User talk:The undertow/Archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I've noticed you have twice removed a commercial link (vandalism?) from a stub article describing our non-profit organization. The link has been added more than 20 times by the same IP address and is to a blog that criticizes our organization with unverifiable information that is not a nuetral point of view. The same external link has been removed about 20 times by various people, but it keeps getting re-posted. I am VERY new to wikipedia, I spent a couple hours trying to figure out what to do, but can't come up with much. I am currently just visiting the article every couple of hours to see if the link is re-posted and then I remove it. Is there anything that can be done to either delete the article about our organization altogether or block that person's IP so he can't re-post the link or lock the article? Thanks for any help you can provide. The IP address of the user adding the link is 219.69.18.85.
Torquemada
Welcome to the internet. It's not always serious business. Spare me the rhetoric; God forbid there's a slip-up, and... *Gasp!* Somebody actually notices a lightheartedly facetious humor insert! 72.223.117.236 02:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
"wikipedia is not the internet" Uh oh, looks like you're delusional. It actually is. 72.223.117.236 02:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Defintion of Internet as listed by American Heritage Dictionary
- In·ter·net (ĭn'tər-nět')
- n. An interconnected system of networks that connects computers around the world via the TCP/IP protocol.
- This definition is also verified by Wikipedia "Internet". Wikipedia could be called an "online encyclopedia" - a "web server" - or even a "world wide web resource" (most preferred), but not the internet ... it's ON the internet. As an encyclopedia / resource, it uses things we call "references" to provide information, analysis or background for a topic [please note citation of these "references" are required for editting pre-existing articles / creating new ones].
- In addition, your use of humor, or "sloppy-satire" is a technique for drama, fiction, poetry, performing arts, etc ... NOT encyclopedias. Please keep your unwanted comments and thoughts to yourself (the only spot, save the toilet, for you crap). D-Hell-pers 03:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Styrofoam
I am a new usuer: Can you explain to me why the styrofoam article was wiped clean and why it is now listed as needing a "cleanup". The "ban" section that was wiped away is an important part of information about foamed ps (known to most people as "styrofoam"), and has been generating a lot of news across the country. If it is not acceptable in the styrofoam article, should I just create an article on "expanded polsytyrene" and put in somewhere in there?Mr. Recycle 19:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Re: last change
I just recieved a message from you at this IP address regarding the vandalization of the Emancipation Proclaimation articl. I wanted to inform you that this IP address belongs to a University, so the vandal could be anyone logging on using the campus wireless.
- okay, i will try and get the user page to reflect this fact. thanks for letting me know. the_undertow talk 23:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Re: last change
one of my friends was messing around on the computer okay? i'll make sure to hit her on the nose with a newspaper next time i see her.
Re: Blackmagick5.jpg
See [1] why it was deleted. My guess is they you selected "For Wikipedia use only" (or something of that phrasing) in the dropdown box on the upload page. We don't want images that only we can use, we want images that are so free, anyone can use them for any reason. Now, you said you got an email from the owner. What did the owner say as far as you being able to publish the image? We may still be able to reupload (or undelete) the image and get it saved through another method, depending on what the painter said. Lemme know, and that'll determine our next step. --MECU≈talk 14:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- For how-to on archiving, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. This not only applies to your talk page, but any talk page. I use a bot to do it for me, but I read that it's broke right now and haven't looked into the other one yet. But you don't need that capability yet, but you certainly can use it if you want to have it done for you automatically.
