User talk:Maelin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Maelin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Contents 1 Freerunning article 2 Thanks 3 Re: Troll warning 4 JL@999 5 Please vote on attempt to delete new Ref Desk rules 6 Unsure 7 "Endless Deletions"

[edit] Freerunning article

Hi, well done on raising the free running article on the cleanup page. As I mentioned there, you are right, the choice of templates in cases like that is difficult. However, cleanup is a bit of catch-all template, but that also means it gets massively over-used. The thing to remember is to be bold and try and fix things - templates are useful, but someone fixing an article is more preferable. Some options are to copyedit it to improve it, research the subject and expand it or nominate it for deletion. In this case free running is actually another name for Parkour, which already has a good article. So, I suggest you edit the article to redirect it to parkour - I'll leave it for you to do as its a useful one to learn - see Wikipedia:Redirect for instructions. Drop me a note if you have any questions about anything. Kcordina 12:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Forgot a couple of things - when redirecting, make sure you don't create any double-redirects. Here you'll notice that freerunning redirects to free running so you'll need to also change the freerunning redirect. Also, its a good idea to leave a note on the articles talk pages stating why you have made a change such as redirecting (which, hopefully, isn't "because kcordina told me to!). Kcordina 12:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks. Dr.K. 13:46, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply to my query on the 0.999 article talk page. ShaiM 07:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Troll warning

Hi, I've replied at my talk page. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 11:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JL@999

JL continues to "fail to respond to any post that might seriously challenge [his] claims" and "fail to read the articles we repeatedly direct [him] to." Why continue to explain these things to him, spoon-feeding him information to reward his bad faith? I decided — and I believe Meni decided — to stop responding to his mathematical posts and his insults. Perhaps he'd see lack of response as an admission that he was right all along, but better to have one deluded person than a garbage talk page we spend untold hours updating. Calbaer 20:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please vote on attempt to delete new Ref Desk rules

Vote here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Reference desk/rules. StuRat 02:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unsure

Ok i nominated the article. the discussion for deletion page is up. its been 5 days. i read the page on wikipedia about articles for deletion but still am not sure what to do. what do i do now?Missy1234 15:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

No worries now, that article i nominated has been deleted.Missy1234 00:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)missy1234

[edit] "Endless Deletions"

I'm not really sure what you want me to say. You open with the claim that you are not merely trying to plead for pet articles and that I should consider carefully what you say, but then proceed to accuse me of being irrational, acting in bad faith, and having some kind of personal antipathy towards amateur game designers.

The answer is that I sincerely feel that notability is an important, even crucial, policy on Wikipedia, and it is the one that gets stretched and distorted most often. People often lose sight of the fact that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of information. Frankly, articles on non-notable personages like Mr. Croshaw just make Wikipedia look bad, and the problem is particularly acute within the computer and video games topic area, under the jurisdiction of the WP:CVG project.

These people and their amateur adventure games simply aren't worthy of inclusion in a general purpose reference work. They are not notable; not in the broader view of the term (which would probably exclude quite a few commercial video games, but it's a slippery slope) and not in the narrower sense, within the computer and video gaming community.

Before I read of them on Wikipedia, I had not heard of any of the games or game designers I have proposed for deletion. Prior to the actual deletion debates, I had never met or spoken to Ben Croshaw, Dave Gilbert, or any of the designers, creators, or fans of the games I have endeavored to delete. (Several of them did talk to me since then, and I also participated in a debate-cum-flamewar on Croshaw's message board.) I do not harbor any resentments toward any of the subjects of pages that I have taken it upon myself to submit to AfD. My deletion proposals are attempts to cleanse Wikipedia of non-notable, non-encyclopedic content, and nothing more.

As for 0.999..., we can discuss this further if you like, but I get the impression that it wasn't particularly a focus of your message. In a nutshell, I think that it is a particularly egregious violation of the purpose of a talk page, and that it probably provokes more inappropriate discussion just by its presence. Andre (talk) 14:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and I prefer to keep my discussions fragmented (in other words, I won't post on my own talk page). If you like, you can delete this from your own talk page, but please don't copy it to mine. Andre (talk) 15:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)