User talk:Bakersville

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Welcome!
2 WikiProject Argentina et al
3 Image tagging for Image:Kirchner chavez morales.jpg
4 World of Warcraft
5 Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can
6 Robert Mugabe
7 Talk:Salesians of Don Bosco
8 Red link

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I noticed you are known only as an IP address; that means you are not signed up. To sign up, you only need to click Create account and choose a username and password. You don't need to provide any personal information. If you sign up, you'll have a username that others can use to recognize you and leave you messages on the wiki. You'll be able to sign your name just by typing four tildes (~~~~) when you leave someone else a message. Plus, you (and others) will easily be able to see a list of all your contributions to Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask at the Village pump, or feel free to ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

[edit] WikiProject Argentina et al

I see you've been editing pages about Argentina. We've been having some discussions on certain current issues, and I thought I might point out to you that there's a group of editors (Argentine and others) working on those articles and trying to make them as verifiable and neutral as possible. I've reverted or changed some of your additions and wanted to suggest that you spend some time reading about editing policies; in particular, controversial or high-profile comments should be inserted very carefully and with good sources. There are unfortunately a lot of things going wrong in Argentina that we'd like to denounce in the loudest possible manner, but Wikipedia is not the place for that.

With regards to the changes I've made to your changes, please see the histories and talk pages of the relevant articles, and consider discussing in the talk pages before making extensive editions.

If you're an Argentinian, I invite you to categorize yourself as one by inserting [[Category:Wikipedians of Argentina]]. This is completely optional, of course. I'd also like to invite you to check the Argentine notice board and, if you're interested enough, to join WikiProject Argentina. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 18:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Kirchner chavez morales.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kirchner chavez morales.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] World of Warcraft

Hi there,

I saw you removed this sentence from the World of Warcraft article:

It has also been confirmed by a Community Manager on the general forums that the epic raid dungeons in the expansion will have a cap of 25 people, including the raid to defeat Illidan.^{[citation needed]}

..with the comment "Not true - Check blizz website". I was wondering if you could point out where Blizzard have said this claim is incorrect? I haven't had much luck finding a source for the original claim, given how hard it is to find anything more than a couple of days old on Blizzard's forums, but a CM (Eyonix I believe) absolutely definitely did state that all raids in the expansion, including Illidan's Black Temple, would have a 25 man cap. —Stormie 14:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

p.s. see [1] and [2] for an offsite archive of Eyonix's posts in a couple of threads. I'm not sure that this meets Wikipedia's definition of a "reliable source" though. :-) —Stormie 14:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought i read that there were 40 people dungeons in the Outland map in Blizz site, but actually the map only states raid dungeons. I don't think however that the original claim is right, all dungeons added in the last versions had been either 20 or 40. Anyhow, probably leave it without the claim if it's only hearsay. [[user:bakersville]

Yeah I think the Outland map just marked things as "raid dungeons" without mentioning a player cap. Anyway, rereading over that section, I think the whole 40 -> 25 man thing is best left to the World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade article, where it is well covered. --Stormie 00:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Argentina, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

[edit] Robert Mugabe

Regarding your edits of the Robert Mugabe article, please take note of the three-revert rule. Would be a pitty if you were blocked. --Ezeu 22:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Salesians of Don Bosco

About the Salesian article ... I stated my reasons on the talk page. --evrik ^(talk) 22:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Since one of the edits was to change an anonymous vandal ... that shouldn't count ... but have been counting. --evrik ^(talk) 20:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
The policy states that reverting vandalism doesn't count. In any case, I thought I was being reasonable by only changing the title. I'll fix that right now. --evrik ^(talk) 21:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm going AFK soon. Maybe we can resolves this tomorrow. Do you want to start a straw poll? --evrik ^(talk) 21:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
That's a lot of effort because of the title of the section ... please put your changes on the talk page first. --evrik ^(talk) 22:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Let's just keep it to the talk page. That's where I will answer you. --evrik ^(talk) 15:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Bakersville. I happened to see the article in question, and support your addition of that paragraph. I find it to be neutral, and have said so on the talk page. I have also removed the neutrality disputed tag. It is clear to me that it was not added in good faith. Jeffpw 15:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to point out WP:CANVASS. Arbcom weighed in with this statement: "Briefly, a reasonable amount of communication about issues is fine. Aggressive propaganda campaigns are not. The difference lies in the disruption involved. If what is happening is getting everyone upset then it is a problem. Often the dividing line is crossed when you are contacting a number of people who do not ordinarily edit the disputed article." Is that what happened on the Don Bosco article? Jeffpw 09:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- So, this issue (abuth the Salesians) is settled? --evrik ^(talk) 20:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

- - Consider the issue settled. Bakersville 21:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

If you look at WP:CANVASS it says limited posting that is neutral and bipartisan is acceptable. I got tired of the back and forth and hoped that bringing in some other ediotrs would resolve the difference. It worked didn't it? --evrik ^(talk) 21:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)