Cazza411

Welcome

Hi Cazza411! Welcome to Wikipedia!

Be bold in editing pages and don't let others scare you off! To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp.

Here are some links that you might find useful: Wikipedia:How to edit a page Tutorial the sandbox, the place where you can experiment Wikipedia:Where to ask a question Wikipedia:Five pillars our Manual of Style

You can contribute in many ways: write an article fight vandalism be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome Improve illustrations and upload new images perform maintenance tasks Become a member of a project that interests you

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. If you need help, you can drop a note on my talk page or use Wikipedia:New contributors' help page. You can also type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia! - KrakatoaKatie 12:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio Monash

Hello – thanks for the message. The majority of the editors who wanted to keep the article in any form felt the article should be merged with the university's article. You and one anonymous IP editor were the only ones who thought the article should be kept on its own.

If you disagree with the result of a deletion discussion, you can take your case to deletion review. Thanks - KrakatoaKatie 12:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I closed the DRV because Coren who opened it had nothing to say. Are you arguing that you want the article deleted? If you are opposing the merge, that's an editorial decision and not for Deletion review to address. Please leave your messages on the bottom of my talk page so I don't miss them. Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

On biting

Pot? Meet kettle. At any rate, if you require help with the merge, just ask and I will gladly give you a hand. If all you are interested in is conflict, you will find little pleasure in my refusing to let myself be goaded. (Posted to both my and your talk page since I'm not certain which you expect to find the response on.) Coren 16:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Not interested in entering into a flame war with you. Additionally, since I did not write the page and have no personal vested interest in it, I am not moving the page myself. I simply disagree with the decision that it should be merged, and disagree with the manner in which the argument was held, particularly your comments and the way in which you seem to deliberately take things out of context to suit yourself. I've also been following a lot of arguments you have made on many other pages and you constantly make abusive references to people arguing with you, especially new people. I had planned to be a contributor to wikipedia, and really think I could have made a valuable contribution to the editing of scientific articles, but I don't want to deal with people like you. I'm leaving.Cazza411 16:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Cazza, don't leave! I read some of your arguments, you're one smart cookie. Don't worry about jerks like Coren. I'm new too. Not really, I just changed my user name because I had someone threatening me. But dont worry there are not too many people like Coren around. He's not very smart, smart people like you threaten him. Just ignore him. Manic4wiki 16:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you should allow one bad experience to colour your entire view of what wikipedia is. It's your decision but why not give it a while longer? Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

You are taking this much too personally. The article simply does not meet the contents guidelines. The fact that only you (with your first edits) and a single anonymous editor whose sole edit in the past 5 months is in that AfD just happen to be the only ones who contested the AfD may not be proof that your are sock/meatpuppets of each other (although you have to admit this looks immensely fishy), but certainly are not enough to invalidate the concensus.

Your contributions are welcome, but you have to remember that when an article is put up for deletion (or is violently edited) that you have a personal interest in one tends to get emotionally involved and that may taint your objectivity. Read over the guidelines and take a step back. Radio Monash may be locally important, and a significant note in the history of the University, but is just not notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia article of its own.

If you establish consensus with the editor of Monash University that the topic should be spun off to a separate article, and you collect sufficient independent coverage from reliable sources, then the article has a shot. In that case, I'd even gladly help you with the rewrite.

You seem to think that I've got some bone to pick against that radio station. I don't. I live on the other side of the planet. I just happened to catch an article while on new page patrol that lied outside the contents guidelines.

I'm not begging you to stay. But I'm suggesting that your reaction might be overly emotional and that you got too personally involved. Think it over with a cool head. Coren 17:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Coren is absolutely right – you're taking this _much_ too personally, and it isn't personal at all. I live on the other side of the planet too and I never heard of this radio station before today, so there's really no way I could have formulated an opinion about it, good or bad. It's simply one article in a sea of millions of articles.

It's natural to be interested in an article on a subject about which you're knowledgeable or passionate, but that doesn't mean you can have absolute control over that article or any other. Nobody owns _anything_ here. This is a website, for goodness sakes, and becoming angry or upset about a website isn't good. Perhaps a cup of tea and a bedtime story about Spiderman would help. Don't take this place so seriously.

You seem like a bright guy and you have a lot to offer Wikipedia. I'm sorry if you feel you can't contribute without a Radio Monash article, and I wish you would reconsider after taking some time to think about it, but the Radio Monash article will go where it's going, with or without you. Good luck - KrakatoaKatie 22:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I do not consider a Radio Monash article necessary to my involvement with wikipedia, it was simply the first article I came across that I was interested enough in to comment on. And I found that an internet search did bring up some independently verifiable information in the form of a news article, which indicated this organisation was the very first student radio station in Australia to broadcast solely online. On that basis alone I feel it is sufficient for the page to warrant remaining separate from Monash University. Unfortunately, I weighed into the debate too late, and it was closed before I could sufficiently discuss this point (and was probably deliberately ignored by Coren, but that is another matter altogether. But most importantly, my desire to have nothing to do with wikipedia anymore is not based on the argument itself (which I am not taking personally, after all it is a debate and my only gripe with it is that I feel it was closed too soon, there was more to say on the matter), rather my problem is with Coren, who finds it acceptable to make personal attacks on people and defaming them. And his behaviour seems to be an ongoing problem, I actively hunted down some of the article discussion he has been involved in and his constant flaming of wikipedians is a pattern he needs to stop.Cazza411 22:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Much as I think Coren is a dickhead, I've actually had a look into radio monash and I suspect you of being the person who created the site. I also suspect you of trying to steal someone's identity.Manic4wiki 14:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)