User talk:Saturday/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, Philip Gronowski, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Questions, 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!  Mushroom (Talk) 01:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Abrahamic religion 2 Vandal who thinks he is funny... 3 Unsigned Comments 4 Fermat's Factorization 5 Thanks 6 Mix Up 7 re: 8 Helpme 9 Nick o'leary 10 Welcome to VandalProof! 11 Thanks! 12 Showoff (band) article... 13 VandalProof 1.2 Now Available 14 More thanks 15 Re:Thank You 16 You're Welcome 17 Your reverts of User:ThEuSeD 18 Why did you delete my additions to John Cena? 19 The page about you 20 A well-earned snack 21 Battle honours of the RCR 22 Aspley 23 Helpme 24 I'm a racist? 25 Helpme 26 Our Job 27 stop wasting other peoples time 28 Johnny Thunders

Abrahamic religion

Hey Philllip, would ask you to reverse your edit (I will do so in any case as soon as I'm allowed) - if you read any writings on Judaism, you will quickly see that traditional Judaism believes that 613 commandments were handed Moses on Mt. Sinai (scroll down to the end of the talk section of the article). Thanks. Incorrect 01:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Certainly; but please provide a source before you edit it. I will leave it as it is until you do so. Philip Gronowski 01:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

from beliefnet.com (there are many more sources that say the same thing): After the Hebrew tribes had spent 40 years in the wilderness, immediately before entering the promised land of Israel, Moses reviewed for them the whole Teaching (or “Torah,” as the Five Books of Moses are called in Hebrew) that God had revealed at Sinai. As given in the written text of the Torah, this Teaching actually comprises 613 commandments (according to Jewish tradition)–including rules for everything from distinguishing between kosher and forbidden foods to circumcising baby boys–of which the Ten Commandments add up to less than one-sixtieth. Incorrect 07:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Well under the Ten Commandments there is a section about Jewish understanding of the giving of the Ten Commandments. If users are interested they can check the page. Sorry I doubted you, it just seemed like vandalism. Yours, Philip Gronowski 15:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandal who thinks he is funny...

15 year old little Rich Kid Phil likes to point the finger on everyone, dont take it personally.

I merely stop vandals... and I sure wish I was rich. Philip Gronowski 20:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Unsigned Comments

Hi - how did you add that unsigned comment signature? Is there a shortcut to do this? Thanks - Gsd2000 21:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello there: I certainly don't know if there is a specific shortcut for this but you can put {{subst:unsigned|user name or ip|date}} replacing the centre with their user name or ip. For example:

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Philip Gronowski (talk • contribs) date.

Philip Gronowski 01:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Excellent - that's the shortcut I'm after. Thankyou! Gsd2000 11:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Fermat's Factorization

Why did you revert this? The last two edits appear correct. If you don't agree please explain.

By the way, they're not my edits - I just noticed the history. Walt 12:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

My sincere apologies, but I haven't the slightest clue about Fermat's factorization method. I assumed that any edit involving small changes in formula were vandalism. Please revert back if you wish. Again, my apologies. Philip Gronowski 19:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. Philip Gronowski 17:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Mix Up

Thanks, no problem. Cheers, Lion King 17:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

re:

You were right, it seems, so I've deleted it. I didn't see any actual assertion of notability in there. Thanks for pointing it out. Just so you know though, if you tag it for CSD an admin will see it eventually anyway because people prowl for those. But telling an admin specifically isn't wrong either. --W.marsh 20:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm still kinda new to the process for deletion, thanks for the heads up. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 20:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I almost forgot, you can delete my post on your talk page if you want. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 20:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Helpme

Hi, how can we help you? You can ask your question here and place the {{helpme}} template at the end so we know to check back.--Commander Keane 22:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Quick response! Hi there! I am having intense spamming problems on the following pages and images by various ip's and users, all who appear to be under the control of one central user:

• Verónica Castro
• Image:Veronicacastro ricos.PNG
• Image:Veronica castro caballero.PNG
• Image:Veronica castro por esa puerta.PNG
• Image:Guadalajara es mexico.PNG
• Image:Rosa salvaje.PNG
• Image:Veronica castro big brother.PNG

Is there anything we can do to stop all of this? I have warned them all to the best of my abilities but they keep on coming back! Are we all forced to forever lived with this incessant spamming? Thanks in advance, yours Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 22:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

