User talk:Dcooper

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Malay Archipelago Image

Is there any reason why you removed the pic from the malay archipelago article?? Wikipedia etiquette requires editors to discuss or at best provide reasoning. Unfortunately, the pic is gone and i am not able to resinstate it. --Merbabu 22:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there is a reason. The image no longer existed.--Dcooper 14:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Beter

thank you for letting me know of this discussion, i really appreciate it. please help in building and improving this article. lets work for the good of everyone...Grandia01 05:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dilana page

I am attempting to build a page for Dilana (as I see other contestants have pages), and you removed my work. Will you explain this please? TxPreacher 20:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

You added an example image to a page as you can see here. I was removing that mistake. If I accidentally removed some good edits also, I apologize.--Dcooper 20:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bovingdon

i was stating the truth my friend. let me keep it on there—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Down in albion (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Arigatou!

Thanks for the welcome! I'm not totally new but friemdly words are never unwelcome. Doumo, Dcooper, -- ben 17:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I swear to God, you had better stop spamming me with these messages. -- TornVictor 19:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

D B Cooper?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.143.59 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for helping to welcome our sorely abused new users :). And I thanked you again here. NoSeptember 18:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

ExecTaxes 12:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cheers

Thanks, Dcooper; wasn't sure what I was doing - Sandbox it will be in the future! -- ben 17:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hannah Ferguson

Apparently not havin a hard return after {{db-bio}} was making the page not show up (I think). I just put in some whitespace and now it should show up fine. Good job keeping an eye on your tagging! -- nae'blis 14:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Good to know.--Dcooper 14:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar!

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I hereby award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your dedication and persistence to fighting vandals on Wikipedia. Thanks for helping Wikipedia stay strong. Nishkid64 19:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warning on my page

I know it's from a few months ago, but what the hell did I do to warrant a warning for vandalism? And how about checking the anonymous idiot who edited my page in November and giving them a warning for calling me a paedophile? Famous Mortimer 16:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

And then changed it back within about 30 seconds! Come on, there's many many worse people than me out there. Famous Mortimer (talk) 14:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I responded on your talk page--Dcooper (talk) 21:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll state it again - and then reverted it back in 30 seconds. You didn't, as you claim, revert the edit for me as it was already done. It seems a little harsh that on the page of a man who everyone knows is a racist, you're giving "official" warnings to people calling him a racist. Thanks for doing such a worthwhile job of protecting the page of Jim Davidson. Famous Mortimer (talk) 12:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I responded on your talk page--Dcooper (talk) 20:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to List of multiplayer gametypes in Halo 2

Your recent edit to List of multiplayer gametypes in Halo 2 (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 18:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stagflation

I returned to ""'Stagflation'"" and saw great improvements to the read following my extensive editing some days back. Since many of the edits were yours, I offer bows to you. It is a much better read. Are you the one who traced to source of the term to the UK? —The preceding comment was added by User:ExecTaxes 12:42, 7 May 2007

Thanks. Actually, Alan Peakall seems to have added that info back in December at the end of the article, but then someone mistakenly attributed the word to Peter Beter at the beginning of the article. I tried to clean that up and cite a couple of sources.--Dcooper 12:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Beter

How are these not reliable sources? -Eep² 18:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

One is a primary source posted on what I guess is a fan site. Primary sources are discouraged as you can read about here. One of the sources is a mirror site of Wikipedia (answers.com). One of the sources is Cosmicawareness.org which does not meet the criteria for WP:RS. As for this link [1], it might be acceptable.--Dcooper 18:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Primary sources (though, not really since it's a fansite) are acceptable in establishing a common fact. Simply look at the first and last released audio newsletter (transcribed into text on the site) and see for yourself. That link is ONLY used to establish the 1975-1982 date of Beter's audio newsletters. Answers.com is NOT a mirror site of Wikipedia; it also includes other information not on Wikipedia. Plus, it is only used as further reinforcement of what is on allmusic.com. Why don't you research the sources before immediately preaching WP:RS? It gets tiring... -Eep² 18:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
If his audio tapes are important, you can find a better source. I'm not convinced that allmusic.com is appropriate. Answers.com is not at all appropriate.--Dcooper 18:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Go nuts--and what's wrong with allmusic.com and answers.com? Who are you to decide what's appropriate? -Eep² 03:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I have copied this discussion to Talk:Peter Beter--Dcooper 14:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attachment Therapy article

