User talk:Scoutersig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Scoutersig, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- T.o.n.y 15:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requests for help

Scouting: Camp Whitsett
I would like to add a page/file/link to "Camp Whitsett," which is now a little stub-segment in Scouting in California. I would like to make it, just for, you know, personal vanity and glory; but could someone help me find out how?? lol sheesh. Thanks. -Greg P.S. Also, I did not realize that there was a difference between "[]" symbols and "{}" symbols. Is there some litterature I can read about that?

Hi Greg! I'm not sure scouting camps are individually notable, so it might be best to just expand the information about "Camp Whitsett" in the Scouting in California article. However, you can read more about starting new pages at Wikipedia:New page. As for your second question, The "[[]]" makes a link and the "{{}}" includes a template. Wikipedia:Editing help has more info. I hope this helps! Henrik 16:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Scouting: Order of the Arrow by lodge/council in State
Yes. For more detail, see the local articles section of the Scouting Project's RulesStandards page at: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scouting/RulesStandards#Local_articles_.28Councils_and_smaller_entities.29. Thanks for joining the project and helping! YIS, Rlevse 10:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Second/side page I want to add a page to my user page (you know, scoutersig/secondpage type) to showcase some maps. Erm, how do I do that?

Just go to the page and create it. User:Scoutersig/secondpage --pgk 18:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocking Blockheads, AKA: Vandals Can I--a non-administrator--block repeated vandals? I'm having a hard time sifting through the wikipolicy. Am I allowed? I just got done (though he may strike again) multi-reverting a vandal at Galileo Galilei. Thanks.Scoutersig 16:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Only administrators have the technical ability to block vandals. However, if you come across a vandal who continues to vandalise after repeated warnings (i.e. after you've reached the {{subst:test4}} or at least {{subst:test3}} stage of warnings), you can go to WP:AIV and it's likely an admin will block them. --ais523 16:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

My signature is broken I tried to make a 'cool' signature like other people have, but it didn't work out so well, and after trying to make it return to normal... I have a signature that won't link to my page at all--it is just text. help! Scoutersig 18:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

If you clear the Signature box, and uncheck the Raw signature checkbox, everything should be fine. If that doesn't work, post back here with the contents of the Signature box and checkbox, and I'll try to help you further. —PurpleRAIN 19:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
If you want help designing a signature, let me know what you're trying to do, and I'll see if I can help. —PurpleRAIN 19:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
This should be what you're looking for:
—[[User:Scoutersig|Scouter]][[User talk:Scoutersig|Sig]]
which looks like this: —ScouterSig
The "Sig" part doesn't show up as a link on this page because it is a self-reference. On every other page it should be a link.
The — just inserts a line before the sig (like on mine). Feel free to remove it or replace it with just a hyphen if you like.
Make sure you have the Raw signature box checked when using this signature, or it won't work properly. —PurpleRAIN 16:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paying attention

Hey, don't worry about it. That's how you find out what stuff does. :) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 11:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vincent van Gogh

Thanks for your note on the above and adding it to your watchlist. Let's see how we get on! Tyrenius 00:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grinbot's "hidden" link

Hello!

That link in cartography is an interwiki link, it builds up the language links in the left bottom box. The one in question linked to the sicilian language site. The bot's sole purpose is to update these links between the different languages - most bots around do just that.

Have a nice day! --grin ✎ 21:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 9/11 Jewish conspiracy

The history of that article says simple cut-and-paste from original/parent article. What article is the parent? It looks like it might have been 9/11 conspiracy theories. If it is, I speculate that the new article is redundant. --Midnightcomm 03:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a split of 9/11 conspiracy theories. --Midnightcomm 03:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
See my talk page. Thanks. Morton devonshire 20:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sigma Chi...

