User talk:156.34.142.158
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Thanks
Thanks bro for reverting vandalism on my page. It was appreciated. You ought to register with us. —Pilotguy (ptt) 21:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] re: st anger
infobox links??? are you kidding me? the only one that mentions genres says that st. anger is speed metal, if you can get st. anger on the list of speed metal albums then you will have a case for that sites reliablility.--E tac 14:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- You can't use Wikipedia content as source to back up an arguement. 156.34.142.158 17:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Eagles
Please stop edit warring on this article and join in the debate here: [1] so that a consensus can be reached. Thanks. Kelpin 12:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- I have read those policies and begun a debate on the issue at the above page which is the proper place to discuss the matter. If you do not agree with me please make your case there. Wikipedia policy is not clear cut on this issue and you should not dictate what it should be - it needs to be discussed. Kelpin 12:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- WP:SOCK is a policy. Have you read it before? 156.34.142.158 12:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- What relevance does that have here? Are you trying to imply that I am a Sock Puppet? If not please clarify your comments, if so please report me so I have the chance to clear my name. I was recently blocked for being a sock puppet by User:Akhilleus so you may find him / her more sympathetic to your case than the other Admins. Kelpin 12:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- WP:SOCK is a policy. Have you read it before? 156.34.142.158 12:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
-
I agree with Kelpin. Most of the people who have spoken on the matter agree with Kelpin[citation needed]. Most importantly, the discussion at the Policy Pump is on the side of allowing the links. While I understand that you are violently opposed to the addition of these two fansites, as you know, you cannot always have your own way on Wikipedia. It's SHARED editing. I hope you can accept this and cooperate with the community consensus. Otherwise, there can be no solution short of arbitration. 76.6.87.148 06:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I find this comment strange... "I agree with Kelpin. Most of the people who have spoken on the matter agree with Kelpin." ScarianTalk 09:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think the comment refers to the discussions held here [2] and here [3] these were attempts to achieve some consensus through discussion of this issue - unfortunately 156.34.142.158 and the others who keep removing the links have had very little to say on the matter, which is frustrating because I genuinely want all sides to join in this discussion and stop edit warring. Kelpin 10:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I did comment at the pump. And my views were suppported by an intervening Admin along with an editor from the midwest and 2 editors from the westcoast. 4 separate editors vs. 1 editor using 2 IP socks. Concensus = 5 to 1. No spam links. 156.34.142.158 14:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't use socks - if you think I do report me. No one agreed with you at the pump once I'd fixed the link that got vandalised by another user in the edit war. Kelpin 14:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Regarding your headcount above - at the Pump User:Sodascouts supported my position as did User:Wikidemo (after I'd fixed the vandalised link). User:Wiki_Alf stated that dmoz is appropriate when consensus is not reached on the sites that should be included. You cannot have consensus without a discussion and I have yet to see your rationale for why The Fastlane is an inappropriate site. You need to state your reasons otherwise no consensus will be reached on anything! You also need to either make an official report about my alleged sock puppetry or stop making the accusation. Kelpin 17:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't use socks - if you think I do report me. No one agreed with you at the pump once I'd fixed the link that got vandalised by another user in the edit war. Kelpin 14:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I did comment at the pump. And my views were suppported by an intervening Admin along with an editor from the midwest and 2 editors from the westcoast. 4 separate editors vs. 1 editor using 2 IP socks. Concensus = 5 to 1. No spam links. 156.34.142.158 14:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think the comment refers to the discussions held here [2] and here [3] these were attempts to achieve some consensus through discussion of this issue - unfortunately 156.34.142.158 and the others who keep removing the links have had very little to say on the matter, which is frustrating because I genuinely want all sides to join in this discussion and stop edit warring. Kelpin 10:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Personal Attacks
I don't think you have read this [4] I draw your attention in particular to the quote by Jimbo Wales. If you think I am / have sock puppet(s) report me. If not please remove or re-phrase the above comments. Thanks. Kelpin 15:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Answer
Hi - I noticed that you have a quite a lot of experience with music articles so wondered if you would mind having a look at The Answer (band) the article used to read more like a fan site - and I've tried to clean it up but a fresh pair of eyes will probably spot something I've missed, (I've also took some stuff out in my last edit and would appreciate a 2nd opinion on whether that stuff had any merit being in the article or if I was right to remove it). Thanks. Kelpin 18:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. [WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • Traceroute • Geolocate • Tor check • Rangeblock finder] · [RIRs: America · Europe · Africa · Asia-Pacific · Latin America/Caribbean] |