User talk:DXRAW/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, DXRAW, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! 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 someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 13:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ryan Corr
Great Cornard Upper School
Fred Wakefield
Simon Deering
American Bottom
Penrith High School
Malaspina University-College
Rhys Muldoon
Farrer Memorial Agricultural High School
Edward Coles
Airtight Bridge
Stuart Diver
Sydney Secondary College
Bart Simpson (Comic book series)
Rhys Jones
Economy of Illinois
Ryde, New South Wales
Lisa's sax solo gags on The Simpsons
Chris Hemsworth
Cleanup
North Sydney Boys High School
Curtin University of Technology
Park Ridge, Illinois
Merge
Dolph (Simpsons)
First flying machine
Pimple
Add Sources
The Lodge
Simpson family
Kenosha, Wisconsin
Wikify
Son of Dork
Ellie Crystal
Dominick's
Expand
Aurora, Illinois
Gerald Wiegert
Demographic history of the United States

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It's Raining Men

First of all, thank you for your edits on Wikipedia. Just wanted to let you know that even though you thought that the text for the Geri Halliwell section of It's Raining Men seemed like an advertisement for her, you cannot simply delete all of the vital listing information (including the infobox and chart information). Please take note that all of the information in the infoboxes and charts are of historical value having to do with the song and its release. If you feel that that a particular section of an article should be split into a new page, please tag it using an appropriate template found here and discuss it on the article's talk page. Simply deleting sections of information from an article is called blanking and is considered vandalism under Wikipedia's rules.

If you need help with the rules of editing, please take a look here. Once again, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! smileydude66 05:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I endorse these comments Albatross2147 23:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newington College

Please refrain from putting emotive, inaccurate and unverifiable content on Wikipedia. The First line of the Industrial Dispute article in Newington College would suffice with links to relevant material. This is an ongoing dispute and cannot be covered with a NPOV at present. You have accused me of vandalism when I am just expecting you to cite references and not hearsay from the press. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.33.38 (talk • contribs) .

No, the fact that you were at the meeting and claim to have heard something is not enough - at best it falls into the area of original research. Cite reputable sources or don't write here. The fact that you were at this meeting proves that you have a vested interest and it shows in everything you write. You are not neutral and shouldn't be writing on this subject until you become so. I am not involved in anyway in this dispute and would like it to be reported with a NPOV and in Wikipedia style. If you want to share your opinion go and blog somewhere else. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.33.38 (talk • contribs) .

I have come accross this article and I am dissapointed by its abuse of the NPOV provisions of Wikiepedia and I am endeavouring to improve it or have it removed. I am not involved in this dispute other than its reporting on Wikipedia. When I see it improved I will go on to another editing crusade. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.33.38 (talk • contribs) .

You have been able to read to read the Newington College Council Act but can't find references for these dubious comments so leave them out until you can and stop slanting this article with your narrow self-interest. Attack this as an academic exersise and not as tabloid trash. If you are part of the Newington community I'm pleased I'm not involved. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.33.38 (talk • contribs) .

The personal attacks started when you questioned my honesty in relation to having no vested interest in this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.33.38 (talk • contribs) .

  • Why do you keep reverting my edits to the page on the school? For example you changed the edit about the NSW Sch Cert. Not all students in NSW do this exam. Thus a statement to the effect that nearly all do it is more correct. Albatross2147 09:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newington College Industrial Dispute

This is a poorly written article which is repetitious, contains weasel words and lacks neutrality. If you are sourcing material you should go away and source whatever is needed and work up a replacement article in sandbox rather than place unsubstantiated comments and wait for somebody to question them. Earja 02:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I have watched this article with interest and have viewed your edits with concern(as the history and talk pages show others have). If the Chaser team did in fact visit Newington then cite a reputable reference and put it back in if you must but please consider if it is really necessary. Much of this article is irrelevant but I notice that it has been pared back and citations have been added so I will refrain from touching it. I think before you edit it again or revert what you consider to be vandalism you should seriously question your own motives.--58.163.48.28 09:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

This article is lacking neutrality.--58.163.48.28 13:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Where did the contents box appear from, and how do i get it moved to the top, so it is above the welcome message. DXRAW 02:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The contents box will appear automatically, whenever a page grows to a certain number of sections -- I think four -- and will place itself juuuust above the first section heading (this is convenient for articles, but not necessarily for everything else). You can force the contents to appear in a particular place by adding __TOC__ anywhere on the page. Luna Santin 03:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:FlyBuys.jpg

[[Image:Flybuys.svg|right|200px]] Hi. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Image:FlyBuys.jpg needs replacing because it is an outdated logo and because it contains compression artefacts.

