User talk:Tverbeek

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

Archive 1 (to 31 December 2005):

Nudity inaccuracies

Yeah, I meant to move that paragraph to the talk page. It's there now, with the explanation.--Cuchullain 23:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Clean-up?

I added a clean-up stub on the Kendall College of Art and Design article, because it doesn't have half as much information as most other college pages on Wikipedia. Also, the Kendall article doesn't look as professional looking as most other college articles on Wikipedia. Browse around on many college/university pages on Wikipedia, and you'll see what I mean. --80-MAN 01:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Larry Hama

You seem much more knowledgable than I am in all ways Wiki, so I wonder if you could tell me 1) if it's it's appopriate to, and 2) how to go about notifying fellow Comics Projects members that an item is up for vote on the Deletion page? It's

[[1]], and you can read my reasons there. Thanks for any info! - Tenebrae 14:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "the fact that he served during the Vietnam War (even if not stationed in SE Asia) is arguably relevant, given that he later edited The 'Nam." Granted. But for somone who doesn't know he wrote The 'Nam (which would be most people, even many knowledgable comics fans), it seems gratuitous. So given what you said, yep, a reference to his writing The 'Nam would be good and relevant to add there, then.

Is there a tag similar to ^{[citation needed]} that can be added in place of original research? Is there any way to request a sysop/admin to create such a tag, if one doesn's already exist? Like the ^{[citation needed]} tag, that would be a great and practical help. Thanks, as always, for your experienced and help. - Tenebrae 02:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see he edited "The 'Nam". I'll make note. Thanks - Tenebrae 03:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hama tag change?

Well, since you and I have been contributing most of the edits, I'd like to take up one more bit of your time to ask 1) whether you think it might be appropriate to change the template from "deletion proposed" to "this article needs cleanup" or "needs to be written in encyc. language" or somesuch, and 2) is that something an editor such as you or I can do, or is it protocol to let an admin/sysop do it?

And say, thanks again for all your help every now and then over the past couple months in navigating the shoals of Wikipedia. The Guidelines are policy pages alone are like Russian novels! (So maybe I should say Das vadanya, however the heck that's spelled!) - Tenebrae 04:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the procedural info! All the best - Tenebrae 14:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Direct market

I'm not sure if I agree about 'direct market' being a proper noun. Isn't the direct market really just a specific manner of distributing comic books? By your logic wouldn't we also capitalize newsstand distribution system? I won't make any further changes along these lines, but I think we should invite input from other users. (I'll copy our correspondense to the talk page). ike9898 21:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Direct Market

I apologise if I seem to have bad faith on the term. (1) References are good (required?) on any article, so I asked for them. (2) Even as the article defined it, the term identifies a business management concept, like "suggested retail price", so I figure it belongs more to business management-related topics than to comics-related topics. (3) I seriously doubt that the comics distribution industry is unique amongst the consumer publication distribution industry. Nevertheless, I never insist, so go ahead with what you see fit. Thank you for your note. --Perfecto 00:43, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the DM & Phil Seuling entries!

It is so gratifying to see the late, lamented Phil start to get his due, here in this relatively mainstream information source.

And it's always personally very cool to see articles branch off from one's own entries. Thanks for making my day (and it's only 5:48 a.m., my time)! - Tenebrae 10:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enlist your help?

User:GodzillaWax, who treated CaptainDisdain and others, well, disdainfully at [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daredevil&offset=20051107053206&action=history%7CDaredevil History Page]], is now doing the same to me.

You can get the gist of it at [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#GodzillaWax_attack%7CAdmin noticeboard]]

If his kind of behavior is something you'd like to see stop, please — please — post a supportive comment on the "GodzillaWax_attack" or the "GodzillaWax_still_at_it" section of Admin noticeboard page that links above.

Anything you can do, I think it would help us all. Thanks very much even for just reading this. — Tenebrae 00:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did read those things

And I believed I was following the directions. Gee, you don't have to take such a nasty tone with me. I'm a human being. I was following complicated, lengthy directions, spread over dozens of pages, as best I could. As for Hama, I don't believe I asked you to step in and "waste [your] time", so I don't think it's fair to yell at me for that. And as for GodzillaWax, whose bad behavior goes back months, I apologize for asking you to support me in not having him insult fellow Wikipedians and write fannish, unencyclopedic entries that make Wikipedia look bad.

