User talk:Sherzo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
User talk:sherzo/Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Messages

Please leave messages at the bottom of the particular discussion, and start new topics under the existing ones.

[edit] Some thing you should know about

Cheers! — Moe ε 00:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Moe has accused me of this. I want you to know, that even though I disagree with your edits and the way you handle users on here, that I would never do this to someone. This maybe someone you have had an issue with in the past weeks, but not me. On the list, I think it might be better if you just place a link to the AWOL controversy rather than stating it in the box.Bluecord 00:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Well it didn't surprise me, if you wish to pursue this furthur, CheckUser would probably be appropriate for this. — Moe ε 14:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Surprise, surprise. — Moe ε 21:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Military Service

There is already a link to the controversy, George W. Bush military service controversy, and it is noted on the page List of United States Presidents by military rank. There is a notation on List of United States Presidents by military rank on why Reagan did not recieve combat service. Bush's AWOL is still controversy as noted on both of these pages, please refrain from placing this on the service page until it is a proven fact with sources. Michael Moore's movie is a very one sided source. They both served and the AWOL should not be noted as fact until proven. There is no problem with linking a side note to the other two sites for more information, however.BluecordBluecord 14:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

i think thats a fair consensus for the time being,Sherzo 15:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LSE Students' Union

I have re created the article and marked it AfD. Again, an edit war in which you have arbitrarily placed a redirect on the article. May I point out this well known wikipedia ideal WP:DIK. Thanks TorstenGuise 19:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

perhaps you should read that also checkout the AfD page

Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD.

[edit] cabal

Please don't accuse me of being in a cabal as I'm not. Please do not accuse me of, and associating with active sockpuppetry, as I'm not.

It is, however, quite ironic how people seem to be having the same sort of recurring issues with you. Doesn't that tell you something? TorstenGuise 23:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] gust

I am not particularly interested in brit stu TV. I came across the articele while tracking a certain troll, and seeing some conflict stepped in as admin. That's basically it. As for GUST, please notice that their "broadcasting" was via local cable network, so I see nothing suspicious here: CCTV-based broadcasting is technically and legally a simple thing. Also I see nothing bad in relying on gust for basic facts: this is allowed by WP:CITE. What an eye must be kept on, is claims to various glory or priority: these most certainly must come from independent sources. Since it has a certain notability as being an early student TV and surviving 40+ years, I'd let it be. Wikipedia has much more real garbage to mop and bias which is next to impossible to fix. I'd say that compared to pokemon and pornstar flood, this article is a gem of information. I know it is difficult to bite the bullet and go away: I myself struggled against a number of ridiculous articles, but gradually came to a conclusion that it is not worth it, unless the text in question propagates falsehoods. Among my personal notability thresholds is the critreion whether the subject in question influences at least a thousand of random people or an otherwise notable category of population. `'Míkka 00:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Me? A sockpuppet?

You're out of your mind. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 13:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm a sockpuppet of myself! :D 65.93.161.136 (talk) 22:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfC

Thanks for this. Your RfC on me has been duly noted, and I've informed the other people that you have accused as well. TorstenGuise 13:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

Comments like this are not productive. Please try to remain WP:CIVIL and assume good faith. Best wishes, Jakew 17:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I second that. --Hirohisat (Apple) 20:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I've seen this kind of thing before. Wongch2 10:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Interesting comments. I wonder where is your proof of their sockpuppeting. Wongch2 06:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] World War Z, citations and POV

Its an unsourced POV statement that even if it was a well-cited complaint, it hardly seems notable at all to be the sole discussion piece in the critical response section.--CyberGhostface 23:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm notifying the user and waiting a week. If I don't get a reply, I'm removing it.--CyberGhostface 11:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, a google search only called up six results. All of which were just copies of this page.[2]--CyberGhostface 11:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Turns out the anon spelled it wrong. The search has only three hits.[3]--CyberGhostface 12:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of Terrorism recent edits

I noticed you contributed heavily to the History of terrorism article and wondered if you could review some recent edits since they seem a bit POV and Disproportinate in weight. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_terrorism&diff=192333467&oldid=190147656 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.96.114 (talk) 12:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)