I couldn't find a good logo on the Fly Buys site, so I searched the web. On my second search "fly buys filetype:pdf", the forth item is this pdf, which easily yielded Image:Flybuys.svg. The whole process took only a few minutes and you can see the results on the right.

So please don't remove {{badjpeg}} tags, thanks. WP 09:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Triple H

Please do not deliberately introduce incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.(Halbared 08:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)) If you stick around Wiki for some time you'll see that the WWE stats (being mostly kafaybe are not adhered to), do not revert.(Halbared 08:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

It's called kayfabe. Tripper is not taller than Goldberg, as I have shown.(Halbared 08:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC))
Here's a good site for you, http://www.celebheights.com/s/Triple-H-2222.html (Halbared 08:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

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 a single page 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.(Halbared 08:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

You've just joined, stay around a while before you call vandalism. It was you who reverted the height to an overblown exaggeration.(Halbared 08:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

I just changed it to what wwe.com had it at. DXRAW 08:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


Thank you for clearing that up. WWE also have Taker at 6 10 and a half, and Andre at 7 feet 4. These ehights aren't necessarily correct. Have you taken a look at the Goldberg/Tripper picture? or at celebheights? Goldberg is a legit 6 ft 3 in from his footy days.(Halbared 08:22, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

I do it on all wrestlers. Sources differ, concensus usually comes from discussion. I have given one good source, www.celebheights.com, look at it.(Halbared 20:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC))

Well usually over contentious ones, a discussion is usually started. Good examples of this would be Hulk Hogan and Andre the Giant. WWE as a source for height and weight isn't that reliable, since they don't strive for legitimacy (eg Hogan and Andre), just to increase the size of their wrestlers (which is only natural for them as wrestling companies I suppose). But is not good for an encyclopaedia.(Halbared 07:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC))

[edit] WP: RFC

I would like to do this, however i am unsure how to start it. Could you possibly help me? I still believe WWE is the rightful source, not this new third party site. --Cookie 02:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

I have remained civil, but if you take a look at the evidence you will see that. You will also see what I stated is correct. Do not leave warnings without any justification.(Halbared 08:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

I didn't I't seems to me that you were being uncivil to Cuke monster DXRAW 09:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Point to where I was being uncivil please(Halbared 09:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC))


Also, please view Andre the Giant's page for format of warning, if you haven't been there before, perhaps you don't know, but if you visit it, you see see what the normal disclainer is like, glad to be of use.(Halbared 09:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

[Dont be a dick] This can also be targeted at you. I have not ben incivil to Cuke monster, in fact as you can see from the page your posted, he has used sock puppetry before, and with you seemingly so intent on saying I am uncivil, it is not illogical to assume that you are a poss sockpuppet. So do I get an apology now myself?(Halbared 09:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

You want an apology for removing warnings, Disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, Not including verifiable information & incorectly accusing me of being a sockpuppet. DXRAW 10:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I consider you started it. I agreed to leave the height at the one that Cuke monster wanted. You accuse me of being uncivil, which I haven't bene and you failed to point where I have been, and you persisted. That is my reasoning(Halbared 12:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC))
I have pointed it out more than once but you just brush it off. DXRAW 12:36, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
U have failed to show any.:oD Strange you ask me to sign my posst when I always do.:oD(Halbared 12:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

By removing warnings from your talkpage. Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, Also by not Assuming good faith And for future refence Include only verifiable information & No original research. DXRAW 09:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Requesting references

