User talk:Stephen/Archive November 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Viva Laughlin again....

The link you provided confirming the airing of the second episode on Network Nine has gone dead, and I've not been able to find another. Thing is, I wasn't able to the first time around, whereas you were able to no problem. Thus, I'm hoping you'll be able to sleuth up a new citable source for the info; otherwise, eventually we'll have to do what WP:V demands and go with what information CAN be cited, (that the show was indeed axed after one episode) which I'm now fairly sure is inaccurate. -- Y|yukichigai (ramble argue check) 04:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work

No, really. You're doing a great job at editing wikipedia my friend. Do you have a list of copy-paste crap you dump on random wiki pages because you think they're wrong or something? Edit4bumz 04:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jackp is back...

..well, I'm fairly sure he is. It's User:Moviemonster. Contribs show same articles and that he is Australian. From my knowledge of Jackp, interest in Summer Heights High would be typical of him. regards --Merbabu 11:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are you serious?

Can you STOP reverting the Markbass page?! It's becoming really frustrating and childish. And you're an ADMINISTRATOR!!! I can't believe this. Do not revert the page again. I'm sick of it. 123.243.210.246 11:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple spam editors

Thanks for dealing with Shinderc and the apparently related accounts. I've no doubt there will be future attempts, but this will help in the interim. Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy 09:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usenet spammer is back too...

Yup, not only is the old random IP address "Usenet Freedom Fighters" spammer back on the Usenet article, but now we've got someone else who's adding a link to a "CanadianAlien" site in the "External links" section there as well. (sigh) Warnings have been posted, but there is no reason to think the UFF guy will respect them this time either. If you could work your magic again it would be much appreciated. Thanks. -- HiEv 13:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The CanadianAlien website is a legit external link according to Wikipedia guidelines. It contains neutral and accurate material, relevant to the subject of the article, from knowledgeable sources. It is a clear and very information step by step tutorial to using binary Usenet groups. Also, neither I or the CanadianAlien site have anything to do with "Usenet Freedom Fighters". My posting the external link was an earnest attempt to share relevant and useful information with people who come to Wikipedia's Usenet article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.233.183.180 (talk) 19:17, November 8, 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing you're "Gord1234", correct? On your talk page I noted a couple of reasons why the link should not be added. Also, in this edit you claim that it is your information at that site, which tells me that it is your site. Adding a link to your own site is a conflict of interest that should be avoided, especially since your site carries advertising. I appreciate your good intent, but that does not mean that it is appropriate for the article. -- HiEv 02:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zeitgeist (video)

  • My bad. I specifically included "low budget" because I thought it was mentioned in a source. You're right though. Perhaps it was in a less reliable source that I later removed or something. huh. well thanks for putting me in my place. :) Pdelongchamp (talk) 06:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you delete my comment?

I assume it was an accident? But why did you delete my comment? [1] it certainly was not from an edit conflict given how far apart the edits were. Russeasby 05:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bindeez

How something so loaded with chemicals was found to be the "toy to watch" and "toy of the year" beats me. You think the chemical is impregnated in the entire sphere rather than being coated? (that's the word; all I could think of was "painted"). Badagnani 09:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Click there to open your card! → → →

[edit] Problematic user

Hey, I was hoping you could help me with something. I've been trying to work with 66.108.191.45 (talk · contribs) and I've made little progress. It looks like the guy is trying to be helpful, but he is often ignoring Wikipedia policy. Most of his edits either have been reverted or should be reverted, and I've tried to explain to him why, but my attempts have failed. His most common problem is adding numerous unnecessary and/or irrelevant internal links to "See also" sections, bloating the section for no good reason. I'm not saying he doesn't make any good edits, it's just that he seems to be doing more harm than good. I don't have time to police his edits, as he is quite active, and talking to him doesn't seem to be helping, so I was wondering if you had some advice on what should be done about him. Thanks. -- HiEv 02:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bindeez

There is the discussion on the talk page about its plurality, please engage. [[2]].


Also when undoing revisions, try and make sure you don't inadvertantly undo more than you want. this reversion caught other copyedits beyond the is -> are; and it was also quite clear from my edit summary that more was done.--ZayZayEM 05:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppet is back

Hello... thanks for dealing with Fireraining, Drcshine, Doleramon, Shinedrc, and Bryantsinger a short while back. I think we've got another one to add to the list - Magicralf (Special:Contributions/Magicralf). I recently turned Video converter (the generic term) into a redirect to video transcoding after discovering that there was an article called Aimersoft Video Converter. (The "Aimersoft" article is a more correctly titled clone of "Video converter".) Magicralf's first edits were to create "Aimersoft" on November 6th, and his/her only edits since were to revert my cleanup and revert the redirect. Thanks. --Ckatzchatspy 08:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CISSP article

There's an edit war happening on CISSP to which you've contributed.

tdbf is insisting on inserting a POV tag meaning he feels the article is not neutral.

I believe the article is neutral. I do think that it can be improved but as it stands the problem with the article is not that it's POV.

Would you please leave your thoughts on the matter on the article's talk page?

Thanks Vincent 16:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re Paradocks13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)

Hi. I note you blocked the above for 31 hours, per a report to AIV. I was going to indef block on the basis of deleted contributions, most of which are attacks or "lolz". I invite you to review those edits. If you feel that 31 hours still suffices then I shan't reblock (but I would guess that there will be another block forthcoming in a little over 31 hours). Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)