User talk:Nydas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you leave a message here, I will normally respond here as well, unless you request otherwise.

Contents 1 Welcome 2 Thanks for your vigilance on Income tax in the United States 3 Reverend John Thomson 4 AfD 5 The Black Book (novel) 6 Hey Nydas 7 Your coment 8 Personal computer game 9 Wilcox-McCandlish law 10 Hello Again 11 Tamaskan dog - blanking of deletion discussion 12 OK 13 Terse to the point of obfuscation 14 List of films with similar themes and release dates AfD 15 Request for your opinion 15.1 Thanks for the reply 16 That Rare Dog Breed 17 Gen X page 18 Military brat (U.S. subculture) 19 Webcomic notability guidelines 20 RE: David FA 21 The Trampformers 22 Boss (video games) 23 Key thinkers in classical liberalism and claimed "banned user." 24 You helped choose Atmosphere as this week's WP:ACID winner 25 Universities and Anti-Semitism 26 Iran War 27 Skyblazer AfD

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Nydas, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you very much for your contributions so far. 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
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style You might also want to

consider changing your username before you get too invested in your current one. Although you are allowed to use just about any name, many Wikipedians encourage others to use real names. I would suggest that you do this. I can certainly understand that you might be uncomfortable using your real name online, but, in this case, I recommend that you choose an alias that resembles a real name. For instance, my name is Nat Krause, but I could just as well have a username such as "Eli Miller" or "Abe Sokolov". If you are choosing a pseudonym, please do not use the names of famous people or fictional characters. An obscure literary reference is probably all right. As always, please avoid anything that could be considered offensive or inappropriate. Note that, on Wikipedia, you can use spaces and capital letters; for instance, "T. K. Truong" is possible, rather than simply "tktruong". I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 08:34, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind welcome. I have actually been visiting Wikipedia for many years, but have only recently registered. As for changing my username, I'll take it into consideration.--Nydas 17:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 21:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your vigilance on Income tax in the United States

Dear editor: Thanks for pointing out the problems in the article on "Income tax in the United States." The problem apparently resulted from a series of edits including an enormous text dump by a new user on 7 May 2006 -- an apparent copyright violation as well as violations of Verfiability and Neutral Point of View. The new user even identified his text dump as a "research report" or words to that effect. I reverted the edits. On a regular basis, Wikipedia gets very similar material dumped into various articles on taxation. Thanks for your vigilance. Yours, Famspear 18:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem, glad to help.--Nydas 19:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverend John Thomson

Hi Nydas, thanks for your message about the Rev. It's funny how these things work sometimes, but when I arrived at the Jock Tamson's Bairns AfD page, what stood out for me was all the great research you had done, flagging up the Rev in the process ... an article crying out to be created. As you say, all's well that ends well, and another jigsaw piece is placed. There's plenty more material in there to be exploited such as the link to curling, and the Jock Tamson's Bairns article needs to be expanded with more information on the source, the link to the Rev and cross references. Keep up the good work. --Cactus.man ✍ 19:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Nydas, just saw your "All's well that ends well" thoughts on Cactus Man's page and wanted to agree. It's amazing how these AfD discussions can lead to more research and general sharpening up of people's thoughts on "messy" topics. If I ever have the courage to nominate something for the AfD page, I'll have to remember it's worth doing whether or not people agree with me. And the article on JT is indeed a bonus. --HJMG 08:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

Hi Nydas, long story, see here. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Black Book (novel)

Good work! --Guinnog 19:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I re-read it, so I thought I'd give it a go. The number of plot points and supporting characters is... formidable. --Nydas 19:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

And even more good work! I changed the link away from SNP; I don't think that was alleged in the book! --Guinnog 17:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Vanderhyde says "This was in the 1950s, an offshoot of the National Party." - I suppose this might be open to interpretation. In Mortal Causes, however, it is distinctly described as a splinter group of the SNP in chapter 10. --Nydas 19:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Then I do stand corrected; although the SNP of the 50s was a lot different from todays one I think! If it's referenced as you say in the book, I have no problem with you reinserting it. Actually, SoS has a lot more links with Ulster Loyalists, doesn't it? Or am I getting my books mixed up? --Guinnog 19:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It does seem odd that a group of extreme Scottish nationalists would have links with Loyalists. After rereading both books, however, it's my opinion that SaS wanted to create a 'Greater Scotland' including Ulster - Dalriada. Although this is far from verifiable and certainly won't go into the articles.--Nydas 19:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey Nydas

I see you've decided to start being rude. OK, your choice. It'll be fun. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 14:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