- As for the image, it appears you don't want to try and get it freely licensed. We must then use it under fair use, which requires a few more rules and things to do. See WP:FUP for the policy and guideline. Be sure to read the criteria (mid-way down, numbered list) for the rules. I believe this would meet all of them, but you should be familiar with all of them. Before you upload the image, scale it down so you meet the FUP; I like 300px wide as a maximum (keep the aspect ratio), but there isn't a hard rule, but 300px no one will complain about being too large. If the image is already smaller than 300px wide, (like 250), then definitely still reduce it further, at least to 200 or 150 wide. When you re-upload the image (this is easier than going through deletion review), you can re-upload under the same filename, but this time, type {{Art}}, and write the rationale. Be sure to provide the source (URL). You don't need to do anything with the drop-down box. Click "watch this" before you upload. You'll probably get an error after you click upload saying that a file under this name was previously deleted, just click "save" anyways and you'll be done. Then, you should immediately go into the article and insert the item. Lemme know when you get done and I can take a look. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use for all the fair use tags if you are going to upload another image that isn't art. --MECU≈talk 15:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- I see two major problems: One, you give a source of photobucket.com, but there's a watermark on the image from another website (of the artist perhaps) so you should give that as a source. Two, it appears merely decorative in the article, since this artwork isn't specifically talked about at all. As it stands now, the image would likely fail to remain upon a fair use review. See #8 in the fair use policy. --MECU≈talk 22:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Unfortunately, emailing and asking for information might be considered WP:NPOV (since it's from the author) and WP:OR since we can't verify the information anywhere. You would need to find a (fairly) neutral reliable source somewhere talking about this work. --MECU≈talk 23:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Also, you may want to re-upload the image (under the same name) because the new source you gave has the (c) watermark slightly different. You should also provide a link to a HTML page where the image is being used. (Be sure to reduce the image again) --MECU≈talk 23:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
-
Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, The undertow! 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. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 03:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, I realised I was using the wrong version of VandalProof. Jammy Simpson | Talk | 00:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Latest Kappa Alpha Order Revert
Undertow- thanks for the latest rv. I too believed it was nonsense, however, did not know whether or not it should have been removed (it was not really "harming" the article, however I did come to the same conclusions you did). D-Hell-pers 01:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: James Earl Salisbury
My first thought was to try and prod the article, but after reading the talk page (which you should read), I don't think that's a good idea. I would however support deletion at AFD. It does seem to be written by his son and the arguments on the talk page for notability are fairly weak: He died of SARS. Not enough for an article, perhaps being part of a list on American deaths of SARS. So yah, go through and list at WP:AFD, if you need help, let me know. It's fairly simple, just follow the directions. Be sure to notify the two users that have been discussing it on the talk page on their talk pages. --MECU≈talk 12:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
The ironic thing is:
Five minutes ago, Bigguyjim probably thought 'oral sex' meant talking dirty... HalfShadow 03:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Borat
It nice! --BaseballDetective 09:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Firefox
Aren't we all? :) You can change it back if you like, no worries. Fvasconcellos 02:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Getting burnt out
This is a problem that many encounter. I'm semi-burnt out, and the solution I've found is to write articles. I started/expanded a few articles recently and the satisfaction from that is greater than going on vandal patrol, or image patrol (as I named it). If you want to help out with images, the first thing you should do is install this script: User talk:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js. Next, try and understand what each button you'll click will do to an image. It should be fairly self evident, but if not, please ask. Take a look at WP:IFD and read the information about what to do and no do there, and then also the WP:CSD criteria for images (and the general and article sections won't hurt either, since many times I come across articles that have images that should be speedied). Then, go look for images. You can either go through the list of orphaned images (I'll recommend this) or look at new images Special:Newimages (which are typically from new users, for which WP:BITE still applies).
Things that are commons that you'll come across:
- Redundant images. New users don't realize they can edit the image page, so they typically will just reupload an image. I've seen the same image uploaded up to 7 times before. Look for the one that is used, and mark all other redundant to that one. I'll do this even if there are other deletion notices on the page since speedy deletion for redundant is better than deletion in 7+ days for no license, etc.
- Replaceable fair use. Images of current people in their current state, or existing buildings, be sure to look for a source and fair use rationale (and read that first!) as well.
- No source/no license/both. No license is the easiest to spot. No source is harder, and if someone claims GFDL-self, you have to count that as a source. Logos and albumcovers are typically given a pass (by me, but you can fight this if you wish).
- Orphaned fair use. (a little more rare now thanks to User:BJBot, but still occurs. If any fair use tag is not used in an image, you mark it with this.