I'd appreciate it if you would take a look at this article and talk page. There is a dispute going on there with a large majority of editors on one side and one or two on the other. A calm neutral point of view might really help to calm this down a bit. I'd appreciate your thoughts. DPetersontalk 02:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will try to look at it.--Dcooper 12:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] De novo bank

I am unfortunately deleting this article, the paragraph was a clear cut and paste from http://www.vpgtitle.com/banking.htm -- lucasbfr talk 20:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Steamshovel Press

Frankly, I don't see much evidence that Steamshovel Press is notable. Its article looks like a permanent stub simply because there's not much there there, if you know what I mean. David.Monniaux put the prod tag on it, but Eep2 and Mosaic2007 preferred to keep it and correct it. I'll vote to delete it if I see that anyone has nominated it. Netuser500 03:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Realms of Chaos (MUD)

Wow, a copyright infringement which remained unnoticed for over four years... And it's written like an advertisement as well. :-/ SalaSkan 16:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess it went unnoticed because it has no links to it, and it seems to have been shifted around from names like Realms of Chaos to RealmsofChaos to RealmsofChaosMUD. Some got deleted, others were left as broken redirects. Quite a mess.--Dcooper 17:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess so. Thanks for tagging it :) SalaSkan (Review me) 17:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another warning about personal attacks

This comment goes over the line in terms of attacking another editor. You have been warned about the no personal attacks policy before. Comment on the content, not the contributor.--Dcooper 20:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

No you are dead damn wrong. I never, ever personally attacked that editor. I told that editor my opinion about his constant reverting of my edits. As I told him and now I am telling you, it is inappropriate to jam someone's POV onto an article. He wanted to put Al Franken's book's name in the Sean Hannity article twice and he wanted to listed Franken's complaints and then he wanted provide the coordinates to obtain a copy of Franken's book. I told then and I'm telling you now that it is inappropriate and violation of NPOV. I did not call him a name. If I stated that I thought he was a damn idiot for wanting to jam his opinion down the Wikipedian readers throat THEN I would have been engaging in a personal attack. I did NO such thing. You tell me where the personal attack is. You made a blanket accusation but you have NOT provided any facts to back up your claim. Please provide the specific word that I called the other editor. What is it??? Why don't you write an admin also? I want to know what I did wrong. I get comments from liberal Wikipedian editors all the time stating that I am a POV pusher. Constant. Unremitting. Never Ending. Will you as a sign of your desire to be fair and balanced in your complaining go with me to the liberal Wikipedian editors and ask them to stop calling my edits POV pushing? Will you? I would ask right now to go with me to Lulu of the Lotus Eaters talk page and tell him to stop constantly calling everyone that edits the Ward Churchill page in a way that he does not approve of POV Pushers. You should. You are fair in your condemnations. I expect to head with you right now over there and see what kind of response that you get. What do you call someone that is engaging in POV pushing??? Also, you gave me a lecture about being warned about personal attacks in the past. Is that the Wikipedian way. No one is allowed to change. Your actions that you did years and years ago are brought back up by new editors like yourself constantly. Tell me do you know the background behind those disputes or do you just assume that I was the bad actor in each of those situations because it says so on my talk page. You do not know anything about those previous run-ins with other editors. You weren't there. You have not gone back and read all of them. You don't have enough information to comment. I want you to provide me with horrible word that I called this particular editor. The one that engaged in an edit war with me, but he has the gall to threaten to call an admin on me for 3RR. Also, did you know that threatening to call an admin over is against Wikipedian policy also??? Did you? Did you go to his/her talk page and write a nastygram over there about not engaging in threats about calling in an admin?? As of the time that I am writing this message, I don't see a warning from you on that issue on that editor's talk page. Don't lecture me. I did NOT engage in a personal attack. Your accusation is wrong. These types of warnings is part of what is wrong with Wikipedia.--Getaway 21:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Incivility is what is wrong with wikipedia, not warnings about incivility. Since you want more specifics about what I objected to, here are the sentences that I thought went too far: "You want to jam Franken's childish rants down the reader's throats... You want force feed the reader your personal agenda....That's so liberal jam your opinion down their throats Wikipeidan of you." I don't know the background of the other complaints against you. My point was only that I knew you were already familiar with the policy of civility and no personal attacks. I didn't warn the other editor because I didn't think he'd crossed the line of incivility.--Dcooper 21:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Those are your examples? Well, clearly you have a total misunderstanding of personal attacks. Every single one of your examples are comments based in substantive Wikipedian rules. They are NOT based upon personal attacks. When you edit an article about Hannity and it reads like an article about Franken then it is going over the line and it is NOT NPOV. That is the substantive point of the comments you used as examples, not that editor you are defending is a "so and so" or a "whatchamacallit". I reject your warning. I focused on NPOV and his threats to call an admin, both violations of Wikipedian rules. You're wrong on this issue and that's that. Have a good day. P.S. I'm still waiting on you to review ALL of the times Lulu has called my editing "POV Pushing". I'm sure that I will be waiting and waiting.--Getaway 03:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely don't want to get into a head-banging contest with Getaway on your talk page, Dcooper--in fact, I came here to thank you for your warm and helpful welcome to Wikipedia. However, there are two items in Getaway's message above that should not go unchallenged. First, he claims that I engaged in an "edit war" with him. I most certainly did not. The page history will bear me out. Secondly, he claims that I had "the gall to threaten to call an admin on me for 3RR." Once again, a reading of the talk page at Al Franken will demonstrate that I wrote: "It also appears that you have violated the 'three-revert rule'. As a newbie Wikipedian, I am not looking to make waves or get into edit wars, or start making reports to admins, but I think that some explanation beyond a revert with an edit summary that says, "Take it to Franken's page" should be forthcoming." Obviously, this was an attempt to avoid the intervention of an admin--not the threat to summon one. I'm sorry that I had to interrupt my thanks with that unfortunate bit--I really do appreciate the helpful links. As a newbie, I am a little overwhelmed. Ossified 00:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

