User talk:Gazpacho
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I don't actively edit Wikipedia any more, aside from defending accuracy of a few specific articles.
This page was archived June 15, 2005 January 30, 2006 July 18, 2006 October 24, 2006
Contents |
[edit] My support
I totally agree with your statement on the user page, and I'm doing exactly what you're doing. Good luck. P.S.: Have you ever seen www.wikitruth.info ? --necronudist 16:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks!
Thank you for so gracefully resolving the conflict on Waterboarding. I'd have done it myself but I don't write as well as you. However, I adamantly disagree with your statement that you "don't actively edit Wikipedia any more." I'd say making 9 edits just today counts as pretty active. Nathanm mn 00:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Requesting comments on link in Evergreen article
As a previous contributor to the article on Evergreen International Aviation, could I request your input on the talk page on whether it should contain a link to the corresponding SourceWatch article? With thanks, --Neoconned 12:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bill Gates
Thanks for the note. I do not doubt you have a stronger knowledge of the exact circumstances. Gabrielthursday 06:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] COntact me
Dear Gaz, regarding this map you have made:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CommunistSplit.png
I'd like to know how you have created it. Please contact me, preferable by email. Address on my user page. - Peter Bjørn Perlsø 22:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Secform4.com link at Bill Gates
I went through a whole dispute with User:Vicn12 over this link, which he was adding at Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and several more appropriate articles such as Form 4 and Option. Vicn12 is affiliated with the site, as he admits at Talk:Warren_Buffett#I_need_some_inputs.2C_please, so his adding the link to any page definitely counts as spam. He has already used one obvious sock puppet, so I wouldn't be surprised if User:207.47.130.88, who re-added the link at Bill Gates, was a sock-- this is the link that I removed as spam that you reverted. Even he's not a sock, I would be leary of allowing a link to this site to stand for any one investor article, because it would justify adding it to every trader who has an article here. Granted, there is nothing wrong with the site as an external link per se, but I would hate to see it added to scores of articles. So I'm going to revert your reversion, but if you re-add, I'll leave it alone (though I hope you won't!). Thanks, -- Mwanner | Talk 21:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your deletion of section at OK Corral gunfight
Please carefully read WP:BOLD on the subject of deletions. Section deletion is for vandals and vandal-reverters. Simply deleting sections which aren't NPOV-enough is generally an act of laziness. This leads to edit wars. You know that. So stop, think, and then edit a problem section to make it more NPOV. Few sections have nothing to offer. They are there for a reason. In this case, there are questions here, as in any assassination or shooting, and there have been later investigations. These need discussion. If you don't like the quality of that discussion, then fix it WP:SOFIXIT. Deletion with rude comments is not fixing. If you can't bring youself to do the work, then just leave the matter entirely alone. If you have problems with Wikipedia (as most of us do) don't take it out on the articles. Go the WP:PUMP and complain there. SBHarris 16:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe I removed it because the whole section was someone's personal opinion of a TV program and how it "shoulda" been made. Gazpacho 02:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Category:American Revolutionary War
You've been putting it into the uncategorized categories list. -- ProveIt (talk) 05:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This is Wikipedier. I got your message about more usful information about Bill Gates and Microsoft, but I don't know any more information. I did however think that replacing chairman with chairperson for Bill Gates would avoid more controversy. Chairperson means chairman, but I think people will take less offense in chairperson.
[edit] My Arbcom vote
What's objectionable on my userpage? Your reason was 'oppose, based on userpage'. ~Crazytales56297 | t+c 13:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spam by IPspammer, NOT you
Nope, it's not me. There are quite a few people in this company. Block the IP if you have to, I have no basis to complain. Gazpacho
- Dude, no one was ACCUSING YOU of spam. Just that IP. You made an unsigned comment on the page, I tagged it with {{unsigned}}, and that's all. Blanking user comments/warning (like MINE) is vandalism; don't do that, okay? End of line. David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 01:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
