Stigma

Some Wikipedians have a tendency to 'brand' other people as 'inclusionist' or 'deletionist', usually for the simple reason that they disagreeing with that person. The connotation of both words is that of a derogative for someone who doesn't think before voting - and the implication of that is that the accusing party can't think of a logically sound reason for disagreeing.

I strongly object to this kind of factionalism. People should discuss, not polarize. I am occasionally branded as a 'deletionist' because of my opinions on VfD, but this is not grounded on reality. People who think otherwise are encouraged to look at my user page, and my role in establishing the semi-policy WP:FICT, which basically calls for keeping or merging of all fancr?ft.

--Radiant

Leave a message

This is Radiant's answering machine. Please leave a message after the beep.

Note that I do not keep archives of my talk page, as the history option suffices for that. I occasionally remove threads from there when they're no longer pertinent.

Thanks

Good day radiant

I wish to thank you again for taking the time to explain to me about the deletion, i did understand much more how this operates. Still learning how to use the tools here as well. I also viewed the section you kindly showed me to visit, and so i did, so am back here for a little advice and your humble assistant*smile* I saw this page: New age Revised and i scroll down to 'External links' I would like some guidance if not some moving assistance if i should add the newage article and or the entire gf at the enternal links area. Or if you see anywhere it can be added.I know am bugging you a bit now but i want to make sure that i do the correct thing please*

Thanks again sparkle --Sparklelight 13:00, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hmm am embarrassed i never do things right with am in a hurry and always busy, need more time to site and write with care...

I have sparklelight

and i use sparklelight1 gees these names get to me anyhow i hope by now you all know the ip number i wish i could of gotten the sparkle name to log in, anyhow everything happens for a reason *wink* --Sparklelight1 13:16, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Smile

Greetings radiant

Just online doing some work and thought i say hi to you and hope you have a blessed weekend, keep up the great work you are doing here

love and light --Sparklelight1 01:03, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Association of Mergist Wikipedians

Hi, Radiant! I saw that your signature links to the meta:mergism page. Have you noticed that the organizer of the AMW, Reene, has apparently left the building? She hasn't contributed since mid-January, and an entry in her LiveJournal states that she's pretty much done with Wikipedia. Joyous 22:51, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Information does not want to be alone I love that phrase; it should be the AMW's official slogan. I don't understand why more people don't seem inclined toward mergism (whether they officially join an "organization" or not). There seems to be some sort of status attached to having created a separate article, rather than expanding an already-existing one. Bad bad bad. Joyous 23:12, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping me a note! The minor character proposal looks great, it's exactly what I was hoping for. Joyous 12:12, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

The school issue on VfD

Hi, Radiant!

I just wanted to leave a note here stating clearly that, although I voted Keep on GRider's user pages, I think the nomination was perfectly legit and I appreciate your boldness in bringing up the issue. I'm under the impression that the dispute over school notability is running out of hand lately, with both parties acting more and more aggressively towards each other and getting less and less inclined to defend their positions with arguments. There is already evidence that deletionists will also begin to garner votes to counterbalance GRider's initiative. I fear VfD will soon be cluttered with, as you called it, axiomatic votes.

I'm relatively new here as a contributor. This problem concerns me a lot, but I'm not really sure how to deal with it. Should general policy discussions be reopened? Since the begining, I've been very positively impressed by your contributions to VfD, and I always try to model my own by your standards of regarding the matters from a sensible, consensus driven point of view. Can you please share your opinions on this matter with me? Thank you very much. VladMV ٭ ^talk 17:27, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Radiant— I withdraw any objections that I may have had to putting a redirect from User:GRider/Schoolwatch to Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch. The arbitration ruling against GRider makes it pretty pointless to continue using his user space, and a redirect would allow those watching this page to get notice that it was no longer being updated and replaced by another page. After his continued flaunting of the arbitration ruling against him, I really don't want to be associated with him. Cheers. --BaronLarf 19:34, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Personal attacks?

• Well you didn't forgot to sign the "no personal attacks please" comment on Vfd, and I didn't bother to check who made it, so that's not about you and me.

Apart from that, I think you're a nice guy and I'm happy to work with you but should understand that I regard your attitude to coverage of things like grass in Australia being "unnecessary detail" as a death sentence for wikipedia's potential usefulness, so when you vote for those reasons you will see some pretty dismayed reactions from me. Kappa 12:14, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank You!