I am giving you one more warning about civility. Read the policy, learn why it is there, and if you can not be civil in your comments, don't comment.--Dcooper 19:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Once again, I reject your warning. I have don't know wrong. Also, please give a warning, as if that is your job, to Ossified who threatened to get an admin. You don't read the posts on your talk page do you? I haven't heard you deal with substance yet.--Getaway 20:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Getaway

Seems pretty borderline to me, but you could try an RfC or Wikiquette alert if you think it might help. The only thing I see that looks blatantly uncivil is "That's so liberal jam your opinion down their throats Wikipeidan of you." Although I admit the rest of the discussion certainly doesn't seem that friendly. Kaldari 01:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I've supported your statements. This user seems much like WatchingYouLikeAHawk (talk · contribs) in the incivility and editing style, especially at Robert Byrd and Strom Thurmond. At any rate, Getaway (talk · contribs) has been blocked many times for incivility and 3RR violations for inserting conservative-only commentary or removing "liberal" sources that he considers "opinion" pieces. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 20:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for backing me up. His rants are different from WatchingYouLikeAHawk's edits. I don't think you should press that issue.--Dcooper 20:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I won't. But someone else made a comment on my talk page regarding a possible sock. Do you have any news regarding that? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 22:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
That was me. I don't think that Keetoowah was a sock. It appears that it is an account that he abandoned after piling up quite a bit of ill will and warnings. I'll cross-post this to Seicer's talk page, as well. Ossified 22:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Kind of like now... his block and warning log is quite extensive. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 23:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I see why the user thought that. Getaway and Keetoowah do seem to have the same style of writing and the same reaction to criticism. They have interests in the same articles, and they share political views. They also both state they are members of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma who live in Texas and have law degrees. However, Getaway denies that he is Keetoowah's new account, and so I'll assume that they are just similar users and not the same. Also there is a reference here to a checkuser which said they is no connection.Dcooper 16:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
DC, when I read the page you cited (in the section labeled My tactics are working), it seemed that Fred was saying (perhaps in a less than direct fashion) that Getaway is Keetoowah. Here's his comment: "Please view Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Keetoowah#Remedies. Keetoowah is an editor in good standing, but under revert parole for personal attacks. Based on checkuser, I think this remedy applies to Getaway, but not Verklempt." Am I reading this wrong? Ossified 18:15, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
You are right. I did not read far enough down the discussion.--Dcooper 20:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, a few days after you filed the civility report on Getaway, he -- true to form -- abandoned his account (as he formerly did with Keetowah, and created a new account a few days later:JobsElihu. He's ramped up the incivility by a power of 10, is engaging in the same 3RR threats/wars, and appears to have gone over the edge. It also seems he is using this sock account to evade his block history. See his edit summaries here compared with his ones here. There's also overlap editing by both accounts on the Sam Brownback page. I think it's long overdue for an RfC or RfA on this guy. Any suggestions where to go from here? --Eleemosynary 14:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)