I have reverted your edits at Australia (continent). Please don't place tags without discussion on the talk page. Please don't add unreferenced or unverified tags when the article was referenced. Please don't request citations in the lead paragraph, check to see what is below and if ecesary request citations there.--Arktos talk 23:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You asked
Sorry about that, I did not read the talkpage. Also Why cant we place tags with without discussing on talk page & Cant ask for refs in lead paragraph. Can you please show me the policy on this so i can read up on it.
Firstly, please use the preview button. You would have found you were posting to the wrong talk page to contact me (hence your discussion on a redirect page was invisible) and also that your earlier edit of the Australia(continent) article had compromised the image display.
For more info as to what an article lead is see Wikipedia:Lead section. The lead should should provide an overview of the main points the article will make
You placed the template {{Unreferenced}} template on the page. Please read the instructions with that template - click on the link. You will see If the external links section includes a references section, this template should not be used. The article had a references section. You will also see ... where to place this template; most suggest either the bottom of the article page (in an empty 'References' section), or on the article's talk page.
The template's talk page gives further guidance. For example: {{Unreferenced}} can only be used when there are no sources (such as web links) of any kind. and reiterated As long as general references are included, {{unreferenced}} should not be used.
You also placed {{Not verified}} on the article. Once again read the template page. It says Please add this template after a good faith attempt to verify information. In many cases template {{unreferenced}} would suffice. Why double up and why add when sources were available? - did you check them? Something wrong with the Australian Institute of Marine Science - a federal government entity?
If you had read the talk page you would have sen an extensive discussion on references and their reliablility which essentially covered the policy of Verifiability, and the guidelines of Reliable sources and Citing sources.
How to ask for citations gives a general overview of which tags to use when but please read the template pages and associated talk pages if you are not familiar with their use before adding a tag.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles is perhaps a good place to start. It suggests several times using the talk pages to develop the article - for example It is always a good idea to describe the research done and sign it on the article's talk page. Those of us who ahve put the effort into doing just that expect people to read the talk page!
For information about talk pages see Help:Talk page
The purpose of a talk page is to help to improve the contents of the article in question. Questions, challenges, excised text (due to truly egregious confusion or bias, for example), arguments relevant to changing the text, and commentary on the main page are all fair play.
Wikipedia:Resolving disputes states The first resort in resolving almost any conflict is to discuss the issue on a talk page. I would go further and say the first step to avoiding a dispute is to check the relevant talk pages. Don't tag without having read the talk page as you indicate you did in this case. Wikipedia:Etiquette recommends discussion on talk pages.
I hope I haven't laboured the point excessively. Essentially by plastering tags outside their guidelines, any point you were trying to make was lost. Use the {{fact}} or {{verify}} tags unless there are no references at all. If you tag, you should discuss it or at least provide a meaningful edit summary ("Various tags" is better than nothing but hardly good enough - the help page states An edit summary should strive to answer the question, "Why did you make this edit?". Providing an edit summary, even if the edit is minor, makes Wikipedia work better by quickly explaining to other users what your change was about.).
You should also raise your concerns on the talk page as a matter of wikiquette and review previous discussions. In this case you would find they had covered similar ground. For example, it might be that you still might not be satisfied as to the reference to Sahul shelf, even though wikilinked to the article, because it might not be an obvious reference to New Guinea being part of the continent. A plethora of tags means nobody is going to be prepared to disentangle your intention.
Good luck with your editing --Golden Wattle (formerly known as Arktos) talk 10:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Experimenting

Please explain which "experimenting" you are referring to and in future please don't be so agressive in your manner.--Archifile 13:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

This is the experimenting i am referring to and I did not mean to come across as agressive. I was just using a pre made template. DXRAW 13:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Reading your User talk suggests to me that many people find you at least agressive. I suggest you take stock and start to take yourself less seriously.--Archifile 13:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
As i said before. I used a template, I did not write it. If you dont like the wording why dont you suggest a change? DXRAW 14:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alex Popov

Do you have any real objection to the Alex Popov article or are you just venting spleen?--Archifile 14:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it fails WP:BIO, Might i recomend reading this WP:FAITH. Also this WP:DELETE will help explain the process to you. DXRAW 14:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Could you please clarify how you think he fails WP:Bio? --Golden Wattle (formerly known as Arktos) talk 19:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I dont see any made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field. and made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field. DXRAW 22:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for attempting to fix my talk page header - mea culpa - the answer was an underscore "_" [1]
You said dont see any made a widely recognized contribution... but he is recognised with awards which gives sufficiently widely recognised for Wikipedia criteria - Check also the alternative tests at WP:Bio - his name gets for example 33,700 google hits. We are probably not looking for the pinnacle - at least as notable as some random Pokemon card.--Golden Wattle (formerly known as Arktos) talk 22:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] block users from editing

you know how I can block users from editing? what shall I do? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lieutenant Dol Grenn (talk • contribs) .

I want to find out how to block users because other members of wikipedia also know that.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lieutenant Dol Grenn (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Talk page slander

Please don't accuse me of things on my talk page without actually providing any links to what it is I'm supposed to have done. CelebHeights 12:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

--WinHunter (talk) 13:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Instead of filling my talk page, how about telling me what I'm supposed to have done in the first place? And by telling, I preferably mean something you haven't just pasted from the template page. CelebHeights 13:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:3RR

According to WP:3RR, you are not allowed to undo other editor's contribution in part or in whole for any reasons for more than 3 times, unless in case of obvious vandalism. Please discuss with other editors instead of reverting each other. Btw I've reblocked you because I only blocked you for 3 hours before, of which the block should have totaled 24 hours. --WinHunter (talk) 02:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

How come i get 24 hours & User:Halbared only got 8? And according to this i was reveting vandalism. DXRAW 02:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/x/r/User_talk%7EDXRAW_Archive_1_dfed.html"