Tdmg

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Tdmg, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! — Lost^(talk) 05:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you've been here quite a while... Belated welcome — Lost^(talk) 05:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Dude! Where yah been?! :P Tdmg 06:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Battery "K" 1st Regiment Michigan Light Artillery

Can you point me to the previous AFD? I'm not seeing a deletion at this namespace. Thanks,--Isotope23 19:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem, it happens... that's why I check the history before I pull the trigger  :)--Isotope23 19:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Leisure centres

No, not spamming, I hope. There are already loads of leisure centre articles in Wikipedia. I'll stop for now if they are deemed un-encyclopaedic. Reference for all these articles: Swansea leisure centres (Sloman 20:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC))

hmm, OK, there seems to be a number of other leisure centre articles that may not be notable, in that case: Eastern Leisure Centre, Fairwater Leisure Centre, Western Leisure Centre, Llanishen Leisure Centre. I'll notify the other chap too. (Sloman 20:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC))

using db-spam

db-spam should be used to mark articles which are blatant advertising for a company. Please do not use it to mark other sorts of articles for speedy deletion. Choose the tag which best describes why the article passes one of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MKoltnow 01:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Crap, I've been using that all day. I'll make sure to use the appropriate template next time. I hope all of this marking I'm doing is helpful... Tdmg 01:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

(discussion transferred from User_Talk:MKoltnow)

Sorry about that, I didn't notice that it was only for advertisements. What template should I use for what would commonly be known as spam, because not all of it falls into to "bio" or "web" categories? Tdmg 01:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Consider reading the criteria for speedy deletion. You can always tag an article with the code directly, such as {{db-g8}} to tag a talk page for an article which does not exist. There are many tags in the right margin of that page you can use. If you choose the wrong rationale for speedy deletion, it may be declined. A useful one is {{db-nn}} for subjects which fail notability.

Lastly, many editors (I am among them) would prefer that you continue a discussion started on your talk page on your talk page so that anyone who wants to follow the discussion later can do so. It's impossible to try to follow any sort of complicated discussion on multiple user talk pages. So I've transferred our discussion here and will watch this page for the time being. MKoltnow 02:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

{{db-g8}} will be very helpful, thanks! I want to do what I can, and I wouldn't want the deletion declined because I didn't classify it correctly. I'm sorry about my faux pau, but I didn't know if you would know I responded unless I posted on your talk page. I've learned a lot today :) Tdmg 02:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Werwolf resistance movement

Why is this article being deleted?, Its about the history of a german militia movement at the end of ww2.

User:Jetwave Dave 4/7/07, 02:55AM

Thanks!

Okay awesome, I knew it needed to be deleted because it was blank, so i read about PROD. I saw on the page that it said something about speedy deletion, but I imagined it was reserved for severe things. I will now read the page on the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you for brining this to my attention. I am learning from my mistakes! :) Dillard421 06:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Ben Swanson

Hi, you tagged Ben Swanson for speedy delete under G4. That only applies to articles that were deleted as an outcome of discussion, not to previously speedy-deleted material. However, you could just put up the article up for deletion under whatever speedy deletion criteria it still falls under. I'll take a closer look at the article and see if it falls under any speedy deletion criteria. Thanks for your speedy deletion tagging :-) Sancho 19:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't see the line This clause does not apply to content that has been moved to user space, to content undeleted as a result of a deletion review, or if the prior deletions were proposed or speedy deletions, although in this last case, the previous speedy criterion, or other speedy deletion criteria, may apply. I would have put it up for a7 if I had known that. I'll be more careful next time, I don't want the page to get through because of some silly loophole. Tdmg 19:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Fore and Aft

It's apparently from a Kipling story, but as a fictional regiment it is indeed too trivial for an article here--I should have taken the time to send it to PROD, which is a good place for the stuff that doesnt fit into speedy. Sorry for putting the work on you. DGG 08:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, it's quite okay. The article was so strange I couldn't even verify that it had anything to do with Kipling. Tdmg 08:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

"The Fore and Aft" Regiment

The deletion comments and selection were begun before I even got halfway through typing the article. I need to look up some data to flesh it out and it is a work in progress. The complaints also seem to be from trolls with no vested interest in the subject. They also seem to have deleted my links to the "Fictional British Regiments" page it is a part of. Hotspur23 13:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Feldmanandpony.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:Feldmanandpony.jpeg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

That was the first image I had ever uploaded and I did not take the time to make myself fully aware of the process necessary. As I said in the description I will honor my promise by proposing the image for deletion. I will come back with a personal photo in a few months so that I will not have to deal with copyright shenanigans. Tdmg 06:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I have contested your motion for a speedy deletion of the article I recently made Passion Fruit (single). Please refer to the talk page. Pinkpineapple 21:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Eric Campbell (baseball player)