In Hoc Brother! Batman2005 00:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

IHSV, Brother Scoutersig! Drsowell 18:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current mac project collaboration

The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 14:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay kingdom flag

The Gay & Lesbaian Kingdom is a micronation, not a real country. It uses the rainbow flag. Their flag is already listed on the Wikipedia article page on micronation flags. If it is being listed on the national flags page it should definitely be removed. PS: It is a good idea to sign your comments so people know who you are. --Centauri 21:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Yep, that pretty much sums it up. --Gene_poole 02:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Happy to help

stealer! I spent so many hours on that box and now you take it and use it for your own evil designs! No, im kidding. Its cool. Post it on the new user boxes page so other people can use it. (You prob should reformat it though. Its outside of the normal boxes)--Samwisep86 23:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Reverts

You can install Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups and use them for example. feydey 12:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Camp Whitsett

FYI. --evrik (talk) 16:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flag infobox on Gay and Lesbian Kingdom

Ah. I didn't notice that it added it to a category. I suppose it can easily be fixed by substing the template and editing out the category. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 22:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

All done. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 22:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] David Beckham

Thank you for that hilarious edit summary! :-) -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 07:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vandal

(copied)

User_talk:84.53.80.194 is at his vandalism again. Scoutersig 14:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Have reported the ip here. Is there anything else that can be done? Rex the first talk | contribs 14:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
I suppose that, no, there isn't much else to be done. I just saw that you had berated him before, so I thought I'd notify some of the people who did that kind of thing. Thanks. Scoutersig 14:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reversion of edits on User:Gooku1bil

If you read what the page says, you will see that it specifically states NOT to revert any edits by me (211.28.235.242) to his page. you will note that he himself wrote that (check edit history).

The previous unsigned comment was left by an apparently unlogged-in User:Gooku1bil
Scoutersig 04:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Secession list

Looks good so far...I'd like to see a bit more about the context of the various movements. We already have a similar article for Canada; you can review it at Secessionist movements of Canada if you'd like to see how it's handled. For what it's worth, though, we treat internal new-provinces-from-existing-provinces secessions in a separate article at Proposals for new Canadian provinces and territories. Bearcat 19:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Scoutersig! Thanks for asking my advice. Did you notice that I replied on the list's talk page? — Sebastian (talk) 19:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I replied on User_talk:SebastianHelm#Secession work. Please let's keep the discussion together - your place or mine? ;-) — Sebastian (talk) 17:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please sign your posts

Hi there, I noticed that your edit to both WP:AIV and the user you reported were unsigned. Could you please remember to sign your posts on talk pages and project pages in future. Regards LittleOldMe 20:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] iTunes Images

If you look more closely at the article Microsoft Windows. You will see many 'icons' of various versions of the operating system throughout the article. For example the Windows Hybrid 16/32 and the Windows 16 bit OS sections both have icons for those versions. The [Microsoft_Windows#History|Windows History]] section also has the icon for Windows 2001. Note this is all the same article. I should also point out that Microsoft Windows is not a featured article.

In any case, the icons have been moved from the logo section to the history or version section which is more appropriate. The entire removal of the previous version icons in the reasoning of the 'contemporary' one is fine does not seem very encyclopedic. Mkdwtalk 10:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFD rationales

Please give much better rationales at AFD than "non-notable X". Please follow the advice in User:Uncle G/On notability#Giving_rationales_at_AFD. Uncle G 19:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Blocking

Most kind! If there's no argument, I'll move it to my honors page. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canyon live oak

This is of course the ultimate question one asks....what constitutes importance? Within project California there are over 10,000 articles and ultimately about 10 percent will be rated as High priority (about one or two percent will become top priority). Look at the other california articles rated high: Ahwahnee Hotel, Hoover Tower, Bishop Pine, etc. My own opinion is that canyon live oak easily merits the high designation as a tree of many uses and a tree that prehistorically had a dominant status in california, thus influencing evolution of many other species. this topic as all ratings are open to debate, but the "mid" category has some amazingly unimportant items like minor politicians, little known streams, etc. i stick by my assessment. let me know your thoughts. regards Anlace 23:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC).

[edit] IP Vandalism...

Looks like the vandalism is slow, so I guess it's not to big of a deal. ---J.S (T/C) 16:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Being an admin

Yes, you are allowed to say that. Anyway, keep up the good work and you may be an administrator yourself one day – Gurch 18:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sigma Chi

Yeah, I did get it from you. I was trying to figure out how to make them and ran across your profile via the sigma chi page. You should add it to the userbox list. In Hoc! Acidskater 21:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you know of a way to get the Sigma Chi page closed so that only actual Sigs can edit it? If so lets do it. I spoke to Eric Bolt from HQ and he said it was a good idea. In Hoc! Acidskater 16:34, 6 December 2006 (EST)

[edit] No more speedy deletion? How about 'plain' deletion then?