That's probably enough to get you started. If you have questions, the best way would be to contact me on IRC so I can help you immediately with that specific image, but through talk pages will certainly be fine as well. Sorry for the delay in the reply, my internet has been out at home for the first time in years. Good luck! --MECU≈talk 13:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- This is all you need (It's all I have in my script page, for this script). You installed the whole script when you just need one small part to refer to it. I dunno if you even need the "required" add-ins anymore:
/**** quick image delete ****/
/**** required add-ins ****/
/*
*/
//addlink function
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="'
+ 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Omegatron/monobook.js/addlink.js'
+ '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');
/*** second required add-in ***/
/*Returns the name of the page. For example, if you were browsing the "[[foo]]" WP page, getPname() would return "foo".*/
function getPname() {
return wgPageName.replace(/_/g, ' ');
}
/*** end required add-ins ***/
/**** main quickimagedelete script ****/
document.write('<script type="text/javascript"' +
'src="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js' +
'&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');
/* This is to keep track of who is using this extension: [[User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js]] */
RE: VP
Hello. Which version of VandalProof were you approved for, and which were you trying to use when you got denied? Thanks. —Xyrael / 21:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
When in ROMe
Re: your comment
- No worries! It honestly took me four or five goes before I came up with a way to word it that felt right. I guess it wasn't as simple as I thought. :-/ Pleasure to help. —GrimRevenant 00:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Redirect to sexual humiliation
I like that actually. Cool. Lotusduck 03:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Nationalism
What I meant by inappropriate I explained in the Discussion page before I deleted the picture. It has nothng to do with nationalism - it is to do with solidarity against the ruling classes, it is to do with liberty (from rulers, not foreign oppressors). It is not, as the caption says, a symbol of "French nationalism during the July (1830) Revolution" - nationalism does not enter into it when you are overthrowing your own ruling class! The picture is not even a national symbol of France (which the tricolor or Marianne or even the Eiffel Tower could be) and even if it were, national symbols are not the same as nationalism. Emeraude 13:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for replying on my talk page. Actually, my definition of nationalism is quite broad, but basically encompasses two types: normally referred to as inclusive nationalism (such as that behind the unification of Italy or Germany) and exclusve (such as that behind most independence or national liberation movements in colonies for example). The two are generally mutually contradictory. Either way, nationalism is an ideology or political theory. The 1830 Revolution in France, on the other hand, is not an ideolgy, it is an event. Your use of 'home rule' is inappropriate - it means the right of people to govern themselves (e.g. the movement for Home Rule in Ireland particularly in the 1800s) and is thus associated with exclusive nationalism=independence movements. There is no way in which this can be applied to France in the 19th century. The country was already unified, centralised (particularly since Napoleon) and established. It was independent.
The 1830 events were a revolt against a despotic regime and had nothing to do with nationalism in any sense; the leaders and participants did not appeal to some mythic nationhood, they simply sought, successfully, to overthrow the rulers and replace them, not in the name of France but in the name of Liberty. It is, however, very likely that Charles X and his allies DID appeal to nationalism (not exactly saying "L'état, c'est moi") with the view of the monarch as the embodiment of the nation. In essence, this was a coup staged by one branch of the ruling elite to overthrow another branch. Delacroix's picture commemorates and celebrates the 'event' and the abstract concept of 'Liberty'
The title of the picture rather gives away what it illustrates - Liberty. Not nationalism, however defined, but Liberty. Whatever, isn't is a great picture? Emeraude 16:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Lipservice on homework?
I saw your message on the homework talk page, after I edited the article. I'm done. Your turn. Chill Factor Five 12:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
im not sure i was quite deserving of your lipservice remark. i simply asked if other editors wanted to collaborate on a specific article. i am away this weekend, with little usage of the internet, so it's not like i can immediately contribute. im not sure what exactly, if anything, was intended by your comment, but i am going to assume it was your way of passing the torch on the article, which is fine. the_undertow talk 21:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- It was a query, and a leapfrog challenge. Were you giving it lipservice? That remains to be seen. :) I was just curious, so I asked. It's really easy to talk about doing something. Lets see what you got. Put my expansion of the article to shame. Or not. I'm guessing "not". :) Chill Factor Five 21:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- P.S: You do recognize good-natured teasing when you encounter it, don't you? I can hardly wait to see your contributions to the homework article. (poke poke)
-
- i feel like Marty McFly when he was referred to as 'chicken.' Or perhaps the Fonz when jumping the shark. either way, i would have contributed. question...i notice you have redundant posts, perhaps to keep the continuity of a thread for outsiders to see. is this a Richard Nixon pattern of paranoia, or simply something learned from your lawyer. ;) the_undertow talk 22:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's so you don't get lost. :) Chill Factor Five 22:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- i feel like Marty McFly when he was referred to as 'chicken.' Or perhaps the Fonz when jumping the shark. either way, i would have contributed. question...i notice you have redundant posts, perhaps to keep the continuity of a thread for outsiders to see. is this a Richard Nixon pattern of paranoia, or simply something learned from your lawyer. ;) the_undertow talk 22:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Suspicion? What about WP:AGF? :) What linearity? By the way, you were right about finding sources - with 52 million Google hits, it's hard to find anything specific. I've fleshed out the external link section. That's my attempt at leapfrogging you (I found some pretty good links). :) It's your turn to add to the article. (I liked your Cold War homework theory bit, by the way). Chill Factor Five 07:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I've added a section on teaching effectiveness - you've been leapfrogged, buddy! :) Your turn. Chill Factor Five 00:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
view on trivia
Your view on trivia is biased, please refrain from deleting triva sections simply because they are trivia. Your suggestion of intergrating trivia on axle rose into the rest of the article would degrade the article, as all of the infomation in the trivia section is simply that. Triva.
