User talk:Archer3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Archer3 and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Contents

[edit] The Whole Commercial Thing in Lenticular

Your comment was... (existing ad links is not an excuse to add new ad links.) So why then is it ok to have an external link that's thinly veiled as editorial, but that site in turn only links to a single commercial vendor? Is it any more editorially pure to throw up a small blog or forum with an obvious singlular commercial interest than it is to clearly label a Commercial Links area? What you're up to seems disingenuine best; whether intentional or not. Especially for a more esoteric industry area such as Lenticular, there is value in listing several of the top commercial vendors. Look around; seems acceptable in both "artificial hip" and "dog food" and all manner of places. And clearly listing the links as "Commercial" vs. disingenously listing them as just "External" is the best way to do this. (Which was pretty much the first change I'd made when I first edited this article. Nothing in the Wiki spam Guidelines is violated by clearly labeling one small bottom section as commercial vendors unless you take an overly purist perspective.

It's interesting how looking deeply into the history, some have removed SOME commercial vendors from external links, but not others. Personally, I no longer work for any particular printer or even in this industry so my interest is in just not being jerked around. Perhaps a great future Wiki addition would be - for a fee - for people to have verfied affiliations publicly listed. What's yours?

So, either accept some commercial links without bias over one or the other, or remove any form of what you consider to be spam, which includes 'filler' editorial with little added value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.206.92 (talk • contribs) 17 August 2006

[edit] Stop deleting my edit in Lenticular/ Commercial Vendors

Dear Archer3, For some reason you keep deleting the HumanEyes link on the Lenticular page. I cannot see why. HumanEyes is one of the leaders in this field and there is no reason why its link will not be there along side with the rest of the vendors that you do not delete. Amirv

[edit] 195.194.111.2

The above user has now been blocked for one week for persistent vandalism, as per your comments on WP:AIV.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  14:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] request for explanation

Please be so amiable and explain why you are deleting large parts of Ajimu, Oita on my talkpage. If you don't I will revert your edits on that page. ackoz 14:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I won't put anything back, I see your point now. It just looked that you deleted a lot with no reason. Sorry. ackoz 14:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tata Consultancy Services

Please do not revert the removal of that content on Tata Consultancy Services - you reverted an anon who removed a lot of content, but this is the content that I have been fighting myself. It is self-admitted original research, it is not neutral (for example accusing them of "slave labour") and the users who keep re-inserting it have never even attempted to discuss this - they simply accuse me of being bribed by the company (of which I know absolutely nothing about). And I will try to get the page semi-protected or something to stop this being re-inserted.--Konstable 01:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liverpool Blue Coat School

Thank you for your preserverence with the vandals at Liverpool Blue Coat School. As you will have noticed, I have been bold and made a major revert back to the last sensible version of 14 July. This had the advantage of reverting a number of "difficult to spot" vandalism changes. -- MightyWarrior 21:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of films...

Just a heads-up, please avoid reverting this page again today. It would be a violation of WP:3RR, and I don't want to see you get blocked for good-faith reversions. I've got this page on my watchlist, and I'll try to keep an eye on it some more today. -- H·G (words/works) 22:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Ah, true. Brain fart on my part! Cheers. -- H·G (words/works) 23:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for the revert on my userpage. DVD+ R/W 22:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Fletcher

sorry dude. it's just there's something odd about Tom Fletcher. it's okay if you're not a conspiracy theorist, but it's not vandalism to take interest in the conspiracy.—Preceding unsigned comment added by DunDunDun (talk • contribs) 25 July 2006

[edit] Squacketball

Added back in Squacketball as a Racquetball variation. Not sure why it was removed other than you don't think it's real. I assure you, it is. Eight of us played just the other day —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirkh3021 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 15 February 2007(EST)

[edit] Squacketball main article

Archer3, I went ahead and created a Squacketball main article Kirkh3021 01:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution

Hi there, I've replied to your question on the talkpage. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 16:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed this is also covered in this section. I've reworded the evolution article slightly to make it clear that we are talking about a rapid appearance in the fossil record but avoid making any clear statement that this appearance represents the exact time when all these animals evolved. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)