So; here's where you can whine (oops - I meant discuss) about what I'm doing here ;-)

Yes, well, what are you doing here ? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gokkun&diff=next&oldid=45615330 DanielDemaret 13:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm confused - the comparison implies I removed stuff - I did NOT do anything but add my comment - if I'd wanted to pull stuff off it would be the pic, not someone's argument for keeping it. Is there a tech authority here who can look into this?Bridesmill 13:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right, as I said on the page, it was just a software glitch. It happened to me once and had me listed as doing various vandalisms. I reported it to the bug people but I don't think that you should - it's just a glitch, I guess, that comes up now and again, it's probably over by now. Herostratus 21:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. The Kalendar Koffee House page probably isn't a speedy candidate since the duplicate has gone up on AFD. The user has been spamming and trying to use the 'pedia for advertising for a couple of weeks - you seem to have seen the Coffeehouse page already - and though the 'company' page could probably be construed as a speedy candidate itself (a different version was already speedied), I wanted to make sure that there was a consensus behind deleting in the hope of preventing further reposting. There is a means for posting similar pages under a single AFD vote, which I would've tried to do had I known of the duplicate at the time the first went up. Given that it's been a couple of days, though, I'd rather put it up for a separate vote just to be on the safe side. --DMG413 16:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • Deleting Kalendar from the coffee house category is wrong. To claim that Kalendar is advertising is also incorrect.

The Kalendar article lists date of opening and location with interior photo. The so called "vanity" aspects have been removed from the article. Kalendar may not be as "noteable" as the larger chains, but that should not preclude it from listing in the coffee house category. To call this article spam would be to call all listings in this category spam. The previous AFD article was edited down to be considered for inclusion - tis all. No harm intended. This on the other hand is the opening paragraphs of the Starbucks listing. I imagine that all listings in this category are similar to this.

Starbucks NASDAQ: SBUX (SEHK: 4337), is a large multinational chain of coffee shops, often serving pastries, popular in the US especially among students and young urban professionals. The corporate headquarters are in Seattle, Washington. The company was in part named after Starbuck, a character in Moby-Dick, and its insignia is a stylized cartoon Siren. According to the company's fact sheet, as of February 2006, Starbucks had 6,216 company-operated outlets worldwide: 5,028 of them in the United States and 1,188 in other countries and U.S. territories. In addition, the company has 4,585 joint-venture and licensed outlets, 2,633 of them in the United States and 1,952 in other countries and U.S. territories.

By definition most of the listings in the coffee house category are "non-notable". In fact the majority of the listings are not known outside the constituency where they are established. Being "non-notable" has always been a difficult area for editors. In this instance for example, the band Pursuit of Happiness wrote a song and video about Kalendar (1996 Kalendar/Gretzky Rocks/In Praise Of (T.W.A.-The World's Address). This by definition makes Kalendar a noteable entity by Wikipedia standards see Wikipedia:Notability "A topic has notability if it is known outside of a narrow interest group or constituency, or should be because of its particular importance or impact". EllisCHanna 04:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• Unfortunately, now the articles are BAI - one liners only. Bridesmill can read, and yes, there are other coffeshops out there that prob don't belong. Starbucks & Tim's *& Cafe du monde etc are notable - Kalendar is not. The fact that the user who put it up does nothing significant on Wiki besides promote the business they own makles it in Wiki's view & mine spam & self-promotion. One of the reasons Bridesmill Studio doesn't have a page (although hopefully someone will put it up ;-)I'm an inclusionist, but I cannot stand disengenuous behaviour. Bridesmill 04:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The image should stay in the article. There is not another interior photo of a "French Style Cafe" in the article, therefore this a highly relevant image. Claiming that the image is vanity/spam/corp is nonsense and an invalid arguement. The image adheres to WP:NPOV standards. Separately the Kalendar Koffee House article has been RFD. I agreed with the arguement made regarding Chains, and have removed the listing on the Coffee House Chains page. The RFD outcome should not reflect on this page. As editors you must not allow your emotions to influence your choices. If you allow the image to be removed then must reflect on the reasons why. None of the reason given for removal of the image are sound or reasonable ones.EllisCHanna 12:44, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• As Ellis' partner in Kalendar I wanted to add my part to this discussion. I completely understand the arguements made for the references and articles in the coffee house chains page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalendar Koffee House. I can see how Wikipedia could become full of advertising style information weakening the references made available in this valuable living encycodedia. I expressed concerns to my partner about that section from the start. But I also saw the possibility of a fit because ultimately it is a section listing businesses with their styles and descriptions. Now the pages that offer descriptions of cafes and coffee houses have excellent written references describing very accurately in words what these are. But the pictures are obviously less effective. It was this section that we were first drawn to. Each section, with the exception of section 2, has one or two picture references as I have reviewed:

Intro Coffee House - One photo simple image reference. 1. History - two great reference images

2. Contemporary coffeehouses -no images as references (actually I think a Starbucks image would work well here - being an icon of the coffee movement of the 21 century- creating a whole new direction in coffeehouses again)

3. Contemporary cafés

The article on contemporary cafes is then highlighted with one image identified as: "A coffee shop in Ireland. There is no outside seating due to unsuitable weather." I assume this was used originally due to lack of any usable cafe images. The photograph could be depicting a bike repair shop or pub or any number of retail stores from its appearance, and lends no further descriptive relevance to this section. We are just suggesting, that as it appears, each catagory under Coffee Houses has a picture reference (with the acception of section 2), the triptych we have added offers a much stronger contibution to the contemporary cafe article, versus the ubiquitous corner coffee sandwich joint that appears to be represented (I appologize if this is actually a famous Irish quirky cafe that I do not know about.)

4. Cannabis coffee shops. The Bull Dog image is perfect. This is very well known coffee house for this section.

I hope this helps define our arguement for keeping this image in this section.I do not see how the Kalendar image is seen as any more or less of an advertising image than any others. For ultimately, we do believe it enhances the article. It was accepted at one point (it had been placed in a picture box like all the others). We hope this inclusion can be made again. Cher-anne Nash, Kalendar, April 1/06 9:00am EllisCHanna 14:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Coffeehouse"

Hi! I removed the link because the paragraph in Canadian Forces discusses the historical Army, Navy and Air Force. Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force are about the historical institutions. But yeah, there is a "history" section in Canadian Forces Land Force Command so the link is useful even though LFC isn't the pre-1968 Army that the paragraph means.

The editor who added the link, 72.137.243.234 (talk | contribs), has a long history of creating wikilinks that look ok on the outside but are usually somehow wrong. My favorite is linking a mention of Great War in Dinobots — I'm pretty sure it's a different "Great War" than what the link suggests; I don't think the Transformers participated in WWI :-) I don't know if he does it on purpose or by accident but I review his linkings very critically... — Weregerbil 16:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For your comments on Eastern Front (World War II). I know it's a contentious issue and I appreciate your input. As for SuperDeng, he was blocked for 72 hours about a month ago for personal attacks. I'm now blocking him for a week as he's gotten worse, not better. Thanks again. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 10:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your idea is an excellent one. As I've tried to tell the people involved before, you can't nail down the exact number of deaths in any war, especially World War II. So I think a range would be best. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 13:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking to the wrong user. I was fixing a link only. I had no idea myself that Canadian forces can or cannot purchase private weapons.--Asams10 22:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for your input on the Gold Coast, Queensland article, I hope it helps. Cheers Triki-wiki 23:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)Triki-wiki[reply]

I hate pestering people's talk pages about AFD votes (or votes at all... it's very bad form really) but I've just done a huge amount of work on this article, and it is probably 80% different from when you voted. I have found a large number of English language references, and I have used <cite> so any reader or editor can identify where each individual statement in the article came from. That ought to deal with WP:V and WP:RS. As for notability, you can make your own decision: the relevant guideline says "Usually, books with an ISBN-number and/or availability in a couple dozen of libraries and/or a Project Gutenberg type website, and with a notability above that of an average cookbook or programmers manual would qualify". If you rank this as below an average cookbook, I'm not going to argue with you :) TheGrappler 04:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your fairness re Demiurge, who is a known censor (domestic terrorism in the US, Ante Pavelic, Eamon de Valera, Irish-Scots, etc., etc.).