I think that britishinsurance.com is definitely something that should be deleted: it is only three sentences long. I know that length (or shortness) is not a thing alone for deletion; but I honestly think that the text of this article should just be moved into the Virgin Birth page due to the fact that it is the only page that links to britishinsurance.com. After looking at the criterea again, I'll agree that it should not have been 'speedy deletion,' but I'm going to put a 'regular 'deletion tag on there now. Scoutersig 22:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Great, that's what AfD is for as you know... now go get 'em dog. Reswobslc 23:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I find your accusion of spam very rude. As a Wikipedian of 4 years, I am hardly adding spam by this article. Astrotrain 00:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Attack on Pearl Harbor umpires

Yes, umpires. War games and military exercises have umpires. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC) They would take measurements and decide what would have happened had real bombs fallen instead of practice bombs or sacks of paint or flour. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Isaac Asimov

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Glad you like my work on the Asimov short story collections. The Nightfall collection is nearly complete, but there are many more to be completed, such as Buy Jupiter. --Robert Fraser 02:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion about WikiProject:California assessments

Hi there. You might be interested in the discussion about WikiProject California assessments taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Assessment#Importance scale. I noticed that you have discussed this in the past with User:Anlace. Mike Dillon 06:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The Southern California WikiProject actually came first. There were, at that time, about a dozen regular editors of Southern California article, but they were all doing their own thing, except that about half of them did some editing and vandal reversions on the Los Angeles, California article. I created the project to try to get some of those editors to work together.
I created WP:CAL afterwards. I figured that it was eventually going to be created anyway, and WP:SOCAL needed a parent. I was tempted (just a little) to leave the project as an empty WikiProject template and let someone else have the 'fun' of filling it out, but that's the sort of thing I can't do. I filled WP:CAL in a way that I think that anyone interested in helping out with California articles can jump right it, and I've tried to keep a watch over the project and answer question on the project's talk page.
Still, I've spent most of my effort on WP:SOCAL, and so I think that project is better organized and better documented. Neither project, however, seems to be as active or self-sustaining as some of the WikiProjects are.
As far at the talk page WikiProject banners go, you should change all articles that are strictly about SoCal from {{WikiProject California}} to {{WikiProject Southern California}}. A few articles, such as major cities (e.g. Los Angeles, California) or major geological features (e.g. Death Valley), should get both templates. The same goes for articles on anything that exists in both, or are important to both Northern California and Southern California, such as California Aqueduct, which should get both templates. There are probably some articles that will have different ratings between the different project (perhaps Long Beach and San Diego should be rated High in SoCal, but Mid in CAL), but the California Aqueduct is important to both regions, so I'd rate it High for both WikiProjects. I don't think I'd rate it Top for SoCal like you did, but I also think that there are good arguments for rating it Top, so I won't quibble over that rating.
We need to find a Bot owner who can help us do the conversions of the from WP:CAL to WP:SOCAL for SoCal articles. I've already mapped out the logic that would be necessary to make it a fairly foolproof conversion, but I don't know any Bot owners. Mike Dillon is creating one, but I don't think that it is ready for primetime. BlankVerse 02:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
How does one tell if the article concerns only SoCal, and not California as a whole? I think that Aquarium of the Pacific may count as one, as well as my home town of Moreno Valley, California; articles like San Luis Obispo County, California pretty much stradles the line of importance, and you pointed out that the city of LA is significant to both areas; but really, it's too vague for me to understand at the moment. Perhaps you could help narrow it down; maybe with several people inputting, we can make a wikiproject guideline, or even *gasp* a policy. —ScouterSig 07:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
It's a judgement call, as with much of what is involved with doing the assessments. The scope listed at WP:WPSC#Scope is the best place to start.
As for the Aquarium of the Pacific, my personal opinion (even though it is a local topic for me) is that the Monterey Bay Aquarium was a pioneering public aquarium and is doing important research, but the AotP is mostly a nice local tourist attraction (although much more interesting the the RMS Queen Mary). BlankVerse 08:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why you added the Attention parameter to your assessment of History of Los Angeles, California. As it says, when you use that parameter: "This article has been marked as needing immediate attention." To me, that means that the article has SERIOUS problems, such as major POV writing, edit warring, formatting problems, etc.

