may be able to partially fulfill the latter two obligations [Citation and author list] by providing a conspicuous direct link back to the Wikipedia article hosted on this website. [...] However, please note that the Wikimedia Foundation makes no guarantee to retain authorship information. Therefore, you are encouraged to provide this authorship information and a transparent copy with your derived works." Thanks again! --Falcorian (talk) 17:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've userfied the whole thing, history included, to User:Falcorian/eldar. --Haemo (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Thanks a ton! It's all moved into it's new home here! --Falcorian (talk) 23:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, I lied. The export function doesn't seem to follow it's documentation... I'm working on it still. --Falcorian (talk) 01:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trenton Ontario Page[edit]

The page is simply incorrect. However Blotto adrift believes he has an monopoly over it. When several different users correct it he complains to an admin and you block IP address'. Please if you are going to block someone in the future please look into BOTH sides. The trenton ontario page is incorrect and it will stay that way until you stop siding with Blotto Adrift. This is not the only page users have complained about Blotto adrift changing. I am here to help wikipedia by correcting mistakes. This will only improve this sites poor view. However if admins do not look into the actions of all users this site will only go down hill. Blocking based on providing correct information is sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.65.118 (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have not blocked anyone. I protected the page because there was persistent addition of non-notable individuals to it by IP addresses when consensus was against it on the talk page, and the edits were disruptive. --Haemo (talk) 02:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection on President of the United States[edit]

I noticed you fully protected the article President of the United States to deal with vandalism. Did you consider using semiprotection instead? We typically semiprotect for vandalism, reserving full protection for the most extreme cases. It doesn't seem to me that vandalism was so serious and so overwhelming that disabling all editing whatsoever was necessary. szyslak 09:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops! That was an accident; I hit the wrong button. Thanks! --Haemo (talk) 20:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! szyslak 23:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funky stuff on WP:RSN[edit]

Hey Haemo

It appears that after this change was made, a whole bunch of active discussions on WP:RSN immmediately disappeared, including new threads. I'm assuming that this was not suppose to happen and that I'm not the only who noticed, but FYI. -BC aka Callmebc (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied there, and fixed it. --Haemo (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

9/11 article[edit]

Dear Haemo,

I thank you for your contribution on the talk page (though of course I would preferred your view to be closer to mine). I am curious to learn more about human consciousness, and I'm surprised that people can hold such strong opposing views. If you can spare 6 minutes, I would like to ask you to view the following clip,

...and tell me what you think when you hear and see this? Do you have alternate explanations for everything that is mentioned here? What would be your response?

Thanks, — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (talk) 19:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm quite sure this will be unproductive, I will watch it at home, where I have sound. --Haemo (talk) 19:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I watched it. There's nothing here; there was not one piece of interesting evidence or verifiable information here. It's a bunch of innuendo and opinion being based off as some kind of factual piece of information. It repeatedly states bald assertions as "overwhelming evidence" when it's anything but — for most of this piece, you could replace "9/11" with "Moon landing" and it would have about equal validity. --Haemo (talk) 23:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huzzah![edit]

The Surreal Barnstar
A fairly simple edit summary, but one that made me laugh out loud; nice one :P ≈ The Haunted Angel 19:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad someone else remembers that show, and not just because Family Guy made fun of it. --Haemo (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Although I do love Family Guy :P ≈ The Haunted Angel 19:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Megan Meiers Suicide Controversy[edit]

Hi,

I saw you reverted my edits which now included the name of "the employee" and one other new line about her. It has since been reverted by a different user. Anyways, I did post my case for inclusion in the discussion. I didn't discount the discussion that had already occurred in regards to this topic--just this week, The New Yorker ran a feature length article on the story and the employees name was used several times. At this point, choosing not to include her name but choosing to include others would be a POV violation, as she has been clearly identified by the mainstream media but wikipedia editors are still choosing to not include her. Also, in a quick "google test" of the girls name, it comes up in several news articles. I think now is the time to include her, but of course I'd love to see additional discussion on this topic in the talk page and see consensus. Gwynand (talk) 12:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, I saw you reverted the edit, not another user. Sorry about that.Gwynand (talk) 12:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits made on January 19, 2008 (UTC) to Roseland Public School[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Roseland Public School. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. 72.75.72.63 (talk) 04:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assume good faith, much? --Haemo (talk)

Nice job![edit]

The Barnstar of Recovery
Congratulations on saving Roseland Public School from deletion! Soxred93 | talk count bot 00:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread[edit]

Hey there, Haemo. You may wish to comment in this ANI thread about a recent edit war by Callmebc. Cheers, Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sea of Japan[edit]

Request temporary unlock of this article so that the second paragraph in the "Naming Dispute" section can be removed. Reason is that it is uncited, unlike the paragraphs that lead and follow it, and it repeats most of the information already contained in the preceeding paragraph. Cla68 (talk) 04:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use the template {{editprotected}} on the article's talk page. I'm sorry, I don't have time to review the request right now (or for the next few days). --Haemo (talk) 07:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, no problem. I don't get involved in edit disputes very often so I'm learning as I go along. Cla68 (talk) 07:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting Radical Habits Clothing and Productions[edit]

What's up Haemo. You helped me out with creating the Suburban Noize Records page some months back. I had a request to create a page that others can't. I made it and was hoping yet again that you may help on fixing the page up. It's simply a clothing company that has become well known across the action sports world. You added some great information for Subnoize. Maybe you can do the same for SRH. A31lover (talk) 13:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could, but I'm honestly not that familiar with the brand. Sorry! Wish I could help!

Horus (Warhammer 40,000)[edit]

Hey, it's me again... Could you userfy Horus (Warhammer 40,000) onto my user space somewhere so I can transwiki it? I didn't even notice the AFD until afterwards so I had no chance before... Thanks! --Falcorian (talk) 07:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Sent to User:Falcorian/Horus, with history intact. --Haemo (talk) 04:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'll set my script loose on it and have it moved over in a jiffy! --Falcorian (talk) 08:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And there you go! Nice as you please, with full history! Horus Thanks once more! --Falcorian (talk) 08:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc. In the absence of multiple sources, it must be possible to verify that the source reflects a neutral point of view, is credible and provides sufficient detail for a comprehensive article.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Haemo/Archive_7&oldid=1143038066"