User talk:Dcflyer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Dcflyer/archive 1 (18:02, 4 February 2006 to 16:38, 10 July 2006)

Contents

[edit] An accusation from an anon editor

This user seems very interested in promoting a racial stereotype about Jewish families.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.180.63 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 13 July 2006. See racism.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.180.63 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 13 July 2006.

You know absolutely nothing about me. Please read Wikipedia:Civility. -- Dcflyer 04:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Please also familiarize yourself with WP:3RR. 67.187.180.63 04:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Thank you

Re: your message: No problem. Throwing around accusations like that - not cool. Hope the edit war gets settled soon. See you around. - Tapir Terrific 05:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Erik Rhodes

Given your recent dedit history, you may be interested in this AfD. Zeromacnoo 12:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Allan Fox

Thank you for the work you do on the List of gay porn stars. You seem to be monitoring changes to the lists closely to combat the "let's add a friend so everyone thinks he's queer" and other inappropriate edits.

I searched Allan Fox on tlaVideo tlaVideo and came up with one movie, The Switch is On, a bisexual film with additional cast members Jeff Stryker, Jeff Quinn, John Rocklin, and Kevin Williams, to name some well-known gay porn performers. (There were other cast members, obviously.)

This in no way qualifies him for inclusion on the list. I just wanted to pass along the link to tlaVideo, as I've found it to be faster and more accurate than Googling someone; it could make this kind of search much easier for you in the long run. The link is also available at the top of the Talk:List of gay porn stars page. Chidom 23:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanky

Many thanks for undoing the vandalism to my user page! May blueballfixed.ytmnd.com this entertain you and bring you good fortune . . . or something (best with speakers on).  :) Dar-Ape 02:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the stalker on my page too. See you around! - Tapir Terrific 02:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banging heads

Sounds like a rock group, doesn't it? You're welcome on all counts. Want to bet there are no reasonable answers forthcoming to the questions I posed? I see we have a few things in common; I'll be stealing some of your user boxes if you don't mind. (If you do, just drop me a note, I'll delete them from my page.) Chidom 03:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Laws, yes, pass it awn - and ah aktchully created mah ver'own usah templit! (Talk about stealing!) Check out the "User Baby boomer" template (and you thought you GenXer's had all the fun!) Bless your heart. Chidom 00:42, 25 July 2006

Didn't hear back from you and wondered if you enjoyed the excerpt?—Chidom talk  06:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks and sorry. Some how I made a mistake with these ip addy's, all of the sudden there were 5-10 or so ip's beggining with 64. etc etc and I must have reverted one by accident. SynergeticMaggot 09:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops, anyway. Those users were putting up "erics a fag" or some such on pages, and that revert you corrected was from a user who was doing to same just before he/she made the addition to the family guy. So again, sorry, and thanks for correcting it. SynergeticMaggot 09:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ann Coulter vandal

Has been blocked :) Thanks for your help - Glen 04:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments moved from User Page

Please see the following link. Verify before you edit. Thank you. Vista Vaporware —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.212.153.145 (talk • contribs).

When adding statements, such as the one you added, "[f]or this reason, many people have labeled Microsoft's Vista as 'vaporware'", please provide a verifiable reference or citation. Also, please see WP:NPOV. Finally, you vandalized a few pages today, 04 August, with Stephen Colbert references. It is hard to tell the difference between the good and the bad. -- Dcflyer 02:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page impressionist?

Do you have any familiarity with User:Hans Schwarc? He appears to have "plagiarised" your talk page to give his own "an appearance of age". (I'm assuming you're just an innocent bystander here, this is purely FYI.) Alai 00:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Be careful reverting vandalism, as I had already reverted the page blanker's edit, and you reverted back to it... Titoxd(?!?) 04:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. I caught my error on Kofi Annan, but you correctly reverted back before me. -- Dcflyer 04:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newport, Florida

I'll tackle the Newport, Florida article today. From what I've seen, 3 seperate articles can come from this. Noles1984 12:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding dispute of John Gibson's Republican status

I could SAY I own a flying car, but that doesn't make it so. The actions he takes working for the Republican party speak louder then his empty words. You asked for a link and I provided you with one. It's obvious that you and Gibson would have a reason to contend his Republican status, as you would both want Fox News to be perceived as an objective source of information instead of a bastion of Republican ideals.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spazik007 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 5 September 2006.