Hi Radiant!,

I would like to thank you for your vote of support and confidence for my adminship, it has been much appreciated. If you need anything in future that requires my attention, please do not hesitate to contact me. :)

- Cheers, Mailer Diablo 18:22, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Radiant, Thank you so much for your support and kind words in my nomination. I look forward to helping out. - BanyanTree 04:20, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my adminship — I vow to use my super powers for good not evil. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:10, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote of support for my Admin nomination--nixie 02:29, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stockroom VFD

"... it is generally assumed that if you (or your company) are famous, someone else will write an article about you." Nicely put! FreplySpang (talk) 17:46, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments

Thanks for your input at Wikipedia:Countdown deletion. Since there have been few enough people, I can afford to thank them individually, and who knows, maybe it will get picked up by others eventually... wait a minute, am I spamming talk pages? How the mighty have fallen... except that I was never very mighty... Anyway, JRM 10:52, 2005 Apr 6 (UTC)

CfD Restructuring

Thank you for the note on my talk page. The spliting into 2a and 2b makes it much clearer, and you have represented my votes correctly. Thryduulf 14:42, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

your question regarding policy templates

No, there was no discussion before I created and applied the templates. I anticipated that there would be some give-and-take over the wording and formatting, and over which templates belong on which pages, but I didn't think there would be any serious question as to whether or not we should have the templates at all. I have long been involved in editing and organizing the policy pages, and it is my experience that there is little interest in discussing such changes until they have been made, so I went ahead and made them. I am pleased that there has now been vibrant discussion, and I'm especially pleased that the addition of the templates has served as a catalyst to restart the stalled discussion over some important but unresolved issues at Wikipedia:Ignore all rules and Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks. Kindest regards, The Uninvited Co., Inc. 15:32, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Factions

Thanks. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "factionalize". Consensus is impossible when we have these two factions feeling free to "get out the vote". --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:53, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Definition

Your addition looks great. Thanks for that – I had always assumed there was something on that page regarding VfD specifically; now there is. android↔talk 21:41, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

VfD template bot request

I can take a look at that, but it will have to wait. I have a full time job and am a full time gradaute student and I have a ton of work to do for school in the next two weeks so my presence on Wikipedia will be diminished. Kevin Rector 14:45, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

RfC

• About Kappa's RfC, I see that User:RickK has endorsed the initial complaint against Kappa. Since you struck out what I make to be about four fifths of the "evidence" of trying and failing to solve the dispute, and the remaining fifth was made just hours before the RfC was filed, I think you may be in a position to ask RickK to reconsider his endorsement. I disagree often with RickK, but I think he is usually fair and follows the rules. On a more personal note, I would like to say that you have displayed an admirable position on this issue. You have displayed a willingness to discuss rather than argue, you have defended with fervor the rights of a user who is usually your opponent, and I seriously hope to see you as an administrator some day. Sjakkalle 10:58, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I retract my statement that the remaining piece of evidence under "Trying and failing to solve" was filed "just hours" before the RfC. It was in fact filed three minutes before the RfC. I have updated my disagreement with the RfC, and stricken my endorsement of Kappa's defense since he should have gone further. Sjakkalle 12:03, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Voltaire

You left a message on Kappa's talk page in which you attributed the quote about "I may not agree with what you say, but..." to Voltaire. This is false; the quote is by Evelyn Beatrice Hall, from her book Friends of Voltaire. Strive for accuarcy.

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to misattribute this quotation to Voltaire." DS 21:16, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Policy Discussion

Hi Radiant,

It sounds like you want me to write up a possible policy against using templates and vote garnering. I must humbly decline, as I don't think I am up to the task of creating a viable policy page. I would however be more than willing to contribute to any fledgling policy pages that are being created. All I would need is to be pointed in the right direction. Dave the Red (talk) 02:10, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Bot request for CfD

Hi there! On Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Restructuring, the suggestion was made to split CfD into one page per day, and transclude these into the main page (just like is done on VfD, except that VfD goes one step further and also uses sub-pages for each individual nomination). This suggestion seems to have met consensus. Since (iirc) you wrote the VfD-bot, could you please do something similar for CfD?

This bot should (daily) create a new page Categories for deletion/Log/-date- , redirect Categories for deletion/Log/Today to the most recent one, and add a transclusion on the WP:CFD main page (and if possible an 'add new section to /today/' link).

As a side point, would you consider having your bot create a link every day? (and ditto for CFD) I would think it useful since the 'today' page gets new nominations all the time, and the 'yesterday' page would be stable and votable.

