User talk:Othtim

StankDawg, binrev, etc[edit]

It's nothing personal. If you'd like, I'm happy to give you a heads-up when I prod or afd hacker/phreaking pages (there are many more that need to go). --- tqbf 03:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there... You asked about the animal planet in the stankdawg article. I'll admit if i screwed up but I do not see multiple mentions of this in the article. Maybe you are confused with the proper use of the REF tags? This REF tag is placed where the statement is made as a link to the source. The section at the bottom (the one with 1,2,3 currently) is dynamically generated based on these tags. If we remove the one that you commented, it will remove that entry from the sources at the bottom. If that is not what you are referring to and I missed a duplicate line, I am not seeing it, although I admit I was up late last night working on it and my eyes may be fried. Bad Monk3y 21:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for Digital DawgPound[edit]

Debate here; you said you were a delete vote, but I understand if you've changed your mind; either way, I know you're interested.

--- tqbf 17:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lesson learned[edit]

Here's what I should have done on the DDP article: written the merged BinRev/DDP/StankDawg article in user space, submitted it for comment, gotten it in place, and then AfD'd it --- the AfD would have made more sense, and even Bad Monk3y might have agreed.

I'll do the legwork on this, but you know the topic more than I do. Any thoughts? I am, for instance, unclear on whether this content makes more sense on StankDawg or on Binary Revolution Radio (I know you disagree, but ultimately I think Strom Carlson and StankDawg should be merged here too). --- tqbf 17:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. What are you merging with what? --Othtim (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. You were a delete for "Digital DawgPound". Where do you think the valid content from that page should go? --- tqbf 01:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know, I'll have to think about it. My first suggestion would be keep it in the ddp article, and just make it not suck. If possible. --Othtim (talk) 01:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask for advice when I get back around to the DDP article cluster; I'm beating up on security vendors now instead of hackers. Thanks! =) --- tqbf 01:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]