The findarticles.com link that you provided is for a different John Gibson; Fox News Channel's John Gibson (media host) is not the Executive Director of the Maryland GOP. -- Dcflyer 19:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. You currently have three (3) reverts on John Gibson for 05 September 2006 Spazik007 20:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for copying the warning that I posted on your Talk Page [1]. Since I advised you on WP:3RR, I am obviously well aware of the policy. -- Dcflyer 01:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Florida Leader

I noticed you marked the Florida Leader article {{NPOV}} and I'm not sure why. I might agree the topic is undeserving of an article at all, but I don't see how it is biased. Would you mind commenting on the NPOV tag on the Florida Leader talk page? Thanks. — ApolloCreed (comment) (talk) 04:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

POV tag now removed as a result of the last edit.[2] -- Dcflyer 04:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lance Bass

Beware that one user sucking you into a revert war, like it did with me yesterday on the Rosie O'Donnell page. The admin suspended both me and the user for 3 hours, but made no effort to address the core question of the dispute, which I gather is the same question you're raising. Wahkeenah 14:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate the FYI. -- Dcflyer 15:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. You currently have three (3) reverts on Lance Bass for September 15, 2006. HollyWolly 16:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Please check again, I have just two (2) reverts on Lance Bass for 15 September 2006: [3]. -- Dcflyer 17:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
As I suspected, this "editor" was a sock puppet. -- Dcflyer 05:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please do not commit acts of vandalism on user talk pages. Intentionally reverting deleted comments, or making untrue statements is a form of vandalism. Thank you. HollyWolly 17:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleting warnings from user talk pages is vandalism. They can be archived later. See [4]. -- Dcflyer 17:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Racist Comments on Pages

Please stop vandalizizing pages with racist comments.Spazik007 20:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.116.72 (talk • contribs) .

Could you point out one example??? -- Dcflyer 01:07, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
And do not forge or spoof other editors' signatures on the comments that you leave, such as you did here: [5]. -- Dcflyer 01:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stalking

Please cease and decist stalking me. You are clearly aware s having edited the policy that my posts are within wikipedia guidelines. See:WP:STALK.If you continue, your account can be blocked. Thank you. Cliesthenes 12:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I am free to edit any article on my Watch List. -- Dcflyer 22:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
And so this does not remain a pointless and baseless accusation, please point to specific example(s). Thanks. -- Dcflyer 01:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Read this edit. It hits the nail on the head of what transpired. -- Dcflyer 23:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
More detail about this editor. -- Dcflyer 04:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

I listed my concern about Cliesthenes edits to WP:MOSBIO and other articles on the admin notice board. It seems that several other editors have similar concerns. Hopefully an amicable resolution will come out of this. Agne 22:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, hopefully. Thank you. -- Dcflyer 22:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hilarious

Hi 'flyer,

Thanks for your vote on the Category:American conservatives delete decision, which helped produce a strong consensus to keep the article. ==Hi again==

Hi Joshdboz, Thanks for your vote at the Category:American Conservative discussion. The votes were 2:1 in favor of keeping it. You might also have an interest in an article I've just created Pre-Iraq War opinions on Saddam. It's poorly named (something I want to change) but as it stands now, it's essentially statements made about how dangerous Saddam's regime was considered before the war. The article is being proposed for deletion, but I of course think it's useful. I'd be interested to know what you think. Now as to what's hilarious -- your "How to play Wikipedia" stuff above is priceless! Did you write it? Machiavelli could learn from it!Noroton 01:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] please...

please provide an explanation before reverting changes in the future. thank you. -lord chenoweth owens—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.216.230.120 (talk • contribs) .

