User talk:Rodgerbales

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Da Vinci Code

In response to your question...

It's not so much that having three links is a problem, but also the warpedfromthepipe link is being misrepresented as being related to google. However, it is not. It is simply about Google's quest. Additionally, these links should really go in the external links section. The googlefact.blogspot.com (hope I got that one right) is not devoted only to Da Vinci Code quest and may confuse some readers. M1ss1ontomars2k4 01:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

p.s. if you get this message, could you please post a reply on my talk page? thx

fixed again. Also, an easier way to sign is to use four tildes, like this: ~~~~ --M1ss1ontomars2k4 01:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Er...I'm guessing I don't have to add that link anymore...M1ss1ontomars2k4 03:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Anon's can't get you banned, especially if you're simply trying to follow the Manual of Style guidelines, which probably have something against random links in the middle of the page. M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Asking Questions

Er...actually, you do not need to sign your comments. For asking questions, there aren't really "rules," just guidelines. For example, I'd like people to sign their messages so that I can see who said what. I'm sure the guidelines are somewhere on Wikipedia. Look around for them! M1ss1ontomars2k4 01:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Awesome I tried the signature on your page

Rodgerbales 01:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:67.101.128.6

take a look

[edit] re webquest help links removed

Roger are you the owner of googlefact.blogspot.com? If so, how about you tell the truth and explain your actions? There were 5 different linked sites that provided help on the Da Vinci Code webquests - 2 were for the original webquest and those links had been here on Wikipedia for several years without issue and were the most well-used resources for the webquests on the internet, and then 3 more links were recently added for help with the NEW Google webquests that just started this month. NOTE that these new Google webquests are not related to the older original webquests at all, and do NOT supercede them in any manner. ONE person comes along who has created a new site that provides help ONLY for the NEW Google webquests (and no help whatsoever with the older original webquests), and deletes ALL the links and information to ALL the webquest help sites both old and new, and replaces them with his own link, and when several site owners try to put their information back up, this clown repeatedly deletes it ..and then mods back him up??? WTF is up with that??? IF THIS IS YOU ROGER, PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR ACTIONS. The Wikipedia page now provides absolutely no links to help with the original webquests, and only one link for help with the new webquest, which is all thanks to one selfish prat from googlefact.blogspot.com. Oh wait, there's one more link too, and that's to his mirror site at davinciquest.blogspot.com. How can you justify your actions? The owner of googlefact.blogspot.com also posted on the site of one of the links he removed (student-rant.blogspot.com), to laugh at everyone and thank us all for the traffic and the ad-impression revenue it is generating for him. AND THIS IS WHAT WIKIPEDIA SEEMS TO CONDONE???? If you could give some reason for your actions then perhaps all of us site owners who were deleted could understand, but we do not see that there is any justification for what you have done, nor have you or anyone else offered any. The ONLY message we're getting here is that it pays to manipulate Wikipedia for personal gain and delete everyone else's links. WE HUMBLY REQUEST YOU RECTIFY THIS MATTER AND THEN LOCK THE PAGE TO STOP THE PERSON WHO STARTED ALL THIS FROM DOING IT AGAIN - which happens to be the one link left on the page. At a bare minimum, restore the help links to the original webquests so people looking for help with them can actually get some. I still can't believe how unjustly this matter has been administered so far.

[edit] a$$fucked.blogspot.com

Report it, I guess, but I don't know where :(. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 04:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Guffey

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Paul Guffey, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.finishwell.org/index.cfm?pid=19397. As a copyright violation, Paul Guffey appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Paul Guffey has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Paul Guffey. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Paul Guffey, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.

Before you re-instate the article ask yourself "is he notable outside Finishwell".

It is considered very rude to blank your talk page. -- RHaworth 17:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Paul Guffey will remain deleted until the Wikimedia Foundation receives a copyright release from him, stating that the content you posted is released under the GDFL. An assertion from you that you are his proxy is insufficient. Absent such release, no discussion is needed. Wikipedia must observe copyright law. Best wishes, Xoloz 17:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block notice

You have blocked for one hour for blanking your page of warning notices. Do not do this. Xoloz 17:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your block

Yeah, you're allowed to clear your talk page, but it probably looked like you were trying to delete the warnings given to you. Etiquette dictates that you shouldn't randomly clear your talk page. If you wanted to properly clear your talk page, you should at least use an edit summary explaining your actions. Or, you can [[1]] your talk page. Either way, you probably should talk to Xoloz, explaining your actions, so that he doesn't stay confused. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (T | C | @) 23:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, this block was a practical measure. I first attempted to leave a message (above) regarding Paul Guffey; apparently, at exactly the same moment, Rodgerbales cleared his talk. My message didn't even appear in the history. Because of his behavior in so frequently clearing this page, I was honestly afraid the editor wouldn't have the opportunity to read my message if I didn't block him temporarily. In addition, of course, rapid removal of warnings from one's talk page is not permitted. The warnings constitute a record for the community, as well the user, and rapid blanking can constitute an attempt to evade admin oversight. Best wishes, Xoloz 00:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)