User talk:Veinor

Please add any new sections to the bottom of the page, sign them at the end by typing ~~~~, and insert an appropriate header; see examples below for how to do that. If you don't do so, then your comment runs the risk of being ignored. I will reply to them here.

Mel Gibson DUI incident

Sorry, I was alluding to the fact that Mel Gibson got an expungement on October 6, 2009. The article was outdated and I was trying to update it with recent information. I just figured out how to fix it though. Thanks for the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.170.61 (talk) 18:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

PSA Artwork

April 2007 I added "trivia" that is factually true about the origin of PSA's logo airplane, which I created. I would like to suggest that the addition be reinserted, and that any info you feel is self-promoting can be left out. I am no longer an illustrator, and you have mistakenly presumed I am trying to promote my work. Not at all so. Just trying to relate the true history of the logo, and the connection to the film "Pursuit of happyness." ~~~~

Ditto

I am overwhelmed by the number of nasty, vicious, self-important and unhelpful self-appointed "editors" on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NealZaslavsky (talk • contribs) 06:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks are not tolerated, nor are attempts to stifle discussion by removing AfD notices. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 06:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

HOW DARE YOU ACCUSE ME OF PERSONAL ATTACKS!!!!!!! YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS. YOU HAVE YET TO MAKE ANY CONSTRUCTIVE SUGGESTION; RATHER, YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING MORE THAN ATTACK ME AND THEN TRY TO MASK YOUR OWN INADEQUATE COMMUNICATION SKILLS BY ATTEMPTING TO SHIFT BLAME. UNACCEPTABLE. --NealZaslavsky (talk) 06:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

You're the one that's calling me a "nasty, vicious, self-important and unhelpful self-appointed "editor"". I have yet to attack you in any way, shape or form; rather, I've simply informed you of what is within what is considered acceptable behavior on Wikipedia. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 06:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Veinor, first time I've run into you: glad to make your acquaintance. I'm sure the above contributor was talking about me, not you, though I'd be honored to be painted with the same brush. Either way: you've been an admin for four years now--congrats on your endurance. Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 15:37, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, My additions were deleted. I want to inform the creative public that such user generated video games are available for free

My contents are as below

There are many social gaming web sites which allow social gaming community to connect, upload games, and compete against each. Most of the web sites are free and users can upload their unique games and play what other users have uploaded.

Arcadewarfare serves as an online social gaming web site. Online social gaming community can connect, upload games, and compete against each other for prizes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thivankasl (talk • contribs) 11:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

additions were deleted

Hi, My additions were deleted. I want to inform the creative public that such user generated video games are available for free

My contents are as below

There are many social gaming web sites which allow social gaming community to connect, upload games, and compete against each. Most of the web sites are free and users can upload their unique games and play what other users have uploaded.

Arcadewarfare serves as an online social gaming web site. Online social gaming community can connect, upload games, and compete against each other for prizes.(Thivankasl (talk) 11:31, 12 October 2009 (UTC))

The problem is that the way you were adding this information didn't really add any information to the article; in addition, it's also a sort of advertisement for Arcadewarfare, going against the external link guidelines. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 11:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Veinor

Yes I just recieved your awful excuse of a message about not being able to make a 'Red Smoke' page.

You spoke about sources?

How about if I get permisson from the bloke himself and from hundreds of students that prove he deserves a page?

Answer me this, how the hell is this page offending anyone/anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Red red red smoke (talk • contribs) 12:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

It all boils down to verifiability; articles need to have sources, and there are standards for what can qualify. The creator of a thing can't be the exclusive source, since otherwise we could have an article called That sandwich I got last night at the student center (tuna with lettuce, by the way). Now, if for some bizarre reason there were newspaper articles devoted to said sandwich, there would be an article. But there aren't. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 12:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you not understand that 'Red Smoke' IS a human being? The WORST example I have heard in my life, didn't make any reference whatsoever to my page? I can't believe you are stopping me creating this page? You still haven't given a valid reason, apart from giving me "Big MEANINGFUL Words" that makes you sound so highly intellectual, however your sitting there stopping me creating a page on a website? Who will type red smoke in the search apart from people who know of him? Red red red smoke (talk) 12:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't feel like having two discussions at once for no good reason, would you mind centralizing it on your talk page? Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 12:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

In any case, just because Red Smoke may be a human being doesn't mean that we all of a sudden don't need sources in order to have a good article about him. You can't act as the exclusive source about yourself no matter who you are, and most people won't count as sources either. It's only people who're known to be reliable sources of information that can count as sources.

As for the 'it doesn't hurt anybody' argument, this is one that we tend to get a lot. But the problem is that the purpose of Wikipedia is to provide verifiable information; articles that don't have proper sourcing detract from this purpose. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 12:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm seems funny after my comment that you want to speak privately??? Perhaps I will have to 'boss' Red red red smoke (talk) 12:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

It's not like your talk page is any more private; matter of fact, if we get involved in a dispute that requires outside arbitration, people are more likely to check your talk page than mine. I'm fine with you discussing it on this page, I just don't like having to go back and forth between two pages for no reason. Your call. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 12:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Im not disputing son, I just think its a joke that I can't make a page for this man? How the hell have some people got pages then? Example, Adam Proudlock has a page? You having a laugh!!!Red red red smoke (talk) 12:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)