I also answered your question at talk:History of Los Angeles, California. BlankVerse 09:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

As for the LA article: "oops." I didn't realize that it was as such: I thought it was a much more discreet suggestion and less of a blatant attention alarm. I also appreciate your comment on the article's talk page. —ScouterSig 15:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
See the discussion on my talk page at User talk:BlankVerse#WikiProject-specific categories for references, etc. Mike Dillon has what I think is a very interesting idea where he'd use a Bot to look at all the pages in a WikiProject, looking for any articles that have dispute templates, and then the Bot would create a page for the WikiProject of all their pages that need attention.
As for the sort of attention that you were thinking of, both projects have Todo pages (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern California/to do) that have been used successfully by other WikiProjects, but have been unused on the California WikiProjects. Someone even removed the transclusion of the SoCal Todo page from the main SoCal WP page because it wasn't being used. Other projects have used either WP-specific Collaborations or Article Improvement Drive pages to get groups of editors to work together on on an article. So far, the members of both California WikiProjects haven't shown much enthusiasm for group projects, so I haven't tried to force anything. If you want to try to start something, take a look at some of the WikiProjects that have successfully used those techniques, but be prepared to be a cheerleader for awhile until the efforts become more self-sustaining. BlankVerse 22:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities

A HA! I finally got you to follow my example and join the project. I was wondering when you were going to to join, you person addicted to wikipedia Samwisep86 22:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot originally gave me some suggestions on 17 December 2006 (UTC); YOU should go get some too! —ScouterSig 19:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Test Icicles

Hey, no problem. The fact that the guy's name was (inexplicably) a redirect to Test icicles instead of just being the article itself and making Test icicles a redirect made no sense. But all is well now! -- Kicking222 20:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IP Revert

That's strange, when I reverted it, it was his vandalism of your first warning. Your warning wasn't showing up anymore and I thought I was reverting it back to your warning, which is what showed after I made the revert. I wasn't trying to revert you at all, but trying to recall your warning from his vandalism. Shsilver 21:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Userbox

I appreciate the validation of my point of view in your new userbox. Mufka 16:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the pizza!

Kewl! My first wiki award! :) Thanks a lot. --Eliyahu S Talk 22:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the award

Thank you for the barnstar. I didn't think anyone noticed the redirects. ;-)

Heck even I don't really pay much attention to them, except when I run across a weird one, or someone has created one or more in violation of WP:POINT (looking at "What links here" on even semi-controversial articles can sometimes be enlightening).

If just 1% of my edits have been redirects, I've done at least 130 of them. I thought that guestimate might be high, but if I've averaged four redirects a month for almost two years, that's 96 redirects. If you count both new redirects and the editing of old redirects, I think that I've probably done that many.

Just my personal opinion: The best subject line is just a simple direct "Thank you".

Would you mind if I kept your praise on my talk page, but edited out the barnstar? BlankVerse 21:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

That was quick! Thank you for taking care of my last request. BlankVerse 21:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Not a problem. Perhaps I'm bummed that you don't "do" barnstars, but I'm not here to judge: just to give praise where necessary. Happy wiki-ing! —ScouterSig 21:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
The main problem that I have with barnstars is that I've seen a few too many instances of editing cliques who have circle jerked each other with barnstars, essentially rewarding each other for their POV edit warring. I greatly appreciate any of the personal thank you's that I've received over the past couple of years (including yours), but I am not fond of barnstars and so I have preferred to keep my user pages barnstar-free. BlankVerse 23:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Vincent van Gogh

The heading has now been linked. Good idea! Dafoeberezin3494 17:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ah, here you go!

I saw your userpage, and I found out you're an Eagle Scout! Well, as thanks for signing my autograph book, I hereby award you this Eagle Scout Medal (did I say that right? :-). --Tohru Honda13Sign here! 07:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I saw your userpage, and I found out you're an Eagle Scout! Well, as thanks for signing my autograph book, I hereby award you this Eagle Scout Medal (did I say that right? :-). --Tohru Honda13Sign here! 07:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Society Barnstar
For your work in improving all articles related to Greek Life, even though Sigma Chi is the best.

