User talk:Sandwich Eater

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Sandwich Eater, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Arundhati bakshi 18:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] AOL Vandal (User:152.163.100.72)

Hey there Sandwich Eater! Thanks for noticing and reporting the above vandal IP address. Unfortunately, as you noted, it is an AOL IP address. Due to the format of which AOL configures their addresses and user, we aren't able to block AOL accounts. If we did, most likely a very large number of users, good and bad, would be locked out. In the future, it's best just to revert this vandalism. Thanks for the help. Cheers, Bratschetalk 16:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFD

You are not allowed to remove the AfD notice at Jefferson DNA Data. If you have something to say, discuss it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jefferson DNA Data. Tuf-Kat 20:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Roundheads Cavaliers.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Roundheads Cavaliers.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] English Civil War Photos

You did not have verifiable permission to release the image under a Creative Commons license -Nv8200p talk 02:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PKN3

Correct the article name from "PKN3" with quotations. Starting a new article is an untidy way of correcting the mistake - you should use move. -- RHaworth 15:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

There is nuch to be said for your argument. However, we do have WP:BIO, and it is necessary to agree on how to implement it.--Runcorn 19:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brockmans

I don't really have any opinion on this particular case. In general I oppose notability as a criterion. As long as articles are properly sourced, I support their inclusion no matter how obscure. Snottygobble 00:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Beachborough Lithograph.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Beachborough Lithograph.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PKN3

Can you clarify what I need to do to wikify the PKN3 stub? Thanks! Sandwich Eater 12:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

This was left on User talk:Pearle; Pearle is a computer program that merely refiles articles to be wikified by month. But to answer your question, a good place to start would be to make appropriate words and phrases into links to other Wikipedia articles. See Wikipedia:Guide to layout for more info. Thanks! -- Beland 06:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Manual of Style

I came across Pharmaceutical Companies (Developing World) and its AFD discussion. I'd like to point out that there's rules/guidelines for capitalization and that anything past the first letter isn't usually capitalized unless it's a name or a title of a book, song or film. The same goes for article sections. I hope you can put this tip to good use in future contributions. - Mgm|(talk) 11:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - will do. Sandwich Eater 15:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heraldry thoughts

Thanks for the input on my heraldry rewrite. I'd like to see this be a FA some day in the not-too-distant future, but it seems like a very diffuclt task. Have a blessed day.--dave-- 18:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Zeitgeist Movie Page

Indeed you have a fair point, feel free to remove the tags if you think against them, thanks for informing me of the mistake. Happy Editing! Djmckee1 - Talk-Sign 19:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Repost

A tag has been placed on Zeitgeist - The Movie, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how Zeitgeist - The Movie is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Zeitgeist - The Movie saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. -WarthogDemon 22:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. While I applaud your efforts to write a sensible, balanced article on this film, as opposed to the spam which is normally posted by conspiracy junkies, it still suffered from the same fundamental problems which led the last one to fail it's AfD - namely a lack of reliable sources (blogs and forums don't count as reliable sources), and failure to come anywhere close to passing WP:MOVIE and/or WP:WEB. The original AfD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeitgeist the Movie if you fancy a long read. If you think the situation regarding sources has changed since then (my own searches have never found much, but it's always possible that I've missed something), I suggest you go to WP:DRV and bring it up there, rather than trying to start discussions in article space. Best, Iain99 13:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I see what you mean. I removed my hang-on tag and suggested it be speedily deleted. Sandwich Eater 13:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I share your annoyance - I'd also like to see a balanced article incorporating criticisms of the movie, but with a lack of critical sources it's not really possible at the moment. It wouldn't be diffiult to write some criticisms ourselves of course as it's mostly ground which has been gone over before, but WP:NOR and all that, so we'll just have to wait for if and when the mainstream media start noticing it. They did with Loose Change I suppose. Iain99 14:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I see Iain99 has already answered. Sorry for the inconvenience here. Cheers. -WarthogDemon 19:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Can you explain why you reverted [1] this as vandalism? There were some legitimate edits in there that got caught in your net. - Philippe | Talk 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heath Ledger

Hello, why did you revert all the updates to do with Heath's death? It is all over the mainstream news sites and the updates have been heavily referenced. -- Chuq (talk) 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Philippe and I clashed! -- Chuq (talk) 22:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes - all of them seemed to contain the picture vandalism, then once I reverted it all of your edits were OK. But as I went down the list all of them contained the penis picture vandalism until yesterday. Then after you reverted my edit, all of your edits in the history no longer contained the picture. Weird. I guess that vandalism is a bit more complex than the standard vandalism. Did not mean to delete proper edits. Sandwich Eater (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
The penis vandalism was in a template. Let's be a little careful about that, eh?  :-) - Philippe | Talk 22:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)