The truth re de Valera's government during WWII and refugees is as follows (please see my last edit, which undoubtedly has already been rv, for citations):

Virtually no refugees allowed into Eire. De Valera's government even rejected a Vatican request that several hundred scientists who had "converted" to Christianity be allowed to enter Eire. It is approximated that 30 Jews found haven in Eire, and that number only due to human trafficking. This did not prevent Roman Catholic Irish-American politicians from awarding the Free State $133,000,000 USD in Marshall Plan monies (mostly in the form of low-interest loans which were never repaid).

Thanks!! Brandubh Blathmac 09:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see comment on your talk page - I wasn't amused Bridesmill 02:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bridesmill - I am sorry to have disappointed you earlier. I was not being "disingenuous"; I was genuinely grateful to have what I thought was an ally against a clear collusive effort by several individuals (all from Ireland) to pre-emptively censor me and to clearly be acting in collusion using boilerplate nonsense to preemptively rv anything I wrote. If I had written the Declaration of Independence Demiurge would label it "sockpuppetry". And I am not a Marshall Plan expert but according to the Marshall Plan wikipage the Plan was "to rebuild Europe".

So why would a neutral country which suffered no damage during the war, and which worse yet, had allowed the German embassy (in violation of the Free State's own neutrality) to possess potentially anti-Allied communications equipment until 1943(!!), and which, worse still, refused to accept more than a handful of refugees during the entire Holocaust, have been eligible for $133,000,000 worth of Marshall Plan loans, which it could never afford to repay, w/o friendly congressmen as I suggested?? I guess you know better.

I would like to have added (since the page is protected) to Eamon de Valera's page re "characteristics of Irish neutrality":

• Unwillingness to permit Jewish refugees from the Holocaust into Éire during or after the war (see [[1]],

[[2]]).

At the "first Irish holocaust memorial day on 26th January 2003", Justice Minister Michael McDowell apologized for "a culture of muted antisemitism in Ireland which discouraged immigration by Europe's shattered Jews. He said that "at an official level the Irish state was at best coldly polite and behind closed doors antipathetic, hostile and unfeeling toward the Jews."" ([[3]].)

Respectfully submitted.

Brandubh Blathmac

I now feel a bit guilty about putting in the RFC. Sorry about the flamewar. However, In a way I'm glad to see that it's not just me, but anyone who contradicts some view of his.

I would like to thank you for responding. The proposed solution is certainly not what I wanted, but it seems like a good compromise that says what both parties are asserting in a neutral way.

JASpencer 15:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 03:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accuse me of being un-Canadian if you wish, but don't take away my newly acquired rights to Canadian health insurance! I haven't contacted the Canadian consulate here yet, but I will ... any day now! Zora 20:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I agreed with what you said. My last edit was referring to the other editor who implied that the child-sacrifice allegation is something that we have to prove before mentioning in the article. Which is blatantly not how things work. Miskin 03:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi, thanks for your comment at Talk:East Sea. would you mind commenting on the content of the disambiguation page, namely whether "east sea" should be described as a "south korea's local name" or should be treated as an english name, per citations? thanks. Appleby 04:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Leyman (talk · contribs) is a sneaky vandal and wont stop changeing items if you ask him. He has changed many items in many articles without stateing sources. Often he gets reverted by others but he still keeps on chageing so if you want his to stop then go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_investigation and sign the post, you need to scroll down some. (Deng 15:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

"If you would like, I can put the Janes numbers down & cite them" --> Great :D (Deng 16:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Carthage got blocked. I'm trying to get some sort of "community consensus" on the issue (even if it doesn't agree with me), so the edit war can stop, and we can get a Sysop to unlock the page and take some action against the "culprit", whoever that may be, if they continue the edit war. Care to add your 2 cents? - Vedexent 15:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) I'm thinking requesting that when the protection is removed it still be semi-protected. That way anyone can edit it, if they have a user account - and are subject to the same blocks as everyone else. Part of this "edit war" is made harder by the fact that Marduck could have been banned for violating 3RR and just come back under a different IP - Vedexent 15:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes! Don't forget to vote! :D - Vedexent 15:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Sorry - it's on the talk page. Hmm... I'm unilingual, so I cannot help. But that's a good source. Someone should add that echo template thingy on the talk page :) - Vedexent 16:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]