User talk:71Demon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to my Talk Page. Please use the box above, or manually enter new messages at the end of my page.

[edit] Archive

• User talk:71Demon/Archive 1
• User talk:71Demon/Archive 2

[edit] Sorry

Sorry, I didn't know you were archiving :( I just thought that you might be one of those guys that erases their warnings, but you're not! Again Sorry! §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Whoa Whoa Whoa, I have been told to edit back talk pages when people try to erase warnings...It was an misunderstanding, I thought you were erasing your warnings but you weren't! I said I was sorry, there was no Vandalism involved I was simply trying to prevent erased warnings, I didn't know you were archiving! §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'm sorry It was an misunderstanding and an accident! I completely detest Vandalism-Look at my contributions and my Userpage...I hate Vandalism so please do not accuse me of Vandalism on a misunderstanding, I understand how you feel and I am Sorry, I just thought that you were trying to erase warnings nothing else, I have already stated that it was an accident, Not Complete and Total Vandalism. §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I completely understand what you're saying...It's Just that on the recent changes it said that you replaced the page with a couple of links and I thought you were Erasing Warnings not Archiving, I didn't know and I am Sorry...and I understand how you think it is Vandalism....I didn't try to Vandalize your page, I just tried to reinstate your talk page, not Vandalize it, Again I am Sorry. §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not okay at all to Remove Warnings after they are read! And I understand I obviously don't even want to think about doing it again, I said sorry like 40 times, discussion over...Please do not write on my talk page, I need to be on Recent Page Patrol now, Thank You! §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't purposely Vandalize your talk page, but I won't argue. I won't do it again...(Trust Me) Well, it's nice to meet you, anyway :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continued personal attacks

I was disappointed to see you reintroduce the personal attacks in these edits today, attacks which had previously been removed by other administrators. --Yamla 04:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The only personal attack here has been your abuse of your admin power in blocking me for spite. You refused to help an editor. Refused to look at the evidence that the pictures were free to use, in the end you were proved wrong and the pictures were free to use. Yes, they were marked as GDFL, when they should have been marked as public domain. An oversite made worse by your actions. In the end I was vindicated, but I had to take two weeks off from posting because I was blocked for spite, all because I proved an admin wrong. Sorry if I stepped on your toes, but the truth is not a personal attack. --71Demon 22:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

PS, there were not removed by other admins, my talk page was vandalised by your friends. --71Demon 22:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. --Yamla 22:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do Not Engage Yamla

It is very important that you do not further engage Yamla. You should not even respond to the warning he posted above. It is important to recognize that anything other than the most perfectly written statement could provide Yamla grounds to block you again. I don't want to see that happen. You've made great contributions to Wikipedia. Please focus on those contributions, and allow the RfC to take its course. Take care. If you need to contact me regarding this issue, please send me an email, but again, I would encourage you to not further discuss Yamla or his conduct on Wikipedia for right now. Justen 23:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, again. Yamla is making a good faith effort to try and defuse the situation. Again, please consider not further discussing Yamla or any concerns you have, except on the RfC. Even on the RfC, remember to assume good faith. To put that as simply as possible, I just try to assume that everything that anybody else on Wikipedia does or says is sincere, honest, and kind. Sometimes that's really hard to do, I know! But it can really help to resolve especially difficult situations like this one. You're a great editor, and I really want to make sure you can keep contributing your great work to Wikipedia. Please consider helping de-escalate this situation. Justen 00:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving

Just a note about archiving- when you create an archive, make sure to add a slash ("/") immediately after your username. For example, your next archive name might be User talk:71Demon/Archive 3. Otherwise, it appears as if there's a user by the name of "71Demon Archive 1" and "71Demon Archive 2". It's a little silly, but it's important. I've already fixed both of your previous archives. Ral315 (talk) 15:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.

• Image:Interstate-268.png
• Image:InterstateWV.png
• Image:WV28.png
• Image:WV55.png

Thank you. BigrTex 18:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Appalachia

Talk about oafishness. You proposed this on my talk page and I never got back to you. I was archiving my January talk page comments and noticed I'd done this to several people, you included. I guess I was just spacey; it's not as if I don't get a big message on my screen when I log in and have a new message! In any event, I certainly did not intend to blow you off.

I think Category:Appalachia is a great idea!

Having said, we've both seen how people can be trigger-happy about new categories. I suggest getting a few allies and helpers by bringing it up first at Talk:Appalachian Mountains and Talk:Appalachia, the two leading articles for the topic.

I suggest establishing some criteria first or else we'll have a real mish-mash -- a road in North Carolina, a town in Mississippi (not even in Appalachia but because of the Appalachian Regional Commission's pork barrel boundaries, there are recurring low level disagreements on the Appalachia talk page), a Christian rock group in WV, etc.

I say that because categories are designed to help readers see at a glance related topics, not as a stamp collection for compulsively categorizing editors that want to put everything remotely related into a given category.

Anyway, you have my support if you first get some other support. I want to make any such effort CfD-proof before we start it! --A. B. ^(talk) 13:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Cam_Ranh_HQ500.jpg

[edit] Wikiproject: West Virginia

Hey! I have created a new section on Government containing mostly templates, succession boxes, and list links for West Virginia politicians and government. I have minimally modified a couple of your succession boxes to meet uniformity. I have to go back and modify about 20 that I did months ago just so everything is the same. I hope you do not mind. Thanks! Mphamilton 05:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USS Chicago (1885)

While editing the USS Chicago (1885) article, I noticed that you recently added [1] it to Category:United States Navy Illinois-related ships. However you used USS Boston (1884) as the Chicago's sort key in this category. Since the article does not note that the ship was ever named Boston, I presume this was a cut-n-paste mistake and have gone ahead and changed the sort key to Chicago. --Kralizec! (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)