OK I have Semi-protected Verónica Castro for the time being (probably for a day or two). I am now watching the images you listed, and will possibly block the an IP if it spams again. If this problem is persistent I will see if we can add the offending URL to the spam blacklist. Let me know if more spamming occurs and I will act.--Commander Keane 23:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Your intervention was much appreciated. If there is anything I can do for you, just ask. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 23:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Nick o'leary

Howdy there :-) Looking at the history of Nick o'leary, I only saw your edit. I was going to nn-warn the user for the creation of the article. I just thought it strange that yours was the only edit. You notice that? -- Irixman ^{(t) (m)} 00:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes I thought it odd too. I really do wonder how that happened. Perhaps I put it up for speedy deletion the moment it was deleted... Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Philip Gronowski! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! I have downloaded and experimented with VandalProof. I am sorry, but I find that VandalProof does not exactly help with my editing. I am sorry for the inconvinence this may cause you, but I wish to withdraw from the program. Perhaps another day I will try it, but not now. I will delete the program on your word. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 20:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi, Phil...thanks for the welcome. I actually have a username and I'm active on other wikis, but I quit this site about three months ago and just wandered in. Glad to say I left in good standing, so who knows? Anyway, thanks again for being so kind. - 74.62.5.240 01:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. It is always comforting to see a good editor somewhere. The vandals (and some users) do get annoying sometimes, but I hope that you do come back. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 01:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Showoff (band) article...

what about this article is a problem??? Showoff is a noteworthy band. Did you even read anything that was written? Please be more careful and you may want to USE THE TALK PAGE!!!!!!!!! -user:xsxex

Please don't shout. I am putting that notice up because the page was deleted before and a message was put in place that said it should not be recreated without good reason. I understand your POV but you must be civil if you want people to listen to you. You may make a petition on the original deleter's page and clearly explain why this page should stay up before recreating it. It will not be blacklisted and automatically deleted because it is reposted removed content, as is happening now. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry it was just frustrating because i spent some time putting it together and editing it. Thanks for the recommendation. Yes of all the articles ive written, these guys definitely meet the criteria. I wish people would spend more time actually reading what articles say, rather than immediately deleting them. actually this was the first time that an article had been deleted immediate without a "notice for speedy deletion" - i think that admin. user:RasputinAXP was being trigger happy. Im sure it is difficult for them too, because they probably just see so many articles that are created which are trash, but at the same time, i thought this was careless. Thanks for taking the time to check this out. - user:xsxex

Oh not a problem. I looked at your other edits and the external links and I saw that it was notable. Citing a simple google search is often a good way to prove one's point. Would you mind if I removed the earlier deletion comments on the talk page and left the notablitlty one? They are no longer necessary. Admins are allowed to delete articles without notice if they seem to be recreated or meet the critera for speedy deletion. They are often under a deluge of bands that have no notability and it is understandable that they make mistakes once in a while. If you ever go on new pages patrol you will see what they deal with. Anyway happy further editing! Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 01:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available

More thanks

For reverting my user page! Much appreciated. Stephenb (Talk) 08:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Not at all a problem. Cheers, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 19:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:Thank You

No problem, glad to help. -- Shizane ^talk_contribs 22:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

You're Welcome

Of course, wouldn't have it any other way. Happy vandal wacking!. Crazynas 06:03, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Revert of my user page. Crazynas 03:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 03:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Your reverts of User:ThEuSeD

Instead of reverting User:ThEuSeD's edits to articles by placing images, you could have fixed the formatting yourself. You could have advised his/her edits on the talk page on how to place images properly instead of using {{test1}}. Please do not bite WP:BITE new users! —RJN 23:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. I do rash things sometimes and fully wish to apologise, and will do so on the user's talk page. I merely thought that such images would likely be deleted within the course of 7 days (I was about to tag them) and thought that they would not serve a purpose to the article. Again, sincere apologies. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 23:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete my additions to John Cena?

Why did you do that? Why? It hurt my feelings. My additions were insightful and stuff. SUMpTHY 19:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I deleted your edits because they were vandalism. If you make useful and proper edits then I would never think of deleting them. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 19:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

No they weren't you're the Vandal so stop complaining. They were useful and proper. Also look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Philip_Gronowski&oldid=58579312, Yours SUMpTHY 10:53, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Your vandalism of my page has to do with what...? Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 19:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The userboxes I added were better and funnier SUMpTHY 21:47, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

They didn't seem better to me. They did have a kind of humour to them I suppose, but please don't vandalise my page again. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 02:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I AM TEH SORRYNESS PHILP GRNAOISKY Philip Gronowski is sucky SUMpTHY 09:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Right back at you. You know, I look at the difference between versions so your 1337 skills went to waste. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 12:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC) SUMpTHY is teh sux0r

