User talk:No Guru

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives

Enter new messages below:


Contents

[edit] PLEASE HELP

I tried taking it up with the editor (user:stoneface02), but he is being unreasonable. I cited my information and it is unbiased and it is valuable. Will you PLEASE help me with this situation. I am not deleting any of his information and would appreciate the same respect. THANK YOU IF YOU CAN HELP AT ALL.

I've even tried compromising, but he seems to have either gathered more names of his own or friends of his to form a "consensus" to leave it off. Kruse56 21:20, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colbert

Any idea on how long Colbert will be sprotected? The "Quotes" section title makes no sense... if you wouldn't mind tweaking that back to something that makes more sense, that would be great. Thanks. --198.185.18.207 16:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, you there? --198.185.18.207 16:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but you sprotected, so I thought you'd be a fine contact. The issue is that there is only one sourced quote there, so "Quotes" is wrong. Also, the self-referential heading is unencyclopedic. "Quotes by Colbert" is unnecessary as the article is already about Colbert. If anything it should just be "Quote". But that doesn't make too much sense either... so I had changed it to "Commencement address". Thanks for the response. --198.185.18.207 17:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey No Guru, how's life treating you? The reason I have "Quotes by Colbert" as opposed to just quotes is because on several articles I've edited I've also included a section called "Quotes about...." I don't think there is a WP policy on this, but if there is, could you point me to it so I can enlighten myself? You'll see why I have been labelling these sections on the Floyd Abrams article I wrote. Granted, if there isn't a section where other people are quoted, it may be pointless to include the "...by Colbert" - any insight? --DavidShankBone 18:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to change it back, mainly because without a "Quotes about Colbert" section I agree with the anon user that it doesn't make sense. I probably edit with future additions in mind more than is necessary. But if I stumble upon a good quote by a respected individual, then I will probably change it. I'm not looking for one, though. Keep up the good work : ) Dave

[edit] chessGuru.net

Hi there Could you tell me why was chessguru.net removed from Chess/External Links/Learning chess on 20 september 2006 . If I'm not mistaken the reason for its removal was that it was a commercial link. But that couldn't be it! The site is absolutely free.

[edit] University of Santo Tomas

I need backup on this, I might exceed 3RR. Also, I highly suspect the image is copyrighted. Thanks. --Howard the Duck 16:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IchessU

A) Sorry about the archive B) The guy banned over it - I conviced him that Chess University is a good think.

Please return the link —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alikfi (talk • contribs).

Again you misrepresent the facts. You were banned by User:Guinnog and you didn't convince him of anything. -- No Guru 01:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Guys, why both of you make the life so hard? Agree with me it's a good link and very rellevant for chess education. I dont spam, I publish it only once under learning chess it belongs to. Please stop delisting it.

[edit] Spanish Armada

See you've been picking off a lot of vandals on this article, the latest being on the English Channel section. I just want to revert to a former edit that doesn't state that the fleet was "delayed by excellent weather" (first sentence), but that might screw up other edits you've made. Wot u fink?--Shtove 00:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Jonathan Papelbon

Sure, I completely understand that philosophy. In fact, it's one to which I subscribe. However, the content, if left like that, would severely detract from the article, as the header was unencylopedic and the content was rife with spelling/grammar errors. I don't have a problem with leaving the content in, but it's beyond me why you just reverted without attempting to fix the errors, as I just did hoopydinkConas tá tú? 06:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hockey and Blue Jays

Do you have a favorite hockey team in Canada or are you a fan of the Blue Jays? Because I kind of like them too. Kruse56 14:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Kruse56

[edit] Dispute Resolution

No Guru, I have set up a RfC for User:Kruse56 due to his multiple violations of WP:Attack in his personal attacks towards me. He has turned the David Ortiz discussion personal. Please see Talk:David Ortiz and User talk:Stoneice02, as well as the accusation made on your own page. Please then visit Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kruse56 and comment. Thanks in advance. Stoneice02 05:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Those nifty boxes

Hi No Guru,

Just a question, how does one use those boxes you have on your user page? Is there a list of them somewhere? -- Kester Teague 22:19, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfB With A Smile :)

      

[edit] Vandalism on "film"

Reporting random, obvious vandalism on "film", 17th Oct. (two days ago). Can't clear it up: blocked IP address (community address). Just thought I'd let you know. --Kingers 18:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mays Edits

I removed the HOF template by accident and nothing more. I did explain why most of the information was edited in the summary. As there is only so much room in the edit field, there is only so much I can do. That article has a number of unsourced statements, statements of conjecture and opinion, and repeated information. This is the case with many of the articles that you seem to come accross. It would be great to get some help.Tecmobowl 04:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

OK but you did it again, even after it was pointed out by my edit summary. -- No Guru 04:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Just a warning: Tecmobowl (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log) is a borderline vandal and tends to act as if he owns articles, removes content, and acts as an expert when he is not. A lot of his "improvements" are removing information and poor rewrites. You have been warned. TV Newser Tipline 04:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gordon Campbell

I noticed that you reversed my editing by removing 'The Honourable' off his name. However, I wish to let you know that it by the Style of Address of Canada that he's termed 'The Honourable' while he's in office[1].

The Style of Address appears on all the current Premiers of Canada and is done according to the policy of Wikipedia.--Cahk 22:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for removing vandalism from my user page. Much appreciated! --Jay†Litman 17:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/o/_/User_talk%7ENo_Guru_6323.html"