For the dispute, see Talk:Scottish people ('The extreme south-east'). --Nydas 14:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your coment

Your coment was struck through as It added no value to the discussion and did not answer any direct question. This Is not a place to try and be funny It Is a serious debate about a page not a comic store.--Lucy-marie 14:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Nominators don't own their deletion discussions. It's as simple as that.--Nydas 14:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not claiming to own the deletions just to keep the crap off the page and maintian a professional tone to the discussions.--Lucy-marie 14:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I will be reporting your behaviour to an admin. It is completely unacceptable to delete comments you don't like. --Nydas 15:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal computer game

Hello, and thanks for your comments at the talk page for Personal computer game. I feel confident that I can deal with all of the issue that you raised, with the exception of the shift from MS DOS to Windows in the nineties, since I've been a Mac user all my life (and was only six or seven at the time).

Would you be able to add some information on the shift to the article? If you can at least put some skeleton information in place, I'd be able to fill it out later - but I'm too inexperienced to work with nothing.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. :) Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 22:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I've moved some information from the "Operating System" section on DOS incompatbilities to the history, but it's now just a very basic note. Would you be able to expand this into something more meaningful? Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 22:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wilcox-McCandlish law

I have restored this article which you nominated for deletion following a reasonable objection raised by the primary author. However I have relisted it at AFD in an attempt to reach a consensus. You may like to give your opinion. Cheers, Yomangani^talk 11:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Again

So, getting right to business: The Metroidvania article.

I've realized, with your own proddings and that of others, that the article did indeed have a lot of OR. While I could argue that many of the things I'd written were indeed true and accurate, in my haste to defend the article I'd forgotten that Wikipedia doesn't necessarily document those things which are true, but those things which are verifiable. While no doubt I could draw from a thousand different sources to eventually cobble together the reputable opinion to support my writing I do realize now that it was 'my' writing.

As such, I've mercilessly trimmed the article. I think it's actually at about one third of the size.

If you've got the time and wouldn't mind, could you possibly go over the article and give me some insight into possible improvements I could make? I would like to see it improve but I also recognize that my job is not to do the research, but to chronicle the research of others.

Thanks, Lankybugger 23:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Replied on Talk:Metroidvania.--Nydas^(Talk) 10:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tamaskan dog - blanking of deletion discussion

FYI ... I expect Blufawn's deletion of the AfD discussion for this article is related to the unnecessary resurrection of the conversation on my talk page. Too bad this user cannot even discern who writes what, and complains to the one who asked a question, rather than the one who offered an explanation. Ugh! I pasted the entire mess on their talk page attempting to clarify what happened. Thanks for listening, and for restoring the AfD discussion. Regards, Keesiewonder 17:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'll keep the AfD on my watchlist, in case Blufawn tries to blank it again.--Nydas^(Talk) 18:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Well, I now see that "someone" has managed to get an administrator to delete the AfD discussion. I have placed this on David.Monniaux's talk page. Keesiewonder 12:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

FYI ... I feel the AfD discussion for this topic should be restored. The topic and the article will more than likely come up again, and we will need the previous AfD discussion as a reference. Much of the nastyness, in my opinion, has come from Blufawn or their IP 80.223.126.199 1) being a new user unfamiliar with the wiki world and 2) a user who is highly emotional (and not necessarily rational) about this rare breed of dog. Yesterday I received inappropriate comments from Blufawn on my talk page about how I should remove idiotic comments that were there. Little did they realize at the time that what they were complaining about was not written by me. Anyway, please restore the AfD text. Thanks for your consideration. Keesiewonder 12:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

04:20, December 17, 2006 David.Monniaux (Talk | contribs) deleted "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamaskan Dog" (protests on m:OTRS about nasty comments)

[edit] OK

OK thanks for leaving a reason why you tagged Fenrir it helps alot now let me explain. The charcheritics (no clue how to spell that) are givin the game (do you have the game?) and affect the game, EX: the third engine decreases the chance of stalls, a very key element to a great dogfighter, and allows VTOL (Verrical Takeoffs and Landings), and makes you faster, another key element to a dogfighter. Those aren't missions they are staments given in the game. So if you would be so kind as to get rid of the tag, thankyou. Ask questions on my talk page please. Thank you and sorry for the spelling mistakes.Sam ov the blue sand 01:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Terse to the point of obfuscation

..totally failing to live up to WP:RS and WP:NEO..

