User talk:Calton

; Archives
	Archive01 12:21, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC); Archive02 20:23, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC); Archive03 10:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC); Archive04 12:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC); Archive05 02:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC); Archive06 23:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC); Archive07 11:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC); Archive08 07:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC); Archive09 04:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC); Archive10 04:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC);

It's clean-up duty, mopping up after the dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that.

Some ground rules before you leave a message

I am not an admin. I did not delete your page or article, nor did I block you. I may have, at the very most, suggested or urged deletion of pages or articles but I have no power or ability to do so on my own. I'm just an editor.
This also means, of course, I cannot undelete your page/article, nor unblock you. I can, however, offer you a cookie.
If you are here to make an argument dependent on arcane or convoluted interpretations of Wikipedia guidelines or rules, note that Wikipedia is not game of nomic nor a court of law. Adherence to common sense and rational argument trumps ruleslawyering, as far as I'm concerned. I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt, thankyouverymuch.
There is no Rule 4.
Do not assume I'm stupid, especially when arguing for something obviously untrue. I do not respond well to having my intelligence insulted.
Don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams. Do I look like Montel Williams? Do I? NO? Then don't lie to me like I'm Montel Williams.
Especially bogus, hostile, and/or trolling remarks are subject to disemvoweling.
Please post at the bottom of the page and "sign" your posts using the squiggly things (--~~~~).
Please extinguish all cigarettes, as this is a No Smoking page.

Thank you. -- The Management.

Re: copyvio

I'm not sure I completely understand the comment you left on my talk page. I am pretty new to the 'New Page Patrol' and if I see something that looks suspiciously cut and pasted I stick the first few words of the article into Google and see what I come up with - if its positive then I copyvio it no matter what, even if the author claims to have permission from the site in question. Didn't realise there was anything more to it than that--Edchilvers 17:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You win

Congrats. --Jayron32 02:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Frequency Quadrupole

The context?? what do you mean. A radio frequecy quadrupole accelerates electrons. What more do you want? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 04:36, October 19, 2006 (talk • contribs) Mjspe1

How about: "A radio frequency quadrupole accelerates electrons." ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by October 19, 2006 (talk • contribs) Mjspe1

Lobbying in AfDs

Wow guys, wow. I think I get the message. Maybe. Just a little. Thank you Wikipedia Administrators. No more consensus building. Yeesh. Smeelgova 05:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

No more consensus building. That indicates to me, at least, that, no, you didn't actually get the message, but press on regardless. --Calton | Talk 08:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not pressed on or done anything of the sort. And yes, I did get the message. Perhaps I do not understand, can there be consensus building? Please, attempt to be kind and polite, and I will listen and obey. Smeelgova 09:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Perhaps this is what I do not understand: How exactly does one "consensus-build", and not risk being summarily blocked by a Wikipedia Administrator?

You DO see the difference, right? Your "no more consensus building" makes it sound as if you believe that a couple of comments to you suddenly brought the practice to a grinding halt; it is not and never has been the case that actual consensus-building is or has been discouraged.

And as for the "all-knowing" admins -- well, there are about 1,000 admins, so if one blocks you unfairly, there are 999 others you can make appeals to. --Calton | Talk 05:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does one discuss issues with other editors of of like-minded opinion on their talk pages, without the risk of being blocked? How does one make other editors of like-minded opinion aware of issues that are important to them? I have started to add caveats to talk pages of other editors when I post to them, to make sure that watching Administrators know for the future that I am being VERY CAREFUL to avoid "recruiting" or anything of the sort. Thanks for the discussion and advice, but please, try to be more kind in your language to me, I am still relatively new and trying to learn and listen. Yours, Smeelgova 05:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please, at least acknowledge a few things. I stopped the actions in question after being warned by User:Jossi. Everything after that was just Administrators getting upset at my discussion, not further actions. I will try my best to not do this anymore, and will tread very carefully when talking to other editors on their talk pages. I would appreciate it if you try to have a kinder general attitude towards me, I am not playing the martyr, I simply want to have a better editing relationship going on here. Thank you for your time. Yours, Smeelgova 05:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

