User talk:Auntof6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is a Wikipedia user page.

This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at

Hello[change source]

Davey2010 is violating the 3RR on Harriet Tubman, and then he edited my userpage.

QD[change source]

"Created by a sock" is a valid reason for speedy deletion especially when it's a userpage. –Davey2010Talk 02:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

To avoid edit warring over it I've now changed it to G3 however I would like to know how "created by a sock" is not in any way, shape or form a valid reason for speedy deletion ?, I genuinely am lost on that, Forgot to add but it would've been more helpful if you speedy deleted it under the "correct" criterion instead of declining it altogether thus allowing the vandalism to still stay, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 02:11, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
"Created by a sock" is not one of the QD criteria defined at Wikipedia:Deletion policy. For QDs, we are required to stick strictly to those options. I don't see the vandalism, either, especially since it's a user page. That's why I didn't pick another option. However, I will leave it for another admin to evaluate. By the way, please watch your language, even in edit summaries. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, You don't need to follow QD by the word - Common sense is all that's needed and it doesn't hurt to be lenient with how you QD things, Not going to lie I am perplexed with how you don't see "[Editor] LOVES THE FUERDAI VANDAL ON WHEELS." as vandalism but we all see things differently :)...., Yep sorry for that immediately regretted that soon after, Thanks for replying, –Davey2010Talk 02:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes, we actually do need to follow QD by the word. If a situation doesn't exactly fit one of the options, we don't use QD. That's not to say you can't leave a note at WP:AN to ask for a non-QD, non-RfD delete. But I really don't see the vandalism there. Maybe it's a cultural reference I'm not familiar with, or a slang term I don't know. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:47, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
And by the way, we don't automatically delete things just because they were created by a sock. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry but you don't, If someone QDs something under a custom rationale than you should honour that not IMHO be awkward over it - We're not the Army and no one's going to be kicked off the project over QDs. But I shouldn't have to go to AN for something that is obvious vandalism, The sock is known as the "Furdai sock" because he apparently loves the word so much, He's repeatedly been blocked on EN hence how I knew he was a sock, Just touching on the custom rationale for a second - If you or QD don't honour custom rationales then that option should be removed from Twinkle (if possible) but I guess that's another discussion for another day really, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 02:55, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Rfd is for those things that don't meet QD. QD is a very strict list of quick delete options that are essentially guaranteed to pass an Rfd basically. If it is a reason other than those it needs to go to Rfd. The custom option in twinkle is just to have a custom wording, not a custom reason if that makes sense. -DJSasso (talk) 18:09, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Maybe I'm not getting it but I just don't see why it needs to be so strict but then again in all fairness - Different project = Different rules, That does make sense but I've never known that hence why I was confused and frustrated above - Anyone would take "custom rationale" to be "a different reason" not "different wording" if that makes sense, Sorry I'm not arguing :),
Auntof6 - Apologies if I came off harsh or angry with you, You're a volunteer just like the rest of us so I shouldn't of been so angry, I wasn't so much angry with you I was more angry with the policy and policies we have but yeah I'm sorry for the bashing, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:21, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Not really sure you will find it any less strict on other projects. is even more strict. They just have had reason to create more options than we have here since our Rfd doesn't get as overburdened as theirs does. -DJSasso (talk) 18:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

deleted Category pages[change source]

You have deleted some Category pages as having "with too few entries" but did this in a way that is not done elsewhere. For example... you did not warn me, nor give me time to add more. Tahc (talk) 03:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

In general, a new category should be populated with at least three entries right away. I believe the categories had existed for a few hours when I deleted them. I don't usually delete them if they were just created. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

adding notices to movie articles[change source]

Plot notices were recently added to Fifty Shades Freed and Lovelace saying the plot was overly detailed or too long. What's up with that? Angela Maureen (talk) 17:52, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

The plot description shouldn't be the bulk of the article. On both those pages, the plot description is very long compared to the total size of the article. The enwiki articles have more other information to balance that out. It might help to consider that the encyclopedic value of an article about a movie is in things other than the plot. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

help me pls[change source]

davey2010 is harrasing me on Enwikipedia.

Microsoft Windows 11[change source]

I just heard that Microsoft Windows 11 is coming out in January 6, 2020.

IP's and Webhosts[change source]

About the IP at WP:VIP, I went to the WHOIS page for it, then searched in Google the company that hosts it. In this case, it's NetShop, a webhosting service. See their "about us" page. Vermont (talk)

Actually, it seems to be related to NetShop, but more directly to HostRoyale Technologies. Vermont (talk) 00:36, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Infobox:stadium[change source]

Hi, Just to let you know you broke the syntax at Template:Infobox stadium (The tenants said "<nowki>{{{Acreage}}}</nowiki> instead of the correct stuff), Just wanted to let you know incase your edits were meant to fix something else entirely, Many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

