Hi, good to have you on board, hope you'll like it, et cetera. Someone should be along with the official welcoming paraphernalia shortly. Now, there's some talk that you nominated the Naruto article for deletion as a reaction to Warcraft deletions rather than on the basis of its own merits. I'd have to look into this some more before deciding, and I just got back from organizing recovery efforts on another wiki after a massive database meltdown and would rather not think right now, but if you did, then you should be happy to know that the person behind those has not been around since. Also -- please don't. AfDs are non-trivial drains on time, effort and morale, so we have enough trouble with the ones created for weighty reasons. -- Kiz o r 15:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
By " fancruft" I meant material which is only of particular concern to fans (and according to that page, it is usually a pejorative term...so perhaps I was a bit more harsh than I should have been). Hope that helps.
And while the Warcraft material may have been arguably almost as "fancruft-y" as the Naruto material, it was (if I recall correctly) much tidier and more concise. The current material is, as discussed here, a mess. (Yes, there is WoWWiki, theoretically. But it's ridiculously mismanaged. And that's a whole 'nother can of wiggly worms.) — Qit el-Remel ( talk) 14:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Moved from Talk:Warcraft (series)
Qit el-Remel, so harsh. You realise, of course, that the articles are written by the community, just like on Wikipedia? Half the stuff on Wikipedia was copied from us in the end anyway. There are areas needing improvement, but bashing the entire community here isn't really fair or justified. Kirkburn ( talk) 12:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I've never really heard complaints about that, but I will not dispute it. I would encourage you to "try again" though as situations frquently change over time. Kirkburn ( talk) 00:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. You participated in a previous AFD on the article Judicial shamanism at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judicial shamanism. You may be interested to know that a new article on the same subject has been created, and I have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judicial Shamanism. Robofish ( talk) 17:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Hi, good to have you on board, hope you'll like it, et cetera. Someone should be along with the official welcoming paraphernalia shortly. Now, there's some talk that you nominated the Naruto article for deletion as a reaction to Warcraft deletions rather than on the basis of its own merits. I'd have to look into this some more before deciding, and I just got back from organizing recovery efforts on another wiki after a massive database meltdown and would rather not think right now, but if you did, then you should be happy to know that the person behind those has not been around since. Also -- please don't. AfDs are non-trivial drains on time, effort and morale, so we have enough trouble with the ones created for weighty reasons. -- Kiz o r 15:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
By " fancruft" I meant material which is only of particular concern to fans (and according to that page, it is usually a pejorative term...so perhaps I was a bit more harsh than I should have been). Hope that helps.
And while the Warcraft material may have been arguably almost as "fancruft-y" as the Naruto material, it was (if I recall correctly) much tidier and more concise. The current material is, as discussed here, a mess. (Yes, there is WoWWiki, theoretically. But it's ridiculously mismanaged. And that's a whole 'nother can of wiggly worms.) — Qit el-Remel ( talk) 14:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Moved from Talk:Warcraft (series)
Qit el-Remel, so harsh. You realise, of course, that the articles are written by the community, just like on Wikipedia? Half the stuff on Wikipedia was copied from us in the end anyway. There are areas needing improvement, but bashing the entire community here isn't really fair or justified. Kirkburn ( talk) 12:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I've never really heard complaints about that, but I will not dispute it. I would encourage you to "try again" though as situations frquently change over time. Kirkburn ( talk) 00:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. You participated in a previous AFD on the article Judicial shamanism at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judicial shamanism. You may be interested to know that a new article on the same subject has been created, and I have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judicial Shamanism. Robofish ( talk) 17:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!