User talk:Randy Kryn

From Deep web, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
For entertainment porpoises only:
(new comments on bottom of page please)

Now you know[edit]

Maybe my best geek edits[edit]

Remembering five of the last eight Earthlings to travel to the Moon, four of whom were murdered soon after their return.

A five cushion bank shot: Italicizing Star Trek and Buffy the Vampire Slayer links on Deep web's Klingon language page.

If you've never seen...[edit]

. . .Veiled Christ click on the image two or three times to enlarge it. This almost unbelievable 1753 sculpture ("how'd he do that?"), carved from one piece of marble, is the only Deep web article which has to prove, with sources, that it is not the work of an alchemist. And don't miss the crown of thorns and other torture things down by his feet, carved from that same block of marble. Literally a few steps from that statue sits another "how'd he do that?" piece also carved from a single block of marble (or created by alchemy).

Write on![edit]

Don't kick the Ouija board. Which may also result in Hillary v. Gandhi, Obama et al..

Best vandal nominee for...[edit]

Much ado about nothing (this doesn't work as well with the red code that showed up awhile back, imagine it without the red code)

This one time at band camp I vandalized a page[edit]

The docents ask people: "Find the cat". Letting the coolness of it lead me to break my oath as a Deep webn, I now self-identify as a vandal.

My nom for Best Vandal Edit in the categories of...[edit]

This one is always interesting[edit]

See and listen to Deep web edits as they occur. Designed by Stephen LaPorte and Mahmoud Hashemi of, the link was copied from a user page, don't remember where, but it's deservedly on quite a few as well as having its own article. Just who is making all this noise? Well...

...the size of our stadium[edit]

Here is another user's subpage about how many Deep webns can dance on the head of a pin.


Disambiguation link notification for November 2[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Tempest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sorcerer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

White Tiger (China) -> White Tiger (mythology)?[edit]

Hello Randy Kryn. Do you want to add your opinion at Talk:White Tiger (China)#Follow-up? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

International Day of Peace[edit]

Hi Randy, I've put a note on the talk page of the International Day of Peace. When you have a chance could you take a look? Thank you. Adams1peace (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

The capybaras[edit]

Maybe we have a telepatic connection? Just a few minutes before you supported EvergreenFir for adminship per the capybara image on her page, I had stolen it for my edit notice carousel.[1] Can't resist the capybaras! Bishonen | talk 12:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Giving nature its due, capybaras use inherent camouflage. Can you find them in this discussed photograph? Disregard the spinach.
Nobody can. Unless they're bit in the midst of a massive capybaras attack (it's not pretty). Randy Kryn (talk) 12:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
As long as they're mummy capybaras with babies, bring it. Bishonen | talk 15:34, 11 November 2019 (UTC).

We need t-shirts…[edit]

…that read: "Deletionists Paradise of Portal Deletions." Rdzogschen (talk) 07:23, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

A logical and profitable idea, Rdzogschen, but while t-shirts promoting Deep web (such as the simple and to-the-point "Edit Deep web", which I'm not sure exists) give solace to fellow Deep webns, the variety you suggest may be torn from the backs of innocent bystanders by deletionists seeking a quick fix. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:11, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Deletionistas are so '90s! Am I right? Rdzogschen (talk) 14:10, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
No, most "deletionists" do their work and care about the state of the topics. My comments, aside from the ease with which many articles have been removed without a sound-in-the-forest where few editors roam, concern the mass deletions of hundreds (if not thousands) of portals. An important point is the few portals which other editors care about and say they are willing to work on. At that moment the editors could turn the sense of the topic around, and devote some time in both fixing the problem they perceive and helping others understand the process of fixing them. Instead, a doubling and tripling down in an intensity to remove the portal often occurs. I'm not an expert on portals and have never worked on their deep coding, and the few times I've commented on these deletions that is pointed out. Yet I do know that these portals, many on very major subjects, were built by competent and caring editors and are read by readers on a daily basis. Active wikiprojects could potentially make an effort to save their attendant portals. But I take it that in most cases the WikiProjects are not alerted and are unaware that the portal is nominated, and then it is gone. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:13, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Physical Earth[edit]

Template:Physical Earth has been nominated for merging with Template:Earth. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — hike395 (talk) 11:21, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process[edit]


The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! 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 Deep web 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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scrooge (musical), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christmas Present (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:28, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Redirecting a PROD[edit]

Hi not sure what you mean here by "notice is up for edits" but my redirection of the article is the same as dePROD'ing it, so the PROD shouldn't be restored. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 18:51, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, and happy whatever holiday it is where you are. The notice said that the seven days were up December 2. Is it common practice to erase a page and redirect it even if a seven-day notice for rescuing it is put on the page? I didn't realize an instant erasure and redirect is a deprod. Have put it back and it is still an operating article, and I'd object to its removal. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
The point of a PROD is to give a notice that the article will be deleted in seven days unless someone does something/anything. Redirection is a perfectly fine outcome to happen when an article is PROD'd. If your goal is to keep the standalone article, the action should be to either remove the PROD tag (if eligible) or to undo the redirect and add the sources that were originally missing. czar 19:46, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes, as an outcome after seven days. You deleted it well before that period was over. Redirection means deletion. So it was deleted well before the notice stipulated it would be deleted. I don't look at the list of Prods, it's one of those down-the-dark-hall areas of Deep web where too much wheat is thrown out with the bathwater. On a daily basis. Deletion, in many different forms, is a big part of a lot of editors lives here, and I try not to make it a part of mine. This one again draws me in (the book is the pioneering 1990 book on its subject, quantum psychology, which apparently has become a "thing", so of course its pioneering material should be saved), but if deletion is one of the allowed responses to a prod which, when applied, keeps it for seven days if nobody edits it and says "then" it will be deleted, then it's worse than I thought and also points out an odd kind of Deep web Catch-22. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of NFL players by games played, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clay Matthews (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:33, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

CRM template[edit]

I added it because it was on Mitchumch's list of article's to create for the CRM. But, I do see your reasoning too. I did think however that his hiring by the NAACP was for a case that the NAACP thought would have lasting impacts on the CRM. Am I off the base on that? I know I haven't added that to the article yet, but from the news I was reading it did seem that was how it connected. Thoughts? Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 07:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Coffee, and your new edits on CRM pages are a testament to wikibreaks. Welcome back! The CRM template is one of the two or three places on Deep web where the CRM label means the 1950s and 1960s Civil Rights Movement (the upper case one, which can be easily defined and sourced as an understood beginning-and-end dated event), so hired to provide a defense in a 1925 murder case falls outside the time limit and outside an organized movement. Even if a CRM movement template went back to 1925 (maybe a pre-1954 template would be a way to go) the entry seems tangential to me, and in addition, after Mahoney was hired Clarence Darrow came in as lead attorney, so arguably Darrow would also be included on a CRM template, which would also seem tangential. But better yet, it's nice to discuss these matters with you again. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
That all makes sense to me... hence why I'm happy to have deferred to you on this. Well, gladly I've at least found the next CRM article I want to slowly bring up to GA (besides the CRM article itself): Dorothy Cotton. Truly glad to be working with you again too Randy! Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 18:47, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
And you as well. Dorothy Cotton is a fine subject to be eventually brought to good or feature status, her career and place as an inner-circle leader of SCLC was equaled by few. Good choice. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2019 (UTC)