Can you point out one example, I could not find one. -- Dcflyer 02:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
I found one here. Please explain the logic of this revert.
Regards
LittleOldMe 19:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
When making a revert using popups, as in this case, the edit summary is automatically filled in and submitted, e.g., "Revert to revision 80870584 dated 2006-10-11 19:39:05 by Dcflyer using popups." To my knowledge, this cannot be changed. Please correct me if I am wrong. -- Dcflyer 04:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
No, you are correct that when reverting using pop-ups, you do not get the opportunity to change the text in the edit summary.
Furthermore, I need to admit that, contrary to Wikipedia policy which urges the assumption of good faith, I came to the conclusion that you were engaging in an edit war out of malice. I apologise for making that assumption and taking that stance.
In my defense I wish to note that you ignored requests from dissenting editors to engage in discussion.
Thank you for responding positively to the request for comment and for stating your position clearly and concisely. Now that I have heard your case I have come to a sympathetic understanding of your position.
I am relatively new to Wikipedia, so it is a learning process for me, but hopefully I can continue to make a positive contribution and I hope that our recent disagreement will not lead to animosity between us.
Regards
LittleOldMe 09:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Three-revert rule

I don't want to labour a point, but can you explain why the messages stating that you violated the three-revert rule were vandalism?

Thanks

LittleOldMe 09:41, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

At the times of their postings, there was no violation of the three-revert rule. These baseless accusations were part of the suspected sock puppeteer's campaign to push his/her non-consensus agenda, by attempting to descredit me as a contributing editor. -- Dcflyer 10:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

When reverting in content disputes, use a descriptive edit summary. Do not use popups or any other automated reverting tool for such edits. —Centrx→talk • 17:29, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Understood; makes sense; will do. -- Dcflyer 05:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, in general reverts should only be done if they are going to tend toward a solution because reverting doesn't actually accomplish anything. So, one should only do a wholesale revert if he thinks the other editor misunderstood and that misunderstanding would be resolved by a descriptive edit summary. Beyond that, there is compromise/collaborative editing that may have partial reverting, there is discussing the issue on the talk page, or for cases of vandalism, libel, etc. there are administrative routes. —Centrx→talk • 05:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate this helpful clarification. -- Dcflyer 05:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You're welcome

And I want you to know that I appreciate the amount of work you did in tracking down that user Cliesthenes and its clothesline's-worth of sockpuppets. It is kind of funny how it seems mystified by how you figured it out. I am still uncertain whether its aim in "singling out" gays is to promote the "gay agenda" or to "gay bash". But it doesn't matter, because either way it's POV pushing and using wikipedia to "make a point" of some kind. Meanwhile, I'm trying to be as low-key and factual about this as I can. That user tricked me into a 3-revert violation and a short-term suspension (which, unlike some other users, I admit was deserved). Being suspended for 3 hours was somewhat humbling, but the worst of it was that it also may have affected the Minneapolis subnet, so it potentially impacted others as well, and that's bad. Hopefully, never again. 0:) Wahkeenah 01:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fox News

I am going to edit the fox news page agin, I messed up on the link beofre, but it is correct and should not have been deleted. It is referenced.16:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.87.64.214 (talk • contribs) .

Thank you for having the citation match the statement on Fox News Channel controversies. We all make mistakes. -- Dcflyer 19:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit]  ?

why did you revert my edit? 195.84.40.9 08:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Because you deleted this text without explanation: [6]. -- Dcflyer 21:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Garden State

I appreciate your contribution to the Garden State themes article. I plan to quote a significant part of your work in a research paper. Can you please identify yourself so I can give you proper credit in the paper, and avoid plagarising. Or can you please identify the source which you used to compile your information. Thank you.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by NJrep (talk • contribs) .

Responded here. -- Dcflyer 05:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] César Chávez

Here you used popups to rollback a good-faith edit. This is both a misuse of popups, and hinders communication with other editors, as well as essentially calls the good-faith edit vandalism. In the future, please explain your reverts of good-faith edits. I haven't been involved in this particular page, but it looked like a good edit to me, so I'm not sure why it was reverted in the first place, and neither does the editor you reverted, so it might be polite to leave a note on his talk page. Thanks, Mak (talk) 22:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rosie O'Donnell

That return to POV-pushing got by 6 editors, including me, before you caught it. Good one! I see its also back to messing with the Bio guidelines, in the same ungrammatical way. I've had a complaint about not posting "RV" (which I think just inspires them to do more) so I'm saying "Winnebago". Do you think that's sufficiently obscure? :) Wahkeenah 10:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Ellen DeGeneres

Your recent edit to Ellen DeGeneres (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 00:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

  • I think either I or that bot, or both, got a little mixed up. You and I were both trying to fix the POV-pushing that keeps turning up on these pages. Sorry about any confusion. :) Wahkeenah 00:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/c/f/User_talk%7EDcflyer_9d67.html"