User talk:Proxy User

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Reply

Yes, you are allowed to remove messages from your talk page once you have read/understood them. Some users choose to archive them.   jj137 (talk) 21:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wendy Yoshimura

I have significantly expanded article Wendy Yoshimura including many sources from "back in the day" to indicate what I believe are all the notable aspects of her criminal history that I can find, but also including reviews of her art. I would appreciate your feedback there or on my talk page. I am just doublechecking to make sure the NPOV dispute is resolved. ClaudeReigns (talk) 04:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Earth Liberation Front

Regarding this edit of yours, just curious as to why. I wouldn't normally alter someone else's post to a talk page, even if I totally disagreed with it. But I didn't want to roll back your edit without at least checking with you as to why. Please advise. Thanks. -- Art Smart (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No, you're right. I thought the comment was asinine, but it's not mine to mess with, so I'll roll it back myself. Proxy User (talk) 22:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I totally agree with you that the comment was asinine. That's precisely the word for it. Nonetheless, such words are a reflection of the writer and no one else. On the other hand, if someone flagrantly vandalizes a talk page or any other content, that's different, and I would have no qualms if a third party reverted it ASAP. Sort of like washing graffiti off a neighbor's house while the paint is still wet. Anyway, thanks for doing the right thing. Very much obliged. Art Smart (talk) 13:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stanislav Petrov

Please do not remove referenced NPOV material from Wikipedia, such as you did to Stanislav Petrov. Thanks, скоморохъ 18:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add POV material to Wikipedia such as you did to Stanislav Petrov. Thanks, Proxy User (talk) 03:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Apology

Sorry. Won't do it again. Britmax (talk) 18:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Konopka

I really suggest you read up on Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia is not concerned with "the truth". All it is concerned about is factual information from reliable sources. Stop with the tendentious editing. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Responded on my talk page. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I've agreed to take out the "computer expert" bit. I have to add a new citation for the computer administrator bit though. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Côte d'Ivoire

Please don't remove cited content without new citations or discussion, or even edit summaries. Previous discussions on the name are [here] and [[1]]. Please see Wikipedia:Consensus, especially Note on use of discussion page for how this is done in practice. Please also see Wikipedia:Three-revert rule:

"The bottom line: use common sense, and do not participate in edit wars. Rather than reverting multiple times, discuss the matter with other editors. If an action really needs reverting that much, somebody else will probably do it — and that will serve the vital purpose of showing that the community at large is in agreement over which course of action is preferable. Engaging in dispute resolution or requesting for page protection is often preferred over reverting. Apparent breaches of the rule, including instances of edit warring, may be reported at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. As the spirit of the rule is to prevent sterile edit warring, not to punish users who exceed a given number of reverts in a given time, it is at the discretion of the sysop to determine when to block a user for a three-revert rule violation and when not to."

Please also take a look at how edit summaries work and why they are useful in this curcumstance. Thanks Much, T L Miles (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)