You've been the kind of diligent and responsible Wikipedian I admire and strive to be. I apologize if my compliments to you and my respecting you enough to look for you for guidance and to ask for your help bothered you so much that you would snap at a person that way. I won't bother you again. -- Tenebrae 16:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop

I said I wouldn't bother you anymore. I apologized for bothering you at all. Yet after I did so, you came back and wrote something on my Talk page calling me stupid, saying I need to be talked to in words of one syllable, etc. What kind of person are you that would go out of your way to insult someone who has apologized and said he wouldn't bother you anymore? Just for the record, I'm a cum laude graduate of a major American university, I work as an editor at a national magazine, I've published books, and I spent years writing for Marvel, DC, and other companies. I think the quality of my research and writing in the nearly 50 comics-professional bios I've written speak for themselves. So, no, I don't believe I'm stupid and I'm astonished at the hateful, schoolyard level of discourse I find throughout Wikipedia. You seem to need to insult others to bolster your own self-esteem. Please stop doing it to me, and please stop posting on my Talk page. - Tenebrae 00:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You Pompous, Ignorant Ass

You insult me ... then use profanity to tell me that you don't "give a damn" about evidence that indicates your insult isn't based on anyting factual!

I don't know why you think you have the right to mouth off to people in ways you'd never dare say to their faces. It's easy to sit back and be the Simpsons' Comic Book Guy, acting like Wikipedia's Pope of Pop Culture, when you're thousands of miles away from the people you insult. I've tried to look for the good in you. I've tried to give you the benefit of doubt. But you're a bitter, venom-spewing pomposity who acts like a big shot on Wikipedia because you can't in real life. Just stay the fuck away from my Talk page. And please: Report me to the Admins, because I'd love them to see the incivility you displayed to someone who apologized to you when you indicated I'd made a mistake. Ooooh, a mistake, heaven help me! Grand Comic Book Lord VerGeek is going to come spit on my Talk Page!

Why don't you bother people like User:GodzillaWax, who break all sorts of Wikipedia rules in their "contributions"? Why not bother people who write "Recently" and "Currently" in their entries? Why not bother people who can't be bothered to cite and link to their sources? Seems to me that last item is way more important to Wikipedia's credibility that someone who points out a garbage entry the wrong way once.

I apologized when you felt you were inconvenienced. Why couldn't you let it go at that? Serious: Please ask yourself, "He apologized. Why do I feel compelled to go back and give him shit?" NOBODY ASKED YOU TO. You just had to come back and go "nyah-nyah-you-need-one-syllable-words". Let's ask the Admins about that if you want to. But if you come back to my Talk page, when I've specifically asked you not to, that's harrassment. - Tenebrae 01:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tenebrae, leave me out of your hissy fits. GodzillaWax 16:39, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a subhead

OK. Look. We clearly both lost our tempers. I don't have a dispute with you; heck, I even told you a couple posts ago that I'd felt respect for you as a veteran Wikipedian. I apologized for inadvertantly bothering you, and I simply asked to be left alone and promised to leave you alone, so I don't know what there is to mediate.

But ... you seem man enough to reach out in a genuine communal gesture, so ... I can suggest this:

If you'll apologize for the sarcastic implications that I'm stupid and need monosyllabic verbalization, and that this was your own violation of Wikipedia:No Personal Attacks ("Negative personal comments and 'I'm better than you' attacks...."), then I will gladly and sincerely apologize, with equal specificity, for my own words, and tell you that as far as I'm concerened we can erase all our previous comments from our Talk pages and that I will not consider that a breach of etiquette, but rather a clean slate. In any event, I promise not to contact you or bother you ever again. Or if you don't like the aforementioned, please tell me in a reasonable tone what you'd prefer. Does this sound fair? -- Tenebrae 04:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm mostly staying away from Wikipedia for a while... just too damn tired of this kind of nonsense. - Tverbeek

Disambiguation

Hi Todd, I'm cleaning up Disambiguation links for "Medium" and was wondering if you would be so kind as to delink your link to "medium (bearer)" so it stops showing up in the disambig database. Thanks! - Dreadlocke 14:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Backpacking

You're invited to be a part of WikiProject Backpacking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to backpacking. To accept this invitation, click here!

Welcome...

Hello, Tverbeek, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! 161.57.55.36 16:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DClogos.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:DClogos.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 13:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:KCAD.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:KCAD.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Illustrated fiction

An editor has nominated Illustrated fiction, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Illustrated fiction and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:EbonyWhite.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:EbonyWhite.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IXsystems

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article IXsystems, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Insufficient coverage by reliable secondary sources to establish notability for this subject

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spider-Man

Hello. :) Since you have been involved in editing the article Spider-Man, I wanted to let you know that we have nominated the article for "Good Article" status. You can view the review page, and if there is anything you can do to make the article better, please do so. :) There are a number of concerns to be addressed and some work to be done, so pitch in if you are able, make any suggestions that you think might be helpful, or at least just be there for moral support. :) BOZ (talk) 01:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of David Myers (academic)

The article David Myers (academic) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability, no independent biographical sources

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrOllie (talk) 14:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo consensus discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:19, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Tverbeek. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Tverbeek. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Tverbeek. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Xero (comics)

The article Xero (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 12:00, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cornerstone University for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cornerstone University is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cornerstone University until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GPinkerton (talk) 04:33, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of XPostFacto

The article XPostFacto has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability here, no evidence of notability found online, none found in the ten or more years of existence for this page

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Static Shock (TV logo).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Static Shock (TV logo).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]