User talk:The undertow/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 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.
← Archive 2 |
Archive 3
| Archive 4 →


Contents

Lying

I don't know how Wikipedia works, but this user is changing pages he knows nothing about. Miamisburg High School's colors are NOT ROYAL blue and white, just blue and white. That is the name of the town newspaper, that is what the citizens believe, and it's what our bumper stickers say. I've never heard it called Royal Blue, but this user likes to keep reverting my correction on the page. If he is doing this and knows nothing about my high school, what could he be doing for other articles?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.135.186.44 (talk)

Well, you are getting an idea of how it works, because I noticed that you were able to make an edit. Here would be some advice...

1. Use the discussion page, on the article itself. You will find the discussion tabs near the top. Instead of putting comments directly in the page, you can put them on this page. This way, other students and editors will discuss how your school colors should be displayed.

2. Anyone can edit, but be careful of reverting (undoing an edit). If you violate WP:3RR, you may be blocked.

3. Everything you and I do has to be verifiable. So, I could not find the school colors on the school website, which means we need a source. For my own edification, I have contacted a member of your staff, so we can indeed find out which shade of blue is correct. Once we know, we can later add a little note in the article that asks other editors to use the discussion (talk) page before editing the colors.

4. Don't forget to sign your page using ~~~~, and think about registering your account.

Until I hear from your school, I don't want to make changes, because it seems that the other editor will simply revert them. The last thing you want to be involved with is an edit conflict. Since there is usually a 'more correct' answer, edit conflicts (in my opinion) are a waste of energy. In this case, we are doing research in order to avoid any conflict. If you have any more questions about wikipedia or your school's article, you know where to find me. the_undertow talk 21:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


Guinea pig

Your talk page is a little intimidating when there's nothing on it! I was getting worried there for a while, as we went almost a week without any commentary...Finally got a couple support votes today. Thanks for the help, I think the sound files really improved the article. Chubbles 21:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Update: Passed FA! Thanks for all your help with the project. Chubbles 04:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Photographic print toning

You recently reverted the work of an anonymous editor on Photographic print toning. The only part that looks anything like vandalism is that he commented out the 'sepia tones in pop culture' section, which he/she explains was moved to the Sepia tone article. I have reinstated this user's edits and cleaned them up since they had some useful information in them. You should apologise and be more careful in future. Thanks. --Imroy 01:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The users edit contained a) a large amount of removal, b) no edit summary to explain the removal and c) left a paragraph lacking in closing punctuation. In most cases, these would point to signs of vandalism via removal, which explains my reversion. I see from your comment that the user was making a good faith edits, and I have every intention of removing the warning and adding an apology. Thanks for letting me know. As you urged me to be more careful, I would put your mind at ease in knowing that in over 5000 edits, this is the first time anything like this has occurred. Cheers. the_undertow talk 02:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


Enrique A Pollack \ Henry Pollack

Could you please review my new article on this subject and support its inclusion.. I have re-written it and added aditional sources. Thanks Callelinea 03:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Serbs

Research who made changes to pages before you criticise them. I never made any changes to a "Serbs" page, yet you consider my "changes" as vandalism.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.123.229 (talk)

I will not go so far as to say that you made the changes, however I will assert that your IP address is directly responsible for the changes made to Serbs. Your (or the IP's) contributions can be found here. The warning, to which you refer, was placed on your page a month ago. The changes were made at that time. the_undertow talk 04:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Undertow, thank you for your kind words in support of my RfA, which successfully closed yesterday. Please feel free to drop me a line any time if I can help you in any way. Pastordavid 15:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RFA, which passed with 53-1-0. I will put myself into the various tasks of a administrator immediately, and if I make any mistakes, feel free to shout at me or smack me in my head. Aquarius • talk 01:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Your hand is hairy lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.193.248.6 (talk)

It's actually the contrast in the picture. The hair on my arms is blond. Doesn't learning things about me make wikipedia worthwhile? the_undertow talk 01:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Heyo

Hey I edited your page to something a bit more appropriate. I got a bit carried away I know but I think it looks fairly close to how it was before? Anyhoo, I don't really like your tattoo, I think you should turn it into a sleeve or something to make it look a bit more full and interesting.


Also I swear those edits to the quadratic formula were not vandalism we are going to be switching dimensions soon to a place where the rules of math are different. I just thought we should be prepared.

Alright, well peace mate... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.24.185.170 (talk)

Reverting your user page

No problem. That IP had also done some other vandalism tonight which I think I've finished reverting. Academic Challenger 08:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Sorry, tried to revert vandalism but didn't manage to revert it far enough. Then got in a complete mess...! Gilesbennett 20:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Managed to get it right second time around, though...I think...! Gilesbennett 20:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

no problem, just helping you out Momusufan 20:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

  • now he vandalizes my user talk page too, hehe. well, his IP is blocked for 3 days, I hope he does not return Momusufan 21:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I think you should get your userpage protected from vandals because people are still vandalizing your page Momusufan 21:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Avoiding Straigtness

I'm chargin mah lazers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! pyoo pyoo pu pyooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.81.102.96 (talk)

I don't know what is in the water today, but my user page is being replaced with nude males and my talk page is under attack by potential laser cats. I'm going to a car dealership today, so trust me, I welcome the lasers. the_undertow talk 20:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Looking over the history of your user page, I've added semi-protection. If you'd rather let the vandals have at it, leave a note on my talk page and I'll remove the protection. - auburnpilot talk 21:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Does semi-protection work?