Yours, Radiant_* 09:43, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Is there a particular format of the new day pages? Just the date or what? Do you want the bot to close each day as well on CfD? I'll do something similiar, but you'll have to be more specific to your request. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:02, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

And the /Log/Yesterday page... I'll get started on that. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:03, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The /Log/Yesterday script has been written. You should see it update the next UTC day. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:03, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Wow that was quick ;) - the format can be very simply, see WP:CFD for an example, but basically it's just a level-1 header with the date. A hidden tag stating to add new nominations to the top would be nice (for some reason new votes are added to the top rather than the bottom on CfD; similarly the CfD main page has newer dates on top). It would be nice if the bot also closed each day when a new day starts. The process should mimic VfD's as much as possible, for consistency's sake. Radiant_* 10:07, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

  You caught me when I was editing. Any HTML comments? And do you have a cute name for the bot? (I prefer to run separate accounts for bots if they are active only in a specific area. That way, the contributions list is much cleaner for someone to look at what the bot is doing... rather than looking at a mess of tasks on one single bot.) -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:11, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Not sure what you mean with HTML comments. I could think of lots of cute names :), but for clarity's sake something like CfDaemon would be best, I guess. Separate accounts are a good idea.

    An HTML comment is something between <!-- and -->. When placed on an HTML page, that text is hidden from view. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:02, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

    • Okay. Referring to WP:CFD and Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies would be appropriate. Radiant_* 11:06, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

    So each new day will have something like, ==Date==\n<!-- Please add the newest nominations to the top -->\n\n<!-- Please add the newest nominations to the top --> (\n = newline). When the day closes, it will add: <!-- Please do not add new nominations to this page, as this CFD has concluded. Put any new nominations to the current day page instead. Thank you for your cooperation. --> -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:13, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• • By the way, something else occured to me... would it be possible (and desirable) to auto-change the Template:Vfd and Template:Cfd daily? VfD links to 'WP:VFD/pagename' but might also provide a link to 'WP:VFD/Log/Today' (maybe even opening that page in edit mode). CfD links to 'WP:CFD#pagename' but should link to 'WP:CFD/Log/-date-' (hm, this may be a tough one unless it's subst'ed). Hope that made sense. Radiant_* 10:50, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

    As for auto-changing the templates... I suggest you draw consensus on that first, by placing it on the appropriate template's talk page(s), notify a few users, place it on the , and . -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:02, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

    • Yes, of course, but my first question is if it would be possible. Radiant_* 11:06, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

• • • • for the bot's name, how about DeleCate - the CfD bot (from Deleting Category debates)? Thryduulf 11:05, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

        I have something far better creative in mind now. I will call it NekoDaemon. Neko is the Japanese word for "Cat". Daemon is the suggestion from Radiant!... -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:17, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New CfD procedure

Question for you. I see each day is now being transcluded. How are we going to deal with the /resolved and /unresolved pages? Currently, after seven days, and depending on how much time I have, I've been moving the discussions "off-page". If I continue this practice, won't we wind up with many "day pages" with nothing on them? Or should I do this differently now? Thanks! --Kbdank71 13:30, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NekoDaemon

... has been assigned the following three tasks:

1. Add new CFD Day Transinclude at the same time as the VFD Bot
2. Create the new CFD Day Transinclude at the same time as the VFD Bot
3. Close the CFD Day Transinclude page at the same time as the VFD Bot

-- AllyUnion (talk) 05:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

See my reply to your comment on my talk page. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:09, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Schools on the Wikipedia

Do me a favor and start a policy consensus on this one. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New users on VfD

Hi there! You made the following note on VfD,

Comment: This nomination was made by yet another account created in the past six weeks that immediately gravitated towards VfD (within 3 days of account creation). This is the the third one this week. *sigh* —RaD Man (talk) 01:13, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have noticed a recent tendency for some (small number of) users to create a new account for making opinionated statements anonymously (which may include VfD). Your remark seems to indicate the same; if so, could you please show me who these 'yet other' users are and where their first edits lie? It may be useful to get consensus on 'creating new accounts to make a WP:POINT'. Thanks, Radiant_* 08:57, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

There has been a recent influx of n00bs who've gravitated almost immediately towards not just VfD, but also the act of nominating school-related articles. Maybe all three of them are legit, who knows. I won't bother to speculate, but it is a strange coincidence given all the attention that schools have been receiving lately. The three accounts I've noticed are:

• User:Wahoofive. Nominated Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Charter School of Wilmington. Account created approximately 1 month before nomination.
• User:Firebug. Nominated Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Crescent School and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Claremont School of Theology. Account created 2 weeks before nomination.
• User:Stoph. Nominated Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/William P. Clements High School. Account created 1 week before nomination.

Sorry I don't really have the time to dig around any further— take it from here if you wish. —RaD Man (talk) 01:47, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Impersonation vandal

First, I wanted to say sorry that guy picked you to impersonate. I saw you just listed it on WP:VIP and WP:AN/I. He was actually blocked about 10 hours before you posted that. In the future, before posting, you may want to check the user's talk page first, to see if anyone mentioned anything about blocking. Or, check the Special:Ipblocklist or the user's block log, to see whether the user has already been blocked. I realize in this case it'd be difficult to search the log given the user's untypable username. Anyway, it's just a suggestion! — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:38, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)