Did you even read it? All you have to do is read it to know why it's notable.►Chris Nelson 19:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I read it. That's why I put it up for deletion. He's the #6 prospect in a farm system, which is not notable. I to not believe that we should have an article on every #6 prospect in every farm system ever (especially if it was also for sports other than baseball). He's just not notable enough. tdmg 19:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

So where is the cut-off for top prospects?►Chris Nelson 19:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe that the prospect would have to distinguish themselves as notable. Either by being #1 or #2 in their organization for many years, or having some significant record in the minor leagues. But we'll see what the admins think :) tdmg 19:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Some things:

• He was drafted in the second round, and was the Braves' FIRST selection in 2004.
• He's been a Top 10 prospect in the organization by Baseball America every year.
• In 2005 he was an Appalachian League All-Star, Co-player of the year in the Appalachian League, and Rookie Level Player of the Year.
• Last year he hit .296 with 22 home runs in Single-A.

He's simply a top prospect in the organization, viewed as possibly the heir to third base after Chipper Jones. This is absurd.►Chris Nelson 19:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Many first rounders (even firsts overall) never make it to the Majors. However, he did get a league player of the year award, and I think that makes him notable. If you add that (with a reference) to the article, then I'll remove the speedy deletion tag. Okay? :) tdmg 19:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Confused And In Need Of Zen Myself...

If American zen isn't a band then what exactly is this: They use the self-coined term, the "Only buddhist rock band in America", a tern often associated with them. ? That's why I tagged it as such. >_> -WarthogDemon 19:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I only read the first sentence and skimmed the last two paragraphs, both of which don't mention music. I missed that one sentence. However, I would still change it, because they were trying to establish their notability as a group of people, and not because of their music, which I think falls into bio more than band. However, if I had caught that line I wouldn't have changed it, because it wasn't that important. Sorry for the mix-up, I'll try read more carefully (I'm just such a slow reader that I don't have time to read the whole thing, it would take far too long). Thanks for correcting me :D tdmg 19:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I can get confused myself and goof up even bigger, scroll down my contribs to see my recent "Mocassin Incident." D: -WarthogDemon 19:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Chibi AfD

In regards to your comment on the Chibi AfD vote, perhaps you'd be more interested in the article Super deformed. This is a the Japanese usage, whereas Chibi is an American fan-fiction usage. Chibi in Japanese is actually a derogatory term, comparable to our "midget". I thought they were the same thing from reading the article, but the Anime guys set me straight. JohnnyMrNinja 08:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Crap, now I don't know what to do! I'll have to sit on it and think where it should be merged. Just because Westerners use the word chibi to refer to something that the Japanese wouldn't consider chibi doesn't make it the same thing, it's the just the words we use. Maybe we should still merge it with cuteness in Japan but explain that the terminology doesn't carry over. Still thinking though. tdmg 16:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

My main reason for pointing out super deformed to you is that as the article chibi relates only to American fan-fiction usage (so really only in materials that originate outside of Japan), it wouldn't make sense to use it in reference to Japanese culture. Unfortunately the article is very unclear about that. Super deformed is both English and Japanese usage for a person that is drawn with a head that is 1/3 or more of their height, such as the sign that is featured on the Cuteness in Japanese culture page. Examples of Japanese usage of the term super deformed (or SD) include SD Valis, Super Deformed Gundam, SD Snatcher. I changed my vote to Merge as a lot of the info on chibi is actually about super deformed, and could be useful there. JohnnyMrNinja 19:51, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

omg wtf

It is not an attack page it is true. This vincent kid is a real dick. Now say sorry for all the things you have done. --Suud Vaastereimergraadt 19:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

See WP:SD for the rules, attacks are listed as General Rule #10, and non-notable people are under Articles #7. I'm sorry if this person has done you wrong, and he might be a real dick to you, but Wikipedia is not the place to write libelous material, that's what the rest of the internet is for :D Go for a run or chop some wood to vent your anger, it will feel good :) tdmg 19:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the place to write libelous material. Its in the Human Rights decaration. Look it up..... --Suud Vaastereimergraadt 19:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

(hundreds of line breaks, edited out)

perve

Sorry man. I read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it doesn't say anything about being able to say libelous stuff on Wikipedia. However, it does say stuff like all human beings "should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood" and "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation". Please refrain from vandalizing my page in the future. tdmg 19:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The Bum

No argument there, I'm still fairly new at this and trying to learn which tags are most appropiate to use in different situations. Whatever gets articles like that out of here fastest works for me. Mdlutz 19:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Invitation

Please accept this invite to join the Red Sox WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Red Sox. Simply click here to accept!

University of Massachusetts WikiProject

I noticed that you have attended the University of Massachusetts system. You are welcomed to join the WikiProject University of Massachusetts at your own convenience. If you have any questions for me, I will respond as soon as possible. Your participation is appreciated. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)