Have just reverted some more vandalism even after the page has been semi-protected.Gilesbennett 06:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

9000!

I removed this because I couldn't find a decent ref. G1ggy! 02:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for helping me out and correcting me. G1ggy! 03:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, if you do find any sources etc., please let me know. Thanks! G1ggy! 03:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

The Transhumanist

I strongly believe you owe The Transhumanist an apology for using his failed RfA as an example in a current RfA. This user has actually been present in the current !voting process, and I applaud that as he is not taking a much deserved break. To opine at the expense of another is wrong in so many ways. the_undertow talk 10:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm really sorry if I've caused any offence, but surely we reflect on previous consensus or disagreement all the time on Wikipedia, using it to define policies and procedures. By citing a previous RfA within another I can only see this as valid and useful to a discussion, even if others view it the other way. I therefore feel unable to apologise for anything. I'm sorry if you, The Transhumanist or anyone else has construed this as offensive. Pedro |  Chat  10:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your considered and thought provoking reply. I hope to see you round the 'pedia again, and in the meantime Happy Editing.! Pedro |  Chat  09:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to drop you a line thanking you for removing the vandalism from my User Page. I appreciate it.I've been off for a while, and I didn't notice it. I do thank you. Rookie Rover 09:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Updated DYK query You supported my candidacy in my recently completed request for adminship. The debated ended 40/4/1 and I'm now an administrator. I'd just like to say thanks for taking the time to consider me, and thanks for the confidence in me. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified.

Regards, WilyD

Your Comments

Just leaving this for when you get back from your wikibreak. A while ago you made some comments on my note in the matrix discussion page. I only just saw them, but I would just like to say thanks because you were dead on. I don't think I'd thought about the tone or the logic of my writing that in the discussion box, and I'll bear it in mind. By the way: according to the 'hand photo' on your page, you apparently use the same type of laptop as me. -Zepheriah 22:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Referencing styles

In case you are not aware, the guidelines on citations have recently changed, after it became clear that there was no consensus to force citations to come after punctuation. The text now reads "Some editors prefer the style of those journals, like Nature, which place references before punctuation. Each article should be internally consistent, but editing solely to change from one style to another throughout an article is deprecated unless there is a consensus to make the change." Even before this change, editing solely to make small stylistic changes was frowned upon. --Stemonitis 06:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: where ya been?

i havent seen you around in awhile. hit me up if you wanna overhaul some articles. the_undertow talk 07:01, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Just chillin'. But I got bored, and so thought I'd pop in to see what's up. I have this weird urge to tackle heart disease. Though I'm lucky I remembered my password. Chill Factor Five 00:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I thought you were dead. I'll take a look at your disease of choice. the_undertow talk 01:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Just finished going over homework. I'm pleasantly surprised that most of the article we created remained intact - with people mostly adding stuff here and there. It only lost a picture, the see also section, and the external links, which I've restored. Diff sure comes in handy. Now on to the disease of choice.  :) Chill Factor Five 01:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know the heart disease article was a list. I'm trying to improve the list (by adding the missing diseases from this class), to see what we have to work with. Then perhaps the page should be converted to an actual article with a brief section on each kind of heart disease, preceded by a more in-depth description of heart disease as a whole. Just thinkin' outloud. What's your 2 cents worth? Chill Factor Five 01:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it warrants an article, as opposed to a disambiguation page. Perhaps we can use subsections so it's not a giant list. Mitral valve prolapse is not a disease, btw. the_undertow talk 01:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Not a disease? What is it then? See http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Mitral+valve+prolapse&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title Chill Factor Five 02:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I've started the conversion. See heart disease. Chill Factor Five 02:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words

Hi, I'd like to thank you for the kind words that you posted on my talk page. Encouragement and appreciation always serves to spur me on to create more articles and continue my work on Wikipedia, work which I do for pleasure and to better what I believe is a fantastic knowledge resource. Regarding my hopes for future adminship - I have attempted the mop a month ago (yesterday, actually), so I was wanting to wait for the 'dust to settle', so to speak, on that previous attempt. However, I feel that by September I would be ready to try again, and I would be honoured if someone nominated me. Once again - thanks. Best wishes, and have a nice day. Sincerely, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 05:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, so you took a look then did you. I feel that I have burned the CSD into my head, but I am hesitant, because I am unsure how I can assure/prove to the community that I have addressed these concerns. People are much more scrutinising of mistakes than they are congratulatory of success - they will let you know if you make a mistake, but not if you do things right. So when people take a look through my archives, they will see some kind comments from people as thoughtful as you, but they will see the criticism and chastising of others, from times where I have made a mistake. I guess this is the way of the world, but it is primarily what is holding me back from trying another RFA before a date as late as perhaps September. Thanks again for your message. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Mitral valve prolapse

Hey there. I noticed your edits over at mitral valve prolapse and I wanted to let you know that in this edit, you removed the main reference I used in writing the article. I'd feel better about using that article as the primary reference rather than using the about.com, yahoo.com, and .org references that have since been added. What are your thoughts? Feel free to continue the discussion over at Talk:Mitral valve prolapse. --David Iberri (talk) 17:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion welcome at deletion review for Plot of Les Mis

After Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot of Les Misérables closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Wikipedia rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 14. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Wikipedia rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with WP:CANVASSING and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. Noroton 03:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)