Phillip Gronowski you are sooooooo awesome! SUMpTHY 12:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Look what I did Philip Gronowski! SUMpTHY 13:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not create pages about people like me, not notable enough for Wikipedia. This kinda makes me look bad...Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 13:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The page about you

I'd rather not as it was just an attack and the best thing is to leave it delted rather than put it here for a while. If I put it here then there is a chance that google could cache it for others to see. The vandal has been blocked here indefinitly. The best thing is if you see it again to blank it and add a speedy tag. Then make a report a Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

A well-earned snack

Thanks for adding to my Userpage. I especially liked the quote you dropped in; I wonder how long before someone tags it? Doc Tropics 15:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It was my favourite movie as a kid, hopefully it was the favourite of others. Cheers, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 16:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Battle honours of the RCR

Hi. Thanks for linking the battles; that's I task I intended to eventually tackle, one I did not relish. One comment, though: that was a list of battle honours, and it shows the wording of the honours as they appear on the colours. It was great and helpful to add the links, but please do not change the actual name of the honour. For example, the "Landing in Sicily" is the battle honour awarded for the Allied invasion of Sicily, so should be wiki'ed [[Alied invasion of Sicily|Landing in Sicily]], so if you could fix those "corrections" so that the battle honours read properly, it would be much appreciated. Aside from that niggly point, thanks again for the great effort. --SigPig 09:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing, I was kinda worried about that too. I'll quickly substitute them now. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 12:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Aspley

You restored a hyperlink to broxtowe on the Aspley page. I removed the link becasue Broxtowe is used in the context of the estate whereas the link goes to broxtowe borough which is seperate to the estate.

--B3ntleg 18:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, my mistake. I assumed you were just vandalising the page. Sorry about that. I will remove the warning. Again, sorry. 19:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about it.--B3ntleg 19:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Helpme

Is there a specific question you had? Please replace the {{Template:Helpme}} template when you have a question. Thanks!—Keakealani 01:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok I forgot I had this up here before I went to bed. Whenever I would create a redirect, the redirect would not work until I added the page to my watchlist for some reason. Was I doing something wrong?Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 14:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

No, you were not doing anything wrong. Sometimes you have to refresh the page or access it from a different link before you will see the redirect work. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 15:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I see. I even tried refreshinhg so I was wondering what was going wrong. Thank you for your help. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 15:15, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm a racist?

Gronowski, why would you be such a racist? Bebenewerth 20:42, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm a Racist? Care to elaborate? Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 20:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC

Yes, friend of friends, you are. Phil, you nominated for deletion a site about an african-american hero, and now that site is gone. You may love your polish-canadian heritage, but you are clearly a racist when it comes to african-americans. Why don't you put up a fancy sign on your user page that says "Blacks not welcome! I'm Polish and Canadian!" Bebenewerth 20:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not a racist, I merely nomionated an article for deletion because the subject was not notable. Please do not vandalise my talk or user page. Do not make personal attacks. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 20:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh philly-willy. Bebenewerth 20:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Have fun in life, eh?

Plenty, thanks for asking. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 21:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Helpme

{{helpme}} Hello, you used the {{helpme}} tag. How may I help you? When you've asked your question, please put the tag back so we know to check back. Alternatively, you can join the Wikipedia Bootcamp IRC channel to get real-time help. (Use the web-based client to get instant access.)

Hi there. Well I just began learning to reference today and I am noticing a problem with my references. Jeffrey Ingram has it on every reference and Nicolaus Copernicus has it in number 1. There is a | before each reference. It is purely superficial but it is really annoying the heck out of me. Might you know the cause or solution to it? Thanks in advance, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 05:53, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I should also add that if I do get rid of it it usually destroys the link. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 05:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Let me take a look at them.. give me 5 minutes — Deon555^talk_Review 05:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow.. looking at the wikicode of it, the <ref> tags should be replaced with <cite web>.. That's prolly wat's doing it.. I'll give it a go on Jeffrey Ingram now. Give me a sec — Deon555^talk_Review 05:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I am kinda new to this reference thing. I'll remember this in the future. Thanks. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 06:02, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Hm.. It looks a bit too far for me.. I'll hand it over to someone else in bootcamp if I can find someone.. else you might have to put a cleanup tag on it, and let someone else do it :) I'll see if I can find someone.. Give me 5 — Deon555^talk_Review 06:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 06:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Right I must be going to sleep now. Night. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 06:50, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Hiya, Sorry.. I kinda deserted you there last night didn't I :P When I picked up the helpme yesterday in IRC I thought "Ah classic case of piping an external link" for some reason that thought left me when I got to the article :s.. Don't worry.. Even I occasionally pipe external links :) Anyway.. let me know if you need anything else — Deon555^talk_Review 22:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Our Job