@Davey2010: It was meant to fix the fact that the data29 parameter was specified twice. Your change put back the duplicate, so that needs to be fixed some other way. Maybe the second data29 item (the one for tenants) should be data27 instead? In any case, the two items for acreage should have the same number, which they don't now. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:19, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Ah sorry, I hadn't spotted the duplicates, I've changed it to 27 and the error's returned, If it helps you can view the problem at City of Manchester Stadium to see what I mean, Realistically do we need the acreage option I mean is that simple anyway ?, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:24, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I don't see an error there now: can you be more specific as to what I'm looking for? --Auntof6 (talk) 21:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry try now, –Davey2010Talk 21:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 (change conflict)  The template appears to have been created with this duplicate and I've reinstated the duplicate assuming it was a different code - Do we know if the duplicate thing has actually caused issues ?, If it does/has then would it be a better idea to move "Infobox Stadium" to "Infobox Venue", Copy all from EN and then essentially use one infobox for stadiums and venues like they do with EN ? .... –Davey2010Talk 21:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I imagine the duplicate would cause problems only if the involved parameters were used. I doubt I checked all uses of the template to see if they were: I was probably just trying to clear the duplicate parameter maintenance category (but that was three years ago, so I might be wrong).
As far as switching to the venue template, I'd get at least a little consensus on that, if only to give people a heads-up. It looks like the parameters aren't the same, so articles that use the stadium template would probably need to be changed one way or another. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh right, Well I'll take a look over the next week and see if it is causing issues - It has to be a small minor fix surely?, Ofcourse if push comes to shove then I'll get consensus beforehand but I'll try fixing first ... Where there's a will there's a way :),
Many thanks for your help with this and sorry for the big red number you probably recieved :(, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 22:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi again, The acreage infobox parameter here is also a parameter on the EN venue template however this option doesn't seem to be used at all - I've checked 15 random articles spanning across 3 pages and ranging from stadiums, fields, centers etc - None have this parameter at all .... so it would be a good idea to simply ignore the issue ?, The duplicate issue doesn't appear to affect the tenants section or any other part of the infobox, Many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:34, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Forgot to say even tho "acreage" is the coding here it's not actually in the template document itself (IE it doesn't say "| acreage = ") .... So as it's not being offered as a parameter there shouldn't be any problems - Problems could only occur if someone adds that above parameter to an infobox but judging by the lack of use on EN and the fact it's not in the doc here I'd say chances of that happening would be very slim, Sorry to bother you I'll leave you in peace now lol, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:40, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
@Davey2010: I think I've got it working, although it seems to require the acreage parameter to be specified, even if you just leave it blank. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:51, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Auntof6, Ah brilliant but there's only one problem - It's now broken on all article infoboxes that don't have this parameter, I don't want to revert or remove that parameter (and it's coding) so I'll leave that up to you, At present 200 articles are using the template if that helps :), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 13:15, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Yikes! i should have thought of that. OK, in a little while I'll go through all the articles with AWB and fix them. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Haha no worries :), Okie dokie many thanks for your help with this pain of an infobox :), Have a great weekend! :), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:07, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Just wanted to pop by to say many thanks for fixing the infobox, That's it I'll bugger off now :), Have a great Sunday. –Davey2010Talk 22:59, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Foods and Drinks cat[change source]

Hello Auntof6, I was populating another cat taking Category:American food as an example. But I found out that both drinks and foods were included there. Can we put both in same cat or we shouldn't mix them up?-BRP ever 15:05, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

JESC[change source]

Hi, Can you please restore those redirects as I was going to create the articles in due course, At the time of creating them I didn't know which article existed and what didn't so decided to create them all but as I said by this week tops all JESC articles will be done, I'll no doubt forget to redo them hence why I kinda want them restored now out of the way,

The chances of someone actually searching "JESC 2012" is very very slim especially when they've not existed for a good 10 years, Anyway many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:40, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Davey2010: I'd be glad to restore them after the articles are created. There's no need for a redirect whose target doesn't exist. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
I do agree on that but as I said the chances of someone searching would be slim but okie dokie, In all fairness now I've created them there obviously watchlisted so even if I do forget they'll still pop up, ANyway okay thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you![change source]

I'm new here on simple and would like to thank you for following up on the articles I made last night. Content creation on en was not a strong suit of mine, but I'm trying to learn the ropes here. I welcome any and all critiques and criticisms you may have on any of the work I do. I have thick skin so I ask you not be concerned about telling me if I've really messed something up. Again, thank you for the time you put in here and let me know if there's anything I can do to help! Operator873CONNECT 22:56, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

the words is and are[change source]

When I see the words is and are within certain articles, particularly book, music and movie titles, the letter "I" in is and the letter "A" for are are usually capitalized; the "re" in are and the s for is are usually lower case. Examples include When Night Is Falling and Blue Is the Warmest Colour. For what particular reason are is and are not completely lower case, similar to of, and, the and with? Can someone tell me? Angela Maureen (talk) 20:33, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

If you mean on Wikipedia specifically, it's part of Wikipedia's manual of style: see en:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Capital letters for the complete guideline. Note that the rules are different for titles of Wikipedia articles. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:54, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Delete vandalism page[change source]

Please delete the page Tom DeLay. It is vandalism. ⑨n⑨Y⑨a⑨M⑨i⑨ (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Beavis and Butt-Head Do America section marked complex[change source]

How is the plot section to Beavis and Butt-Head Do America complex? What is complex about the section? What are the complex words? Angela Maureen (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Complex words/phrases: menacing, mishaps, hitmen, euphemism, catch an airplane, security (because it means people here, not just the concept), trespassers, burst in, duo, hitting on, cavity search, open fire --Auntof6 (talk) 21:51, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I took out cavity search, open fire and changed menacing to terrorizing, mishaps to accidents, burst in to come in, hitting on to flirting. I also linked euphemism, flirting and security. Angela Maureen (talk) 22:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Is there anything else I should do with the page? Angela Maureen (talk) 06:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Alt Accounts[change source]

Can you revoke talk page access and block my alternate accounts from editing? Thanks--Thegooduser (talk) 13:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) We can't block accounts that haven't done anything wrong. -DJSasso (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Thegooduser: Why would you need your account(s) to be blocked? If you're not going to be active for a while, there's no need to be blocked - you can just not edit during that period and you could even put a notice on your user page that you're inactive.--SkyGazer 512 (talk) 14:44, 19 June 2018 (UTC)