Unrelated note, but the use of these quasi-acronyms is bad juju. Lots of people do it, but it's still bad. If you take the extra few second to write something out (using the piped shortcut) then it's less exclusionary, and neophytes are more able to participate in discusions. Even old hands may not be aware of what it is you're pointing to, and if you spell it out than it's often not even necesary to click the link to see what you're saying. This page probably says it better than I do. - brenneman 10:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of films with similar themes and release dates AfD

Hi, you've expressed an opinion in the deletion discussion of this article. I've recently suggested a compromise in hopes of improving the article while keeping both sides happy, and would appreciate if you could revisit the issue. Thanks. --Wafulz 18:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for your opinion

Hi Nydas, I saw you had contributed to the list of top hat wearers on the Top hat page some time ago, so I think you might be interested in a move to delete a similar list (List of bow tie wearers). That list could be combined with the Bow tie article, but I'm arguing that the list should stay as is. If you have an interest in whether or not that list should stay, please visit the deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bow tie wearers) and throw your two cents in. Noroton 21:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the reply

No apologies needed!Noroton 21:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] That Rare Dog Breed

OMG! I have tried to get an answer from the admin who deleted this whether this article even should have been recreated since it recently went through an AfD. i.e. the difference between recreating the article and a deletion review. I am tempted to nominate it for AfD ... or contact a second admim ... What are your thoughts? Neither you nor I are getting through to Blufawn. Ugh! Keesiewonder ^talk 22:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI Keesiewonder ^talk 22:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

It probably won't do too much harm to let the article stand for a little while, to let more editors have their say. Some of them might be more tactful that me. The most likely outcome is a second AfD, and that will take a week in any case.--Nydas^(Talk) 22:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gen X page

Regarding subject page, I noticed you edited best-selling authors and appreciate that you left a comment. I added that entire section down to the Coupland illustrations about 9 months ago. I feel credible authors are the best way to convey a point to an article, and in fact, this org insists on it. Although there is some variation with definition, some like Foot and Yankelovich, are renowned for their research in this area. Ledboots 16:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Military brat (U.S. subculture)

Thanks for your excellent feedback. I went through and made most of the changes that you suggested... I worked on the captions, but I could use your help on them. I'm not sure if my revisions there really take the captions to the next level. I hope that with my changes that you can support the article.Balloonman 06:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I completely misread one of your criticisms on this article--- it makes much more sense now... but I also responded to your question about the US subculture part--- it essentially boils down to this: To make the article global would be too broad a topic on a subject where there is no literature outside of the U.S. Since no credible research has been done, it is easier to explicitly state that the article deals with US brats...Balloonman 06:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Webcomic notability guidelines

Hi Nydas,

I have created an outline for webcomic notability guidelines, something I want to create and try to establish with together with other editors to help the debates over a large number of webcomic AfD's going on lately.

As I have seen you in the AfD debate over Dueling Analogs, I thought you might be interested in helping on this project.

Thanks for your time and happy editting!
Cheers

JackSparrow Ninja 21:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: David FA

Thanks for your comments on the David FAC. Do you have any opinions on the suggestion that the Davidian Revolution section should be cut? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

As I said on the FAC, cut it a bit, but cut the military/feudal stuff more.--Nydas^(Talk) 22:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Trampformers

Hi Nydas: Thanks for pointing out the problems on The Trampformers article. I've tried to re-write it more neutrally and to verify the statements made (also to justify its existence!). We're new to Wikipedia so just getting used to the spec. Any further advice would be appreciated. Hope it's a bit better now! Cheers...Pete aka Lord Cutglass

The best advice I can give is to not act too surprised if it gets deleted. Unsigned bands are rarely notable. Also, the 'objective of this article' isn't really appropriate; see Wikipedia:Avoid self-references.--Nydas^(Talk) 10:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

OK Nydas, understood. I've just added a 'References' section to try to prove the information sources. Hopefully I've done this right but if you have time I'd appreciate your advice and / or editing help with the referencing; for example I'm not sure if a citation template is required? I've had a read of 'avoid self-references' as you suggested and got rid of 'Objective of this Article' (changed it to 'Summary' and attempted to outline notability without self-referencing the article.) Thanks for the quick feedback and the clear advice.Lord Cutglass

There's still some self-reference in the article. Also try reducing the repetition of dates etc in the references section.--Nydas^(Talk) 16:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Nydas. OK, (I think) I've got rid of that extra self-referencing paragraph I missed before and reduced the References section so there's only one entry per date. It reads much better when it's pared down I can see that now. I had a bit of trouble working out what's required for the image 'fair use rationale', if you get a chance I'd appreciate if you could please check it's ok or suggest/edit what's wrong. Cheers Lord Cutglass 10:29, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nydas, I thought I'd try and catch you in the rosy midst of your post-Barnstar glow! I'd also agree you've done a great job of highlighting all the inane bollox in The Trampformers. Thanks for your patience with my general Wiki-incompetence. Any chance now the detritus has been suitable expunged/knocked into some kinda reasonable shape you might please consider removing the referencing and notability templates linked/transcluded to the article? I've done me very best to do what you say! Cheers Lord Cutglass 07:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

