User talk:Hairchrm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome
|
[edit] Sorry...........
Sorry I messed up your game I can't believe I missed that move. Well anyway, you can have the next move i will mostly mess it up again 8-/, GLPhoenix741 00:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
== Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Avatar: The Last Airbender You supported this article last time, so can you support it again since the nomination resrted? The Placebo Effect 22:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inuktitut Wiki
Hello, I work for the National Inuit organization in Canada. Your proposal to close down the Inuktitut Wiki was brought to my attention yesterday. I think there are valid reasons for shutting down the wiki as it has existed for the past years, however, due to some recent developments I would like to see the wiki kept open longer. More comments are posted on the discussion page [1] --InuitTapiriit 14:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Substing
Hello and thank you for your participation in countervandalism. Please subst your warnings to vandals by simply adding subst: (Example {{subst:test1}} instead of just {{test1}}). Doing so will replace the contents of the template into the talk page instead of just transcluding the template. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 02:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds Good!-Hairchrm 02:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pensacola Ice Pilots
I was not the one who vandalized the Ice Pilots page. I was the one to remove the comments. I routinely go through and update info on that page and I never vandalize it.
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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 15:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you!
.. for reverting the vandal who defaced my user page. Appreciate it! :) - Alison✍ 07:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] User_talk:Wakemp
Your revision edits are not welcome. Please leave this page blank. Continued reverting of content will be considered vandalism Wakemp 05:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Next time you wish to blank your own user page, please log in, so that I do not mistake it as vandalism. I am not the only one, as user:RobJ1981 rved the page shortly after you again blanked it. As you want your page blank, I will not write it there. Thanks, sorry for the confusion!!! - Hairchrm 05:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- As stated in a talk page post (on my user talk): Trying to disguise the fact that the community has issues with your creation of non-notable articles by repeatedly blanking your talk page by editwarring, on the other hand, is very likely to get you blocked.. So our reverts of the blanking are justified in this case. RobJ1981 06:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 66.91.112.18 Issue
Tell me, what did I vandalize? Stop writing random stuff on my talk page- I don't know what inspired your witch hunt and I don't care. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.91.112.18 (talk • contribs).
- 66.91.112.18, I don't think they were talking about you. Michaelbusch 05:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
First of all, correct, it wan't about you. Secondly--- Actually, this is all over nothing, you (a) shouldn't have deleted our warnings, (b), should have listened, (c), should not have called us "Nazis", and (d), it isn't a witch hunt, just a bunch of disgruntled editors. - Hairchrm 05:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone attributed "Michael Busch" to a comment I added on my own talk page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.91.112.18 (talk • contribs).
Sorry I called you a Nazi. I called you a hyena later but I think I explained why. This has gotten way out of hand. I was trying to contribute to an article and got bashed by drones scanning for changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.91.112.18 (talk • contribs).
Hey, whatever. I think we are all willing to give you a second chance. Good luck editing!!! - Hairchrm 06:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I fixed the mis-appropriation. Michaelbusch 06:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rant of 72.235.14.99
What do you think of this? Why Wikipedia Can't Work
Wikipedia claims (or is promoted by its users as) a replacement for the traditional encyclopedia. They frequently compare themselves to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, but in reality Wikipedia is not an adequate substitute, let alone a replacement. What's more, because of fundamental problems in Wikipedia's philosophy, design, and operation, it would appear impossible for Wikipedia to ever become such a substitute.
There are many problems with Wikipedia, some more important than others. I'll discuss only two that have bitten me in the past. The Ignorant Edit-Bully
Many people have noted this phenomenon, though I've never seen a good name for it before. In a nutshell, the problem is that a person knowledgable in a given field (but not a regular Wikipedia contributor) notices an obvious error in a page devoted to a topic in that field. They want to be a good citizen, so they edit the page and correct the error. However, within minutes, their correction has been reverted, restoring the error, and if they're particularly unlucky, they may receive a note from the person that reverts their change, accusing them of "page vandalism".
It seems that there are a large number of Wikipedia devotees or zealots who have little more to do than hang around the Wikipedia site, watching for edits to pages that they've contributed to. Any change to "their" page is taken as a personal insult and instantly reverted, regardless of its merit. What's worse is that the types of people who do this simply do not have the knowledge or intellectual tools to recognize the merit of the contribution. They would appear to typically be young people, perhaps in their first couple of years of college. They have the headstrong ignorance of the young adult, coupled with an insecurity complex that makes them unable to accept that others might have something to contribute that they themselves lack. In "real life" they would be harmless, as they wouldn't be able to stand up to others in a confrontation, but the anonymity and isolation of the internet give them the confidence to become overly assertive.
So an expert makes a contribution, sees it discarded by someone who obviously has no qualifications to judge it and all the time in the world to get their own way, and the expert simply leaves, never to contribute to Wikipedia again. The quality of many of Wikipedia's articles clearly shows this phenomenon; reading through the edit history of many pages shows it in action, graphically. 72.235.14.99 01:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Diff
I am the same as user commons:user:Hairchrm
[edit] Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies
Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of unassessed articles tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 20:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter
The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hello
My edit wasn't vandalism. The previous edit was. I have been updating these figures for weeks. 190.10.0.111 05:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