Please remove the message in the trivia section of the axl rose article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pro-trivia (talk • contribs)
reply...
I've replied to your latest message on my talk page. Cheers. Chill Factor Five 05:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Re : 7th Sun
AfD nominations usually imply a delete (unless specifically stated otherwise), but I would take it as an argument offered rather than a vote itself for deletion when closing debates, for reasons of equity. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 08:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- We do have cases procedurally brought to AfD due to overturning of decisions at deletion review, proposed deletions and restarted nominations, in which the nominator will state no opinion. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 08:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
The notice posted on the corridor of the ground floor at Hietalahdenkatu 7A, Helsinki, Finland is a roughly A4-sized piece of paper posted on the wall of the corridor of a ground floor of an apartment building at Hietalahti, Helsinki, Finland. The notice is printed in Finnish and reminds people that storing bicycles by chaining them into the mat cleaning racks outside the building is forbidden.
- Yes it was a joke, one that has gone down to the classics. (No I didn't bookmark it, just happened to come to my mind.) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 10:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Tesla coil? If that isn't the answer, try this. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 10:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Within-group study
I would try {{prod}} first. If it gets opposed, take to AFD. You could try WP:CSD A1, but prod might be the better starting point. Also, when you linked this page to me on my talk page you put Within-group_study where the underscore isn't needed for the space. Within-group study works just fine. --MECU≈talk 00:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- I doubt you would get blocked for mis-processing images. Someone would probably yell at you first, and if then you continued to do it, you might get blocked, but it would be awhile. "Providing a tag"? I'm guessing instead of marking it "no license" you put in a license tag? That's only a good idea if it's painfully obvious, like an album cover, or of the sorts. Really, the uploader should tag it because really only they know the status (or should). But yah, doing so is generally fine as long as you're sure what you're doing is right. You can even remove licenses or switch licenses. --MECU≈talk 01:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
リライアントK
I believe in Wikipedia we are allowed to put alternate spellings, and language spelling into articles. Especially for people who are reseaching and looking for alternate spellings may help turn up more information. 70.162.84.57 10:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Guinea pig
This is in re the reference you provided regarding Alfalfa hay - I have noticed that many online sites caution against use of alfalfa hay, but so far as I can tell, this appears to be conventional wisdom without scientific basis. I've checked several published sources on guinea pig nutrition, and none of them say anything negative about guinea pigs eating alfalfa; one of them even recommends it. Could you please find me a more reliable source for this statement? Chubbles 03:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Your question on Mailer Diablo's talk page.
You're thinking of a Jacob's ladder. Try the Wikipedia Reference Desk next time, and your answer may be faster. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 01:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Your question on Mailer Diablo's talk page.
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Battlestar Galactica (2004 TV series), have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. the_undertow talk 06:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Mr. Undertow, what is your authority? Do you have an agenda or can you not clearly see the edit I made was done to an entry was a clear religious slur against Jews, Christians and Muslims. Do you not care when someone is talking out of their ass or can someone simply write whatever they want? It only took you seconds to undue my change, are you stalking the Battlestar page or are you a self-dedicated guardian? Regardless, you dont seem to have any handle on what contitutes research or citing sources. I ask again, do you have an agenda against monotheists?
