User talk:Yooden/Archive 1

Archive 1

Two Many Categories

I would recommend adding the World War I Weapons of the United Kingdom category to Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. It's not something I can just do because this isn't a clear case of a typo. It's just 2 similar categories. If you need help with listing it, let me know. And no, you can't link to Categories easily. It bites but it's one of the bugs with the Wikipedia software. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 11:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

VA-111 Shkval

Howdy! I've added back the nuclear reference you redacted from VA-111 Shkval. I assume you removed it because there wasn't any sourcing on the statement, so I included a reference in the talk page. If you removed it for other reasons, then I would like to suggest using the edit summary in the future to avoid this type of confusion. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Yup, now I added the summary. --Yooden

Hi there! I see that you removed the text again. If the reference I provided wasn't sufficient, could you let me know what quality of reference you consider good enough to merit leaving it in? My understanding is that the nuclear warhead was key to the original Shkval design, considering that it had no terminal guidance, and that its primary role was as an anti-carrier force weapon (detonating a subsurface nuke would certainly affect a tight fleet). Thanks! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:58, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Hallo

Hi, das war nur zum Informieren. OK Ciao Gilliamjf 06:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Anti-Semitic Yooden

Yooden I don't want anti-Semitic people posting crap on my Talk page so stop it Battlefield 13:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I can see nothing anti-Semitic about Cool Cat's statements. --Yooden

I am referring to your anti-Semitic statements here Citation and then screwing around with my talk page. Cordially Battlefield 15:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You probably don't want to imply that anything in that block in anti-Semitic, so please point out what exactly you are referring to. Use the edit history if that helps or just plain quote my statement here. --Yooden

Please be polite

Please don't include insults in your edit summaries, as you did in your edit of Terrist. (usually only USians a norrow-minded enough to forget the existence of other) Thank you. JG of Borg 13:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the error I fixed speaks for itself. --Yooden

If so, why did you need the insult? JG of Borg 13:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

To explain why I inserted the 'US' instead of 'national'. The only criterion I could go by is the narrow-mindedness typical to USians. --Yooden

Category:Canadians_detained

Hi Yooden, I noticed you voted Delete on Canadians_detained. The proposal was to rename. Could you re-check your vote ? Thanks. -- Ze miguel 15:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Done, sorry for the sloppy reading. --Yooden

No problem, thanks. -- Ze miguel 15:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Landshut Hijacking

I wondered why you substituted "Landshut Entführung" for "Entführung der Landshut." While your replacement arguably is the correct German genetive construction, the shorter "Landshut Entführung" was commonly used in the German media (and that explains why the title of the article is (the directly translated) Landshut Hijacking and nothing else). I'll revert your edit. Thanks for your understanding. Ben ^T/_C 15:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I remember differently. Google backs me up. --Yooden

What kind of answer is that? Come on. This is not how we discuss things in wikipedia. If you take the 1,610 against 1,360 hits for "entführung der landshut" and "landshut entführung", resp. as your only argument in support, forget it. Ben ^T/_C 21:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Ship deletions

Thank you for your interest in helping clean up the ship categories and articles, however I must ask that you first review the material at WP:Ships and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships) before making more deletion submissions. A lot of hard work has gone into the standards we have come up with and your proposals would blow big holes in the organization scheme as outlined by the wikiproject and associated guidelines pages. I have placed my opposition on the CfD entries I saw, and one of the article for deletion logs, but I don't get the chance to visit AfD as much so I miss things at times. I would have been very dissappointed to come in and find an article such as Deutschland class cruiser which I just cleaned up and trimmed to the data appropriate for a 'ship class page' suddenly exploded because I didn't hapeen to catch the vote. I appreciate the desire to clean up the 'pedia, believe me I've made enough waves already in the ships categories doing just that. I would be more than happy to collaborate with you to further improve our articles and cats. Josh 15:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I read the project page. It explains the policy, but gives no reasons. So what are the reasons to add a large number of essentially empty categories? (Maybe you should explain that not here but in the deletion section.)

The AfD is different. Current Deutschland class cruiser is a subset of Pocket battleships, there is no reason why the page should exist. Maybe Deutschland class cruiser is a better name for the page, but I wanted to do one step at a time. I see no reason to split the class page into two parts, one to explain a very common nickname, one for everything else. Again, please give your justification for this. (Again, maybe not here but in the deletion section.) --Yooden

From Hitler Talk

"That, too, is a personal attack. Could you guy take a break please? "

I hope this wasn't directed at me?Michael Dorosh 23:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Sure it was. Do you think you you made a level remark about the topic at hand?

I don't blame you, I really don't, but things heated up and the attacks started to fly back and forth. --Yooden

Template:AcademyAwardBestPicture

Just thought you might be interested that Template:AcademyAwardBestPicture is being proposed for deletion. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 10:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Signing with four tildes

Hi Yooden. Please sign with four tildes (~~~~) instead of three. This will place a timestamp next to your signature, which is invaluable for others reading a discussion. Thanks. ~MDD4696 03:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hitler Dates

Doh! Didn't realize about the preferences. For some reason though, your format wasn't showing up in my preference before, seems to be ok now, shows up the way I want, I trust it does at your end as well.

I used blank ISO dates before, they have to be wikilinked to do their magic. Everything looks fine at my end. --Yooden

Yes in fact there is

Yes, it's funny, but indeed there are RPGs about RPGs. The most famous is probably Hack Sign, a console RPG that consciously mimics a holographic MMORPG and some applications (such as a newsgroup for the "MMORPG.") I'll go add this in.

Scharnhorst & Gneisenau

I have opened an RfC on whether to refer to these ships as battleships or battlecruisers. Since you have participated in this debate previously, please have a look, read the debate, and make your views known: Talk:Scharnhorst_class_battlecruiser#Request_for_Comment:_Battleships_or_Battlecruisers.3F Regards, The Land (talk) 18:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Your old userpage

This is just a heads up that I've merged the history of your old userpage at Yooden with User:Yooden. I Hope you don't mind. Graham87 07:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

And your old user talk page history is at User talk:Yooden/from Talk:Yooden. Let me know if you want anything done to it - I can do a history merge there if you like. Graham87 07:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Yes, it would be nice if you could do a history merge for my /Talk. Thanks for your work! --Yooden ☮

Done. You're welcome - I love looking at old page histories in Wikipedia. Graham87 15:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Notability of Caleb Haye

Why did you put the notice on my userpage. I didn't create the article.--Ryan (talk) 06:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, but you made a number of edits and I thought you'd like to know. --Yooden ☮

Aikido

Howdy Yooden, since the article has achieved featured status, a large scale change like this needs to be discussed - could you join me on Talk:Aikido? Thanks! —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 14:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you very much. Maple Leaf (talk) 22:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)