- Thank you for the advice. I really wish you'd calm down a little bit though and act a little nicer. Let's all agree that this episode is over, I've learned a bit from all of your commentary, and try to edit my POV/contribution patterns in the future. Yours, Smeelgova 06:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy deletion criteria A7

You should realize that criterion A7 refers only to articles that don't explain the importance or significance of their subject at all. Articles that do explain significance or importance may not meet various notability criteria such as WP:BIO, WP:WEB, WP:MUSIC, et cetera, but failing to meet those criteria is not grounds for speedy deletion. You seem to have a bit of confusion on this point. Non-notable subjects shouldn't be deleted speedily if their importance is explained, because then it becomes a matter of opinion and some community involvement is important. Just a friendly reminder. Cheers! Mango juice^talk 17:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smile

Smeelgova has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Let's all try to get along better. Thank you for all of your informative commentary. Hope you are doing well, and have a good weekend. I'll probably be taking a short break because I've got ambulance training and filling in on a volunteer shift. Warmly Yours, Smeelgova 12:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The sideshow

Hey Calton, I've been watching the Gene_poole/Centauri sideshow on Elonka's RfA. I just noticed that Taxman struck Centauri's !vote with the comment, "One per customer please." I don't know much about the situation, but do you think it would be worth listing at RFCU for vote-stacking? It seems a bit ridiculous that this has continued on and I think the links you posted where quite compelling. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 15:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Cruz Yachts - Spam?

Calton,

You marked an article which I have been developing as spam. I disagree!

There is a fine line between promoting a product (spam) and documenting a company which produces products (viable Wikipedia articles).

I began that article yeasterday and have improved it today. However, I had to request reinstatement of my work-in-progress.

I suggest that rather than jumping to the "spam" conclusion in the future, that you post your concerns at the discussion page, and or contact one or more of the major contributors.

I'm sure that you are zealously editing with the best of intentions, but please be respectful of other people's hard work.

Thanks.

Kevin

Tagging Alex Machacek

Why did you tag the article ? Just because of inclusion of "jaw-dropping" word ? You could've just deleted that word. Why tag the article ? Just read the full article. Where do you feel, it is like an advertisement. Don't sabotage other's hard work. By the way, Alex Machacek is a leading fusion guitarist and he is in no way related to me. Where does the idea of advert comes in ? I am removing the tag. If you have any issues, please tell me first. Don't tag articles just like that.

--N R S | ^T/_M\^B 09:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Type specimens

Hi, thanks for the comments. Please feel free to borrow the design. I love Johnston, great face. Is it the same face as that used on the London Underground? Scotland yard commissioned a proprietary face a few years back that owes much to Johnston, right down to diamond shaped dot on i and j. See you live in Tokyo. Great city, I have visited twice. Amazing. Will look for your newly formatted Johnston. Best, Jim CApitol3 01:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: great printing museum in Tokyo, in ground floor of a beautiful contemporary building with a concert hall and offices above.

Printing Museum, Tokyo web site CApitol3 01:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Get your attitude correct, kid

Before trying to advise others, first try to rectify your own attitude, kid. You were told the same thing by another editor. You should've learned from that. By the way, he has the skill of shifting from legato to scacatto easily and it isn't my POV. Critics and jazz greats like McLaughlin alike, and others have said so. So please don't go on tagging articles, just like that. --N R S | ^T/_M\^B 04:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kiddie, that's what I am asking you. What is THE problem. Would you have the discretion to specify the problem. If you don't specify the problem, please remove the tags, since then they are useless and seem to be your own POV. --N R S | ^T/_M\^B 04:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I told you to provide me the problems in the article. How can I know what the problem is before you specify. As far as the link you've provided is concerned, I am the sole editor so far, so whatever is the problem you think is, that must be edited by me. So please provide the specific problems. --N R S | ^T/_M\^B 04:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]