User page
Thanks for the reversion. That guy sure has some fish obsession. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
AMA deletion
The Association of Members' Advocates is being threatened with deletion. Please consider visiting and adding your voice to the MFD discussion. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 17:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for helping revert vandalism on my user page. —dgiestc 07:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
NP
Told ya before, when I am around and quick enough to catch it, I got your back. For some reason, when I saw that, I thought of the army slogan "Shut up maggot" haha. D-Hell-pers 20:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- now maggot wouldnt really bug me. <----see what i did there. thats what i call brilliant. haha. i totally made lemons into lemonade. okay, more like lemon juice. the_undertow talk 02:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Hahahaha Hahaha Hah Hahaha Ha
- Hahahahahahahahahah Haha Ha
- Hahaha Haha Ha....
- Hahahaha Hahaha Hah Hahaha Ha
Ok ... that's enough D-Hell-pers 03:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC) PS- sorry for using up your discussion page space :-p
Why?
Why in the world are you reverting these edits without any reason given? 74.225.251.130 20:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- sorry for the lack of reason. the reasoning behind it is that starting a trivia section, as a rule of thumb, is not a good idea. if your information is of importance, it should be integrated into the article. not that trivia isn't interesting, it's just that you dont want the article to contain a list of items, such as trivia. if you check out Avoiding Trivia in Articles, it may give you insight into my reversion. it was certainly not intended to offend. the_undertow talk 02:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Re-read it yourself. "Don't simply remove it, but seek to minimize it. It is possible to move a trivia section to the talk page to allow other editors to participate with discussing and integrating the information worthy of inclusion in the article. Some trivia is especially tangential or irrelevant, and may not warrant inclusion at all." 70.146.60.230 13:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- yes, i understand that. however, there was no trivia section. you inserted the section, with one item of trivia, thus making a trivia section. the passage you cited is meant to refer to a pre-existing section, with multiple entries. hence, the 'attempt' to minimize it. i reverted your creation of the section in order to avoid having to eventually disperse the added bits of trivia. if you take the underlying factor here, it's best not to create the section, and it's more appropriate to take your factoid an integrate it in the article, lest the article get's tagged {{trivia}} and we are back at square one. the_undertow talk 22:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- I wrote a rather long and sarcastic response, but then deleted it because I don't think it would help get through to you. It's a shame because it was in fact quite funny. In summary:
- The only reason I created a trivia section is because that is how Coral Springs, Florida is structured, and I created both a Trivia and High Schools section, which you both deleted.
- I've gone through your edit history and this does not seem to be an infrequent occurrence. You seem to spend a lot more time "preaching" than "practicing" the creation of good articles.
- I don't think that's helpful. 74.225.250.142 02:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- my first 1500 edits were all towards the creation of good articles. homework and guinea pig are 2 examples. to say that you created a trivia section because that's how it was done on another page doesn't mean it fits within guidelines. but look, you are free to revert my changes - its your wiki too. if you create a trivia, its very likely that another user will 'tag' it with the {{trivia}} template, and then another user will integrate the information, if it is notable, and delete the section. it seems appropriate to simply add your information, along with a reference, directly into the article. there are many facets to wikipedia. right now, i am concentrating on recent changes and vandalism. next week, perhaps more article writing. and i appreciate the restraint on the sarcasm - it really doesnt help anyone. the_undertow talk 03:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I think your reality check bounced. Based on my quick counting, it looks like you had about 30-40 content edits to homework, maybe a dozen to guinea pig, including the talk page. You can check Interiot's edit count to find out for your own edification.
- Personally I think you should spend more time on research and writing content before you get pedantic about other people's references and whether other people's contributions are "within guidelines". That is, if you're interested in building a free encyclopedia, not accruing rep by playing the game of Whack-a-Mole with petty vandalism.
- P.S. - make sure you go back and integrate the Trivia you added, such as this.) 65.8.46.172 16:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- you went back 2000 edits to find that i added trivia to Taylor Hawkins? some of my very first edits, which should be deleted because they are original research as well as non-notable. it's a learning process. regarding the edits to articles, i did 6 months of writing before i registered. as far as vandalism goes - it can be whack a mole. but it is important to make sure that misinformation does not get introduced. as far as your logic, it's another non sequitur, im afraid; like your justification for adding a trivia section. you say i need to research more before i deal with vandalism? i dont see how the two correlate. but then again, i dont see why you dont a)stick with guidelines or b)WP:IAR and re-add your section. the_undertow talk 19:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
White?