Your just doing whats in best the interest for Wikipedia. I don't mind. --WhereAmI 03:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

stop wasting other peoples time

regarding yr nomination of Louise Crisp fr deletion. i notice u tend to waste other people's time by interfering, suggesting spurious deletions etc., if u haven't a clue about a subject please leave it alone. in the specific instance, publications are listed, your claim is wrong by the standards used in that area (granted it's an obscure area, all the more reason for the ignorant to leave it alone), if they were self-published, that could class article as vanity, maybe. furthermore, speedy deletion is obviously wrong (someone did correct that for u) please check the difference between the two types of request. and try to do something constructive rather that making work for people to clean up after you. User:Bsnowball

it isn't a 'personal attack', i believe u are wasting time by being too quick to use the tag in question (there are no votes for deletion for instance, u have also done this kind of thing before in subject areas you are not familiar with, this can see this from your talk page) and u shld read up on how to use the tags correctly. speedy deletion was obviously wrong (someone else had to fix this for u), u ignored the fixing of the article (the publications obviously count towards notability) & it should have been marked for justify notability/provide references first. please think about those quidelines: high number of google hits is not necessarily low/no notability (apart from simple common sense, u're reasoning seems to be: not on internet therefore not important) those are not listed as conditions, but possible ways of establishing notability. and perhaps more importantly, 'patrolling' is not appreciated (& can be counterproductive) when you don't know the subject area, and in this case (as in others u have interfered with) it is obscure/specialised. lecturing other people on their behaviour is not going to be taken seriously when u refuse to read guidlines and/or address criticisms. Bsnowball 11:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

First: Your headline: "stop wasting other peoples time" can be seen as a personal attack (commenting on the contributor , not content). You are directly calling me a person who wastes other's time. Calling me a computer geek from the other side of the world is a personal attack as well: [1]

Second: The only other thing I can see on my talk page which points to me being a person which wastes other people's time is Showoff (band). An admin had thought that the article was a recreation and "deleted it" by placing a tag that said protection from recreation. They forgot to preotect the page and it was "re-created". I had that page open in one of my tabs during and after "deletion" and noticed it was re-created. I tagged it appropriatly because an admin had previously "deleted" it. The user then put a petition on my page and we resolved the conflict. I made no mistake of my own for marking it as a repost qualifying for deletion.

Third: I sure am ignorant in field of poetry. But am also ingnorant in the field of clubs and organizations. Does that mean I should not nominate articles about Joe Blow's Leaf Club because I do not specialize in their field?

Fourth: Speedy deletion tags specificaly say articles "'may" meet criteria for speedy deletion. Not that that they meet it. That they may meet it. A person can make mistakes. This may be one of them.

Fifth: The notability of the subject is still in question for me: Wikipedia:Notability has this as one of the criterea for notability:

Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work

Note the world multiple. Louise Crisp is a published author. Louise Crisp has (to my information) recieved only 1 award and I have not found any independant reveiws. Also being a new page patroller means being hit with many non-notable people that we do not really have time to go to the library and check for. Google is therefore my friend.

Could you please specify if you want comments on your page or my page? I'll post it on both of your pages, you have my permission to delete them if you want them on one specific page. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 20:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Johnny Thunders

May I ask why you removed the photo from this page? And what spam did you remove? Stephenjh 22:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I meant just to remove the linkspam from the photo, not the photo itself. Herzco went around to multiple pages and would add photographs in, leaving a link to his webpage in each caption. I went around and removed the caption spam and accidentaly removed the photo as well. Some of the photos he added were of little value to the articles, even though they pertained to it so I completly removed them. You can take a look at my contribs to see if I did removed anything else worth keeping. Yours, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 22:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I see. The photos were uploaded by the photographer herself, who has quite a large portfolio and is a professional. Her photographic contributions to Wikipedia are highly valuable (IMHO), many being previously unseen and/or unavailable elsewhere. In fact, the photographer may be worthy of a wikipedia article herself! Surely there must be a way of crediting her for the photos displayed...perhaps without the www address? Can you think of a way to do this? I believe the photos add a lot of value to the articles themselves. Stephenjh 22:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well the contribs she makes are giving credit to her, I didn't remove the links in the photos themselves. I will have to check further to see if she is notable enough for an article. Cheers, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 23:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)