No-one owns articles or any part of them on Wikipedia, so if you think that the templates should go, you can remove them.--Nydas^(Talk) 09:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks, Nydas. I'm beginning to see how it works now! I've raised these issues on the article's talk page. So I'll wait for a while to see if there's any feedback. Cheers Lord Cutglass 10:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boss (video games)

		The Editor's Barnstar
		In deleting vast swaths of crap from the boss article, you have officially made the internet suck less. This is a Good Thing. Thus, I award you the Editor's Barnstar in the hopes of convincing you to do it again if necessary. Happy deletionating =) ♠PMC♠ 09:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Woo hoo, my first barnstar! Many thanks :) --Nydas^(Talk) 21:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Key thinkers in classical liberalism and claimed "banned user."

Hello. I noticed you'd like to see that article deleted. I am "All Male Action" and it is not true that I am a banned user. I was simply required to change my username because a user "172" thought it was obscene or something. User 172 also put the "Sockpuppet" thing on my userpage there unilaterally. It was never proven that I was a sockpuppet of anyone, and I'm not. Look on the userpage there. It says "Your username has been blocked indefinitely because it may be rude or inflammatory, unnecessarily long/confusing, too similar to an existing user, contains the name of an organization or website, or is otherwise inappropriate (see our blocking and username policies for more information). You are encouraged to create a new account and contribute to Wikipedia under a more appropriate username. Wikipedia:Username provides guidance on selecting an appropriate username. You may also edit Wikipedia without creating an account." So you see I'm not a banned user. It's just that username that was banned. Then user 172 put a tag up claiming I was a sockpuppet of an "RJII" which is simply a lie. In regards to the article, I just moved that material out of the classical liberalism article because it was making it too long and messy. No one objected at all and I put a request up for objections before I did it. The name of the article is the same name as the section that was removed. If you don't like "Key thinkers" then I guess change it simply to "Thinkers.." Simply False 16:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm doubtful; new users are seldom familiar enough with Wikipedia to add elaborate references, complete with a misleading edit summary. However, it is true that being created by a banned user isn't a good reason to delete an article. I'll remove the prod, but possibly list it on AfD later.--Nydas^(Talk) 18:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't write any of that article. I simply moved the section over to create the article. I didn't even write any of the material in that section when it existed in the classical liberalism article. Why are you calling the edit summary for the edit you referenced in the classical liberalism article misleading? All it was was organizing the sentences better. I simply moving one sentence before another without even changing the content. I do know how how to put references in though and have put in "elaborate references." It's very simple. Monkey see, monkey do. Simply False 18:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

If you get the article deleted it will be recreated again in time because people will start listing classical liberals and describing their ideas and it will make the classical liberalism article too long and will have to be moved again. I don't understand why you would want it deleted. Simply False 18:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You're right, I misread the changes page. My apologies. As for wanting to delete the article, we already have articles on all the thinkers, and trying to tie limp descriptions of them together under the bitterly contested grouping of 'classical liberal' strikes me as totally unencyclopedic.--Nydas^(Talk) 18:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose Atmosphere as this week's WP:ACID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Atmosphere was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Universities and Anti-Semitism

Hi. Just a note to say that whilst you and I disagree on the validity of the JFNP source, I am sure we are both trying to produce a good article. I'm pretty sure that you will hold to your position as I will to mine. See you around, doubtless. LessHeard vanU 12:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iran War

I could use some help here. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iranian-American War--Lee1863 15:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I tend to think that there may be good reasons to avoid general speculation in an encyclopedia. My 'weak keep' in the Sino-American war AfD has only becomer weaker since then.--Nydas^(Talk) 20:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Skyblazer AfD

Hey, thanks for the keep vote. Why would you define Skyblazer as a "weak flop?" It may have been a fairly obscure game but the reviews in the gamefaqs link were generally positive. Besides the complete textual makeover I need to deal with how saw I got flagged for no copyright on the picture--I asked for permission from the website I got it from and they said yes, though. I'll get to that once I deal with everything else I need to do in real life. --Thermal0xidizer

It's not a bad game, but as far as I know, it never sold a great deal. Like the rest of Sony's 16-bit stuff, really.--Nydas^(Talk) 20:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)