[edit] Lindsay Lohan
Hi, im new here...and i cant edit protected pages until my account is 4 days old..so, can u do these small changes to the Lindsay Lohan article that i think is necessary for the page......thank you....since your not accepting to unprotect the page, then the least you can do is the following on my behalf...
In the infobox, it says Casablanca (2005 - 2007) that should be changed to Casablanca (2004 - 2007) cause lohan signed with Casablanca in 2004...[1] ................
In the Acting Career , there is
- 2.1 Early career
- 2.2 Career 'developement' <<<< [First, notice in the article that the word development is written wrong) (Second, i think this one should be named "Breakthrough success and Career development"
- 2.3 Return to acting
................ A new section should be created, it should be named "Other activities"
and in that section, put the following: Lohan is the new face for Visa Swap [2] ..................... Labor pains should be added in the Filmography section, cause it already started filming.....[3] 213.42.23.71 (talk) 15:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hello, I have fixed the typo for you, but the other changes all seem to be at least a little controversial, especially in regards to the reply you got on the article's talk page. When you get autoconfirmed, then feel free to edit the article, this of course doesn't mean that you won't get reverted. I would continue to use the talk page and try and get a consensus for your changes. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 19:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Help desk revert
Ah, thanks for reverting that. I usually put the date in everyday because the bot usually puts the new date in 25-30 minutes when the new day arrives. I'm watching the help desk and I wen t to the help desk through the link on my watchlist and it was actually tha talk page since that was where the last edit was made in the help desk. My mistake. -- RyRy5 (talk) 00:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you, Gonzo, for saying that I do well at the help desk. By the way, I think your active sometimes at The Test Wiki. Do you think Wikirights would be a good place to be also? -- RyRy5 (talk) 00:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for joining. Well, back to Wikipedia related things. What do you think of WP:UPH and baseball uniform? -- RyRy5 (talk) 01:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Regarding WP:UPH, I just wanted to know what you thought of users assisting other users in renovating their user pages. That's all. :) I'm one of the only active users there though. -- RyRy5 (talk) 01:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gonzo fan. --RyRy5 (talk) 01:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] watchlist
Thanks, I replied at Template_talk:Watchlist-notice#Multiple_watchlist_messages. — xaosflux Talk 01:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Gonzo fan2007. There is a request at WP:RFPP to undo the full protection on this article. I know little about it, except that Darkest-Link33 and Thetriforcehero have been indef blocked for puppetry. That might decrease the amount of edit warring there. Since you did the protection so recently, I thought I'd leave a note for you instead of unprotecting it myself. EdJohnston (talk) 03:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. (Search for 'Zelda' if you want to see the request at RFP; a link doesn't seem to work). I reduced it to semi-protection. EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Any thoughts?
On List of Oakland Raiders head coaches. Because I'm hoping to get this to FL status. Buc (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Nominated. Buc (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Review
Hello again Gonzo fan. Do you mind reviewing my last 500 contributions or so. I think you mentioned that you would take a look at my contributions yesterday. --RyRy5 (talk) 06:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Erm, okay, I think.:s --RyRy5 (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 |
|
The Guidance Barnstar |
| For taking the time to review my editing, guiding me to the positives and negatives I have done, and showing me how and what I can continue and start to improve from them, I RyRy5, award « Gonzo fan2007 the Guidance Barnstar. Thank you! :D It is very much appreciated. Regards, RyRy5 (talk) 23:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
[edit] Deleting duplicate Images
You deleted Image:A6M3 Model32.jpg as an exact duplicate of an image on commons as Wikipedia:CSD#I8 - unfortunatley the original image was still in use at A6M Zero and had not been renamed, causing the image to disappear from the article. Please check to see if an image is in use in the original name before doing this again.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikirights image?