Hi The undertow. Not quite sure what hapened here, but I think this edit can't be right :-) Fortunately an IP editor caught it and reverted it. Just thought you should know. Best, Gwernol 13:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well I certainly didn't think you'd vandalized it :-) Looked like a VP problem to me. Just wanted to let you know. Best, Gwernol 19:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
VP Bug
Could you reply to my question please. I have a theory... Prodego talk 23:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
VP bug?
I just reverted an edit you made to B, which looks like should have gone to B&Q. Sorry about the edit summary. I suspect your VP program is not properly escaping ampersands, which is then terminating the 'title' URL variable early and thus directing the edit to the wrong article. Anomie 00:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Pulp Ficton
Why wood you delete a post speaking the truth? Pulp Fiction copeid Dumb and Dumber all the way.Wathch the movie and you will see. Dipshit!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.163.39.120 (talk) 00:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
- sigh. i know, don't feed the trolls. i know...i know...must. keep. mouth. shut. the_undertow talk 00:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
watch the movie, stupid!!!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.163.39.120 (talk).
- if you can find a reference then i will personally re-add it. i suppose the fact that pulp fiction was written years before dumb and dumber, making your argument logically impossible, is not going to sway you, so find me the reference, and ill be happy to place it in the article. the_undertow talk 00:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Korea vandal
Whoops, didn't mean to step on your toes with the warning for that Korea vandal. It took me a minute because I was looking for the appropriate warning topic. (During which time he/she vandalized again and you reverted.) Kat, Queen of Typos 08:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Back off
Nobody threatens me 218.185.94.226 06:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- im assuming that by the amount of warnings on your user page that you are being ironical. the_undertow talk 06:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- your not invited to my barbeque 218.185.94.226 06:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Kristin Kreuk
There's a reason why that image is not on the infobox before. some IP address just put the image on the infobox. Infobox images need a personal picture from what I've been told. (209.177.21.6 - talk)
"This is the actual hand that will revert your vandalism ..."
Gods, I love that. Cracked me up. RGTraynor 03:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
shrek the third
i was just a little bored and decide to play around with the shrek page, didn't mean to cause any trouble, but GOD UR QUICK!!!
DONT FORGET TO WATCH CHAD VADER!!!!
Adoption Graduation
Congratulations! I'm glad to see you are completely involved in Wikipedia now. Please feel free to continue to stop by and ask questions if you need it. MECU≈talk 12:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
AFD nom disappearance
Did you somehow remove an AFD as it appears from [2]? Edison 02:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was looking at the AFD and about to go to the article when the darned thing disappeared. But I googled the long hexadecimal number and now I see why some administrator with oversight powers took it upon himself to make it vanish. I jtst wish they would leave an explanation in the AFD discussion page when they do it. Edison 02:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Double warning
Hi, I hope you don't mind, but I just removed a warning you left at User talk:122.167.19.178, as it was a second warning for the one edit he made, which I had just reverted and warned for. I think two warnings for the same thing can get a bit confusing :-) --08:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- :-) No problem, it's happened to me in the past. I just thought I'd let you know, it can be weird coming back to a talk page and finding your message gone... --JoanneB 08:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you...
For your kind comments at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scientology and Werner Erhard - i see no evidence of an attack, especially in light of the fantastic sourcing - I worked hard on sourcing that article and your acknowledgement of this is most appreciated. Thank you. Smee 12:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC).
Re: Nice Work
I wanted to drop you a line to let you know that you swayed my vote on a particular AfD. Your research and knowledge of guidelines is greatly appreciated, as well as the presentation of that material. the_undertow talk 21:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, thanks for the review and the change of vote! Feedback is much appreciated. Cheers! — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 21:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Paige White vandalism
You fixed some vandalism to Paige White, as did I and about four other people. Those anon IP vandals all seem to trace back to a location near Culpepper, VA, and those IP addresses seem to be hitting only that article, so it's apparently one person. --John Nagle 06:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Daughters of Enid Blyton
Both Gillian Baverstock and Imogen Mary Smallwood are book authors, although most of the books are (at least in part) about Blyton. I think their writing makes them independently notable. --Eastmain 04:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)