Acidskater 10:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
With thanks I award you this Barnstar. Timrollpickering 18:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kappa Alphas

I changed the W&M and UMD pages to reflect that the organizations at those schools are Kappa Alpha Order organizations, not Kappa Alpha Society organizations. I'm not sure if you meant to set them both to be Kappa Alpha Society schools, but neither the schools' webpages nor the society's webpage (http://www.ka.org/KA-chapters.html) reflect that. Just wanted to note that in case there was confusion -- since I was made two identical changes to your edits, I figured I'd mention it in case I've missed something.

Cka3n 02:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rushing African-American Fraternities

Hey Scout, I saw your request for cleanup on this section. As written it is not in any way universal, and in some cases is outright wrong. The text was cut and pasted from a section of an existing blog titled "Joining a black fraternity or sorority." Text and cites for this section were also placed by a banned sockpuppet[1] who seems to places nonsense in various articles in hopes of bolstering attacks on various African-American fraternities and sororities. Hope that helps; I tagged the section, but it probably needs to come out altogether. -Robotam 17:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Conversion of {{WikiProject California}} to {{WikiProject Southern California}}

It's funny, since I was the one the group "gently chided", I thought I was the only one re-tagging. I appreciate your support, and of course I support you as well. And I do agree about Riverside County, I probably should have left both. I said I wouldn't add/move/change any tags until the discussion is over, so when it is, I'll at least re-add the {{WikiProject California}} tag back to the county. Thanks again, Brien Clark 17:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, a whole lot of talk and no action, no consensus, and a lot of disappointed people in the process. I feel bad for BlankVerse. I wouldn't worry too much about KP though, I've never interacted with a more capricious fellow.
Yes, I guess we can go back to dual tagging to keep good faith. Because I really think the single tags is what is best for wikipedia, I'm half-tempted to prod on with converting tags per WP:IGNORE, but I won't. The whole debate has made me disinterested in banner tagging in general. I'll probably move on to doing something else for WP:SOCAL. Brien ClarkTalk 19:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good idea

Hey Scout - I think your most recent post on the Calif tagging question is very practical and workable. Do you think you might be re-involve some of the other folks who had contributed to get their views on your most recent suggestion? Spamreporter1 19:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Independent proposal for WP:CAL and WP:SOCAL tags

"He was not previously involved with either project before seeing this discussion, and I belive that his opinion therefore is NPOV."

User:Spamreporter1 is a sockpuppet of User:Ronbo76. They are also the editor who is responsible for the original hubbub over this issue, and the one who placed requests for comment on several project's talk pages (which is okay, but it would have been better to file an WP:RFC in my opinion, and I thought that the placing of one of the RFC's on the WP:OWN talk page [see here] was uncalled for). They also canvassed several editors on the issue. IMHO, they are not a neutral party in the discussion.

As a single-purpose account intended for separating spam fighting from regular editing, that is a legitimate reason for having a sockpuppet account, but I think the account should be identified as a sockpuppet, and it shouldn't be used for anything other than spam fighting. BlankVerse 07:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Even without a smoking gun, a quick look at Spamreporter1's contributions would show that they were not a Wikipedia newbie when they first started editing as Spamreporter1. Other editors had also noticed this, and User:Will Beback specifically asks User:Spamreporter1 "Are you also active under a differnt username?" [2]
For the smoking gun, see this reply [3] that User:Spamreporter1 left on User:Will Beback's user page:
"Because of my concern regarding possible personal attacks cluttering my regular user name, I created this user name for these types of issues only, a legitimate use of an additional user name."
As for identifying Spamreporter1 as User:Ronbo76, that is a little less certain. Still, based upon their writing styles and how they interact with other users, I am confident that they are the same person. BlankVerse 06:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
The plot thickens. Brien Clark 01:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delaware-wedge.gif

Actually, Pennsylvania was a different color (a light pink), but I went ahead and darkened it anyway. — Eoghanacht talk 17:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject California

"I notice you're not officially listed as a member of either project. And since you started them, I was just wondering why."

See User:BlankVerse/rants#On joining WikiProjects and Regional notice boards. BlankVerse 08:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Shattered union map.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Shattered union map.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 18:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please vote

Thanks. Ronbo76 21:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SoCal/Cal Project

The problem with this is that the initial decision was incorrect and exlusionary, so it must be changed. KP Botany 18:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

I noticed your wikibreak, and thought you could use some cheering up. Thank you for all your hard work, it is apreciated. Don't let the trolls at WP:CAL get you down, they're just trying to keep their article count up at the expense of making wikipedia better. Hang in there Scout. Brien Clark 04:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] [4]

I am This Commons user. —ScouterSig 15:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] userbox

I now have obscounded with one of your user boxes. Now we have exchanged boxes vis a vis .Samwisep86 07:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hard versus Soft science fiction

Asimov is also mentioned in article for Hard science fiction as one of defining authors of this subgenre. —Q Original 21:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Samurai Jack

Didn't know anybody would be paying attention, but thanks for the complement. If I can I'll try and do a little bit of copy editing with the article later. Hewinsj 16:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories versus lists

The choice between categories and lists can be difficult, although I recommend lists for most situations.

Categories are probably best when subjects can be grouped together based on simple, clear criteria; when the characteristics described by the categories are major characteristics of the subjects; and when only a minimal number of references are needed to establish that the articles meet the inclusion criteria. For example, Category:Presidents of the United States is a functional category because identifying a person as a United States President requires only one reference and because the position is clearly one that most people identify with the individuals.

Categories are less useful if the inclusion criteria are unclear or if the characteristics described by the category seem like only minor details to the subject. (Many people have the impression that fraternity/sorority membership is only of minor significance to these people, which is why people are advocating the deletion of those categories.)

Categories do not work at all if the individual articles could be placed in many similar categories, mainly because the category system will become too long to read. This is why actors are no longer categorized as cast members in specific TV shows or movie series. (Also, see Zebra Waxbill.) Also, if membership in the category requires extensive referencing, then the category will not be useful. This is part of the reason why Category:Freemasons was deleted.

Lists are also much better if additional, complex information can be given on the subject. For example, see list of blue plaques. Also, when dealing with some subjects (for example, African-Americans in science), articles on the subject can communicate much more about the issues than either categories or lists of related items.

This is my perspective into lists versus categories. Also, several people have commented that some "category versus lists" guideline pages in Wikipedia may be out of date; you may want to keep this in mind. You should also see Wikipedia:Overcategorization for some examples of other bad categories.

I hope this is useful. Dr. Submillimeter 09:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

You may find WP:CLS, WP:LIST, WP:CAT, and WP:NCCAT useful as well : ) - jc37 08:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fight Club

I saw your comment on Bignole's talk page and thought I'd give you the heads-up. The Fight Club DVD has a commentary in which the director describes the film as a black comedy with heavy satire. From the sources I've seen, this was done by the director so it would be satirical and seditious, instead of sinister and seditious. In addition, Edward Norton said this in an interview with the Yale Herald: "[Fight Club] was a dark, comic, sort of surrealist look at some of the dysfunctions of our generation and of young people who are feeling out of sync with the value system they are expected to engage in." It's not solely a black comedy -- other themes, such as self-identity, exist in the film. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fight Club

Just because you do not think that it fits does not mean that the filmakers did not intend for it to be that way. I personally found it hilarious, and repeat viewings make it even more so. If you can, I suggest listening to the commentary, and then watching the film again. You'll find even more things to laugh about, because some are very subtle, or not at all explained except in commentary. I've personally been working with User:Erikster on updating that article, and by personally I mean he's doing all the work and I'm just assisting in the DVD information. You can view what he's done so far here. I've already had this discussion with another editor (not being offensive, or trying to sound annoyed, just stating that I'm aware that in the current state of the article that it isn't clear why that category is there).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] California

The proposal to merge is the equivalent of a deletion - the article will no longer be there. Please don't remove my posting again until the discussion is over. --evrik (talk) 13:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trimming Ayn Rand's influences

Thanks for your support but some guy reverted all my work and I didn't really want to argue with him. I only have a little interest in Rand so it's not really my place. Just recently, someone else came in and trimmed the list again, only he went too far and removed people who were famous and do claim to be influenced by Rand in a big way. For example, LaVey admitted that his entire religion was a rehash of Objectivism, so his name belongs. I haven't decided whether I want to try fixing this but I don't want any more conflict. Lancombz 21:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Magister officiorum

I just finished translating the German article into English. Take a look? Dr Gangrene 11:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/c/o/User_talk%7EScoutersig_db45.html"