Um, I just saw you upload Image:Wikirights.png on RC. I'm curious of what it is.--RyRy5 (talk) 07:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it looks pretty good. Do you want me to add it? Well, in a few minutes? (I have something to do per the section above the one you just posted on my talk page) --RyRy5 (talk) 07:18, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I just need the URL. But you can upload it too. Let's just hope the URL fits the box that I have to put it into... --RyRy5 (talk) 07:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- The url is too long by 3 characters. Can you fix that? --RyRy5 (talk) 07:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Wow, just missing the "g." Well, now what? We can't use your logo since it can't fit the "g." --RyRy5 (talk) 08:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- You too. Although I'll be ofline for the rest of later today (UTC). --RyRy5 (talk) 08:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
It works! Since there's 4 rights at my wiki, there's 4 boxes on the logo which is why I like it. Do you think you can get each box individually? I plan to use 1 of each box as a symbol of one of the 4 rights.--RyRy5 (talk) 16:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Unprotect?
Could you please unprotect WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999 protest activity? Per Talk:WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999 protest activity#Request for comment, I believe we've come to some kind of agreement on things. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with your boldness. Obviously there was absolutely no consensus to unprotect the page. There is a difference between being bold, and just going against consensus. You have a whole thread of a bunch of people saying do not unprotect, and you just went and unprotected it. I was tempted to just reprotect it, but I figured I would ask you to readd the protection before I made any actions. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 07:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- If we have any sort of problem with the page being semiprotected instead of fully protected, go ahead and increase the protection again. I'm not here to pick a fight. —Remember the dot (talk) 07:42, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
(replying to message on my talk page) - Let me try to clarify this a bit...I understand that not having the interface work is a serious concern. The last thing I want is for uploading files to be even more difficult. We both want the upload form to be open to improvement, we just disagree on how open it can safely be.
I feel that you overestimate the level of damage that can be done to the page. For one thing, only editors who have been around for 4 days and made 10 edits can edit the page. That right there will prevent all the vandalism that Wikipedia talk:Upload has been prone to.
You also stated concern that there might be cross-browser compatibility issues that would need to be tested and addressed. Let me reassure you that the kind of code Wikipedia:Upload uses is well-supported across all browsers, and cross-browser compatibility issues would be as rare on this page as they are on the rest of Wikipedia.
And finally, in the end Wikipedia:Upload is only a frontend to Special:Upload. Even with the worst possible vandalism, Special:Upload itself would still work.
Really though, all I'm asking is that we give semiprotection a shot. We don't have to argue about whether or not it will work. We can actually try it and see, and if it doesn't work then it's back to full protection. —Remember the dot (talk) 17:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- (replying to message on my talk page) - Honestly I'm rather sick of the issue, I can see it both ways, and I wouldn't care too much if the page went back to full protection. —Remember the dot (talk) 18:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- By the way, I was delighted after reading this week's technology report. Apparently edits from Tor are no longer autoconfirmed. This means that even though Wikipedia:Upload is only semiprotected, it is now Grawp-proof. Grawp previously used Tor in new and exciting ways to evade his blocks, but this will no longer work. Happy editing! —Remember the dot (talk) 01:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] A Featured List contest
Greetings. FL directors Scorpion0422 and The Rambling Man have decided to run a contest for FL contributors. We are trying to get some interest in the process and get some FLs for the under-represented topics. If you would like to learn more about this contest, you can find such information here. If you are uninterested in it, then you could still help out by reviewing FLCs submitted by the entrants. Thanks for the time, Scorpion0422 18:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Kwong Lee Dow Young Scholars Program
Hello!
I noticed you deleted this page with the reason that it was "Blatant advertising". It is clear to me that you don't want inferior work as such on Wikipedia, but is it so bad that it can't be fixed and must be deleted? What is wrong with documenting a scholarship program? After all, is the Rhode_Scholar article not a scholarship program? Why is that one not classified as "Blatant advertising"?
Perhaps could we work on the KLDYSP article to make it more informative as to advertising, rather than deleting the page altogether?
Cheers ~ James Kanjo (talk) 05:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
