User talk:DennyColt/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Isikop 2 Regarding your edit to Pythagoras: 3 Clarification 4 Protection 5 Secondary accounts? 6 Lisa Nowak 7 Fuzzy 8 RegisterFly 9 3rr 10 Thank you... 11 Speedy 12 Entrusted with the Bucket! 13 Brandt AfD 13.1 Some improvements you might like to make to your list 14 EssJay 15 Michael Jones (new age pianist) 16 Edit summaries 17 Sorry 18 Edit to Casey Jones 19 San Andreas 20 Page blankings 21 What? 22 Image tagging 23 Tnavbar-header in US State templates 24 Vandalism Template 25 Strange comment 26 Here ya go 27 Regarding v/d/e links in US state templates 28 Double Up 29 User:71.104.125.246 30 Thanks for pointing me to WP:FORTHEPEOPLE 31 High volume traffic links 32 My RfA 33 Re: Template:Wikipediahistory 34 Fair use rationale for Image:Scwartzbarbaratribune.jpg 35 Essjay picture 36 sandbox for Essjay controversy 37 RegisterFly 38 Sandbox/Fork link 39 My RfA 40 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ASALA attacks on Turkish diplomats 41 CU 42 Re; fundamentalist angle on Stonewall Jackson 43 please remove my Wiki page 44 Information 45 Anon Vandal question 46 Mess 47 Shaking my head 48 Wikipedia community 49 Image tagging for Image:Dennycoltmine.jpg 50 Oops 51 for editing the subject

[edit] Isikop

hey I think people are either using bots to do editing on their pages for them acting like nazis and acusing people of vandalising automatically if the page they edited even changes a little bit. eg --Isikop or else people are writing virus bots? maybe but I am having the same problem you are and so are other poeple I know. --Wiki4steve 10:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

he got blocked. - Denny 10:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding your edit to Pythagoras:

Your recent edit to Pythagoras (diff) was reverted by automated bot. You have been identified as a new user or a logged out editor using a hosting or shared IP address to add email addresses, phone numbers, YouTube, Geocities, Myspace, Facebook, blog, forum, or other such free-hosting website links to a page. Please note that such links are generally to be avoided. You can restore any other content by editing the page and re-adding that content. The links can be reviewed and restored by established users. Thank you for contributing! // VoABot II 00:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Trying to stop that vandal, thanks. - Denny 00:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification

Excuse me Denny what do you mean when you said "it looked like a completely raw thing that wasn't right to be an article??" It is a real article. The synopsis I added is completely accurate, and before any deletion I would like proof of any wrongdoings. I am sure you will be quick to avoid any responce since you may understand that you have incorrectly deleted my contribution so I will send a copy of this to other monitors. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Connman21 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Protection

I think it is semi-protected. I just put the wrong tag on. Try to edit it and let me know if it doesn't work. --DanielCD 21:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

My bad, it's semi-protected. - Denny 21:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Secondary accounts?

What other accounts have you used in the past? Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lisa Nowak

I think hobbies are beyond trivial, but I won't fight over it, if you want to put it back, go ahead. Corvus cornix 19:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you please point out where in policies and guidelines it says that we should include hobbies? Corvus cornix 19:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Theres no hobby policy that I can find, but most bios have interesting sourced information that expand what we know about people and help put things in context. Plus it doesn't hurt a single thing (especially since it's sourced). Just looking through some random astronaut articles like Michael E. Fossum, Kenneth Cockrell, Gus Grissom, William G. Gregory, Mary L. Cleave, and Michael R. Clifford I found loads of personal little things like hobbies, club memberships, etc., and it's fine. - Denny 20:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Denny the Nowak court hearing image was courtesy CNN

[edit] Fuzzy

I reverted back to an eariler version that didn't contain that text. Hang tight, several admins are working on the article right now.--Isotope23 14:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RegisterFly

You're doing a great job! Thanks for the help! GreenJoe 20:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll do my best. If you read WP:NPOV, it doesn't have to be balanced either positive or negative, it just has to be free of personal bias. There's a difference, though with RegisterFly, it's hard not to put in bias if you had domains with them. GreenJoe 15:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I never had/certainly won't have anything with them now, but the story is so interesting... well, that's why I built it up. I mean, a chihuahua... - Denny 16:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3rr

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.. Note your most recent revert was, in fact, your third, meaning that your next revert would be a violation of the rule. I have not stated that I believe you are engaging in vandalism. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I dont want either of us tagged and blocked for that (3rr), I want to work it out on talk. It doesnt hurt anything to leave it there for now and it'll be silly to slug it out source by source for an article that will have 100+ sources when its done. none of it is a controversial/blp thing, really. I just got miffed when you implied vandalism in the summary of that edit. Lets work it out on talk. None of topics on that article are a race to fix, we can move though it at a rational pace. I wasnt able to work on it much over the weekend during other commitments and was going to get back to it this week. - Denny 14:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

revert, adding item that was removed revert revert. If you actually want to discuss how it was a phenominon, do so, but if you were discussing instead of reverting you would have written more than this nondefence of your actions. I would be more convinced of your desire to fix the article if you actually spent some time on the content that has not been looked at, both removing and reinserting things as they were verified, than rechecking my work which I already did throughly. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Noted... do you agree on my idea to sort out the naming first? I think that name and the unique (lax) qualifiers of 'phenomena' are the real problem. It sounds like a ginchy title but it's too unwieldy as a basis. - Denny 14:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you...

so much for your warm welcome! As English is a language I'm not using every day I will be always glad for getting support. I made a few contributions to english WP as an IP but got the idea that it might be only fair to let everybody know that I'm not very familiar with the language. Yours, --MrsMyer 17:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy

If you nominate a page for speedy, and it gets deleted, that means an admin agreed with you. I always take that to mean I can speedy it immediately every time it comes back, but up to you. I suppose being nice has it's merrits :-) Someguy1221 19:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Entrusted with the Bucket!

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. Thanks for your vote, I've received an overwhelming 96% support and successfully took a copy of bucket-and-mop from the main office!

School graduation exam and HKCEE are both pressing in, so I might become inactive for a while. But soon after that, I look forward to working with you! --Deryck C. 03:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brandt AfD

Just as a technical note, would you mind refactoring that huge source list to the Afd talkpage and linking it in your opinion... I imagine this debate will be huge as is so just to make life easier on the closer it might be nice to have that linked on another page.--Isotope23 18:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, replying there on afd. - Denny 18:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For the meticulously researched list of references on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Daniel Brandt (13th nomination). Impressive work. AnonEMouse (squeak) 19:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :) - Denny 19:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some improvements you might like to make to your list

I don't know if you've noticed or not, but:

• this AlterNet article is just a copy of this Salon.com article;
• this ZDNet article is just a copy of this CNet article;
• this article in the Sydney Morning Herald is just a copy of this article from The Age;
• this article in the Seattle Times is just a copy of this article in the New York Times;
• this item from a SEO newsletter is just a copy of this item from a SEO newsletter;
• you have listed this news article twice;
• you've described this article as "establishing him as an authority/notable expert on privacy", even though it was written by Brandt.

Hopefully this will help you improve your list. --bainer (talk) 05:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

thank you! If it's ok I will cross post what you wrote on my talk as a reply to the section on the talk page (more visibility). - Denny 05:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing. --bainer (talk) 05:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EssJay

I think the rv did indeed go back to a state with no blogs. Gwen Gale 23:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Jones (new age pianist)

LOL! No prob!  :) Cricket02 00:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Hi, I know it's more the fault of this "twinkle" script than your own, but if it's not too much of a bother, is there anything you can do about edit summaries such as this one? I fail to see how this could possibly be taken as a "good faith" edit. The user saw the "edit" link, hit it, erased everything on their screen and hit "Save". It happens thousands of times a day – and sure enough, no sooner had you reverted them than they did an identical thing to a different section. Yes, I have read WP:AGF and I'm fully aware it's an "official guideline", but "reverted good faith edits per policy concerns" just sounds wrong, as it isn't just assuming good faith, it's actually labelling the edit as good faith, when it's overwhelmingly likely not to be one. Is it not better to stick to "revert edit by...", which makes no assumptions about anything? Thanks – Qxz 07:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Good point, I assumed (wrongly) that the first was just... a mistake. TW lets you flag as AGF, Vandal, or just generic. I'll start using the generic, it's smarter--you're right... Sorry. - Denny 07:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think the "good faith" one is intended for edits that contain useful information and are relevant to the subject of the article, but fall foul of a policy such as WP:BLP, or constitute a copyright violation, or something like that. Also, if a user makes a useful change and in the same edit removes a large amount of text, as in those cases it's much more likely to be a mistake. Thanks, and thanks also for your help reverting vandalism; much appreciated – Qxz 07:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I'm going to use the generic RV tag for all the borderline ones like that. And for RC, its... oddly relaxing. - Denny 07:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you there – Qxz 08:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

Sorry about the incorrect edit. I'm a noob, and I just started doing anti-vandalism work, and i'm new at it. Scottvn 21:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit to Casey Jones

See Talk:Casey Jones#Proposed split. I proposed that the section be split out to its own article on Feb 28 and waited for discussion. Hearing no objections, I did the split. Slambo (Speak) 21:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] San Andreas

Damn, you beat me to the revert. haha. just having a smashing anti-vandal time. - Pandacomics 06:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page blankings

Hi, it's me again. Just thought I'd point out something that may be of use to you in the future. When users blank pages with no explanation, it's usually vandalism, but occasionally they're acting in good faith – they've seen an inappropriate version of the page, and they've dealt with it the only way they know of; by removing it. Case in point, the situation at Asian College of Journalism, Chennai. If you check the five edits prior to the anonymous user's blanking, you'll see that, good-faith or not, they weren't really suitable for the article. By reverting the anonymous user only, you restored the good content but also the bad; in this case I think it made more sense to revert the previous five edits as well. In summary, before you revert any edit – but especially a page blanking – it's often a good idea to quickly double-check what you're actually reverting to. Thanks, and keep up the good work – Qxz 06:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Well... you'll pick it up, and you're doing an excellent job already. I think experience is the best thing, over time you'll figure out various things with practise. For example, the fact that articles about schools are so frequently vandalised and infrequently maintained that it's sometimes necessary to go back months to find an un-vandalised version. If you haven't already come across it, have a look at Wikipedia:Most vandalised pages, which gives some of the popular and/or controversial pages that attract a lot of vandalism. Treat edits to those pages as suspicious and check them all; same goes for Today's Featured Article, which rather annoyingly changes every day :) – but is easy to see simply by going to the Main Page. If you warn or report an anonymous vandal, and they are blocked, and shortly afterward a registered user starts vandalising in the exact same way, skip the lower warning levels as it's obvious they've just created an account to circumvent an anonymous-only block. Likewise for the same thing in reverse. If you see a page blanking that looks to be quite a short article, and the edit before the blanking was by the same user – and in particular if that edit says "Created page with...") then check the history as it may well be that the only contributor to the page has blanked it, in which case rather than reverting it should be tagged with {{db-g7}}. Similarly, if you come across an article that even when reverted looks unsuitable, be sure to check the history and tag it for speedy deletion if there are no acceptable versions. Non-speedyable articles that need listing at AfD can generally be dealt with in a more timely manner, and I doubt anyone's going to come after you if you don't nominate those as you encounter them, so don't feel forced to do so (AfD listings can be a bit annoying to do). If possible, try to make sure you don't warn users for edits they made before you previously warned them, if that makes sense. In other words, ensure they've had time to read one warning before leaving another (though in the case of vandals who obviously aren't going to stop, it's usually best to forget about this and just leave token warnings so they can be listed at AIV as soon as possible).

I don't know if you're already doing any of these things, but they're things I've come across, so just checking. Hope this helps – Qxz 07:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Some confusion here? I was editing to help cleanup and saw GET BACK IN THE KITCHEN BEFORE I TAKE MY BELT TO YOU!!! on Womens rights? I reverted and receive a warning from you for vandalism? wtf is that all about? New Inn Winchelsea 07:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Doubtless a bit of confustion after the page was vandalised dozens of times in a very short space of time, by mutiple users. I almost did something similar myself a few minutes earlier. Easy to get confused when you're trying to find the good version of a page in such circumstances – Qxz 07:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What?

What, no email address specified? I was gonna shoot you a quick note. Well, whatever. Mahalo. --Ali'i 19:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging

Greetings, just to inform you that the Wikipedia-screenshot tag you placed on Image:Essjaywikiascreenshot.jpg has been removed due to the fact that screen shot according to the source details you added is of a Wikia page. Thanks. (→Netscott) 22:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry that doesn't work. Where's the history of the development of that page? In order to qualify under that license the screen shot must be taggable like this which without the history of the page's creation it obviously cannot be. (→Netscott) 23:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

A bit of a technicality really but let the discussion you started be answered by the folks over on Wikipedia:Fair use. In order to qualify for {{GFDL}} there needs to be a history to trace contributors edits back through the creation of the given content. (→Netscott) 23:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I've created a new template that depending upon what happens to Essjay's Wiki page you might be able to use. See Template:Wikia content. Cheers. (→Netscott) 23:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tnavbar-header in US State templates

Hi DennyColt,

Do you think it would be alright if I revert all of your edits to the "capital" field in each of the US state templates that you made, and just place the Tnavbar-header in the master template? The original point of including the parameter "temlate_name" in this template was the future implementation of the Tnavbar feature in the master template, and it seems to make little sense to do it by adding it to the "capital" parameter" in all of the child templates instead of just once in the master template. Let me know what you think, and if you agree, I'll make all the changes. --CapitalR 17:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a really good idea; sorry--still learning the templates. I'll roll them back myself to save you the trouble, give me 10-30 minutes tops. could you show me after which diffs are for the final changes? really curious to learn that! - Denny 17:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, sure, I'll send you the diff after I implement it. By the way, I noticed how fast you were making edits; I was just wondering if you were doing them by hand or if you had a special tool to help. I'd be interested in knowing about any helper tools that you have, as I often make such repetitive edits myself. I use the Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser often, but am always looking for new tools. Thanks, --CapitalR 18:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's the diff of the changes I made to add the Tnavbar to the master template: [1]. It just adds the same code you used inside of an #if statement to make it optional, and using "template_name" parameter for the name of the template.--CapitalR 18:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, thats much more efficient of an edit than my hands-on method. but... it's not taking to the templates? do we have to do something else with it? - Denny 18:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• It seems to be working fine on my side. You might need to do a cache-clear refresh to see the updates. Another way to force a refresh is to do an edit on the New York template, and then preview the result; that should force a refresh. Let me know if that doesn't work, and then I'll take a look to see if there's