User talk:Damicatz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You've just never heard of it like many others. Plaeop is a wonderful and exciting and i hope many others join me in studying it.

Contents

[edit] Safe sex NPOV concern

Heyas, I saw you tagged Safe sex with the NPOV tag, but didn't see an explanation on Talk:Safe sex. If there is a part of the article you are concerned about being POV, I'd be happy to help address those concerns and bring the article into conformity with the NPOV policy. Tags like that need to have explanations in order to be helpful. Any insight you can provide would be apprecaited. Thanks! -SocratesJedi | Talk 06:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Ah, hey thanks for your reply. I removed the tag, but I'll go and check that out. I think that those comments were semi-outdated and have been talking with User:Sci guy about some other edits to the article too, but I'll do make sure about that too (that it really is the case that those concerns are old, if they are not, I'll re-add the NPOV tag). Thanks for your concerns and your reply though! -SocratesJedi | Talk 22:18, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:WoS Box art.jpg

Image deletion warning Image:WoS Box art.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

[edit] DB

Please be a bit more careful about speedy tagging - you tagged Homesick as nonsense when it was it was quite clearly a carefully written book review. -- RHaworth 04:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism protection

Hey, thanks for explaining and not just deleting without saying anything. I thought that only admins could do it, but then I saw a non-admin do it, so I guess I was misled. There really should be a vprotect on Featured Articles though.. I'm not sure why no one has put one up.

It did clear it up, thank you. And I'm sorry I screwed up your discussion page twice in a row by accident.. Dan 06:35, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Damicatz

You wouldn't happen to be damicatz from upnetwork, would you?PiccoloNamek 08:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, just making sure. There's more than one PiccoloNamek, believe it or not, so I thought there just might be another dami. Anyway, thanks for reverting my userpage. That guy needs to get a life!PiccoloNamek 08:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your attention to the Arcata Eye page. I believe the anonymous editors are members or close associates of the Plazoid, and are thus prone to a certain point of view regarding the Eye. --Metatree 23:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pro-Test

I have actually just asked for Peer Review for the article so as to get some other perspectives. So far, the only sourced criticism of Pro-Test is in the article, and being associated with the group myself I don't feel I'm in a good position to make those criticisms myself. Thanks for the tip, though. --ProTestOxford 20:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for policing User:Dcfleck. --Dcfleck 00:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] no one asked you

69.179.75.234 03:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

don't be so darn happy either 69.179.75.234 03:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't remove it that time!!!! 69.179.75.234 03:56, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

  1. you didn't understand that last remark

2.I just made it so you had to scroll down

3.You have never used an ip, with an ip you can not create articles, and even my user page is considered an article

when i said scroll down i meant this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:69.179.75.234&diff=39442203&oldid=39442174

And i did not know that was a warning

You're probably having a good day if an anon tells you not to be so darn happy ; )
Adrian Lamo ·· 04:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please don't vandalize my userpage. The IP address was me. I wasn't logged in. Thank you. --Analogdemon (talk) 01:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Nice touch putting it up for deletion. You, nor anyone else, can bully me around. --Analogdemon (talk) 02:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I will not stop just because certain admins consider this in bad taste. They do not represent the "community" so therefore, they are in the minority. Five admin's opinions do not represent consensus.

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page! I greatly appreciate it. --Hansnesse 02:29, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

Really? Are you sure I could get blocked? That's not my interpretation of the WP blocking policy. May I respectfully suggest that you are mistaken.

Thanks!

I'm sorry, however I must respectfully disagree. I feel that I am contributing factual content.

Thanks again!

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Altosystem.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Altosystem.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. 11:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unix Games

In regards to the UNIX Games Catagory : UNIX, when used correctly, refers to AT&T's orginal UNIX operating system and their direct revisions such as UNIX System V. To my knowledge, none of the games listed in that category run on System V or any of the orginal Unices'. At the very least, I believe the category should be renamed to indicate that it is for games that run on UNIX-like operating systems. I still, however, believe that it is redundant. The games listed appear on the category pages of the operating systems they run on individually and none of those games, to my knowledge, are compatible with all modern UNIX-like operating systems. - Damicatz 20:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes UNIX was developed by AT&T, but it now applies to a number of different flavors supported by different vendors. So I suppose I shall have to disagree with your statement "when used correctly" since I'm supporting several of those flavors of UNIX right now, and it doesn't feel incorrect to be calling them UNIX. Yes it's entirely possible that some of the listed games are inappropriately catalogued. Rogue, at least, seems quite appropriate for the UNIX games category, at least in my mind. But maybe you don't consider the Berkeley flavor to be UNIX? :-) Thanks. — RJH (talk) 20:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Berkely UNIX is a UNIX-derivitive but none of the orginal UNIX code remains. So it is a UNIX-like operating system or a UNIX-style operating system but it is not UNIX. - Damicatz 21:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of the history, thanks. Looks like you will be busy cleaning up the Category:Unix of all the UNIX derivations. Good luck. — RJH (talk) 21:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Zilog Z80.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Zilog Z80.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 04:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Thomasvista.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Thomasvista.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. 10:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Thomasvistainside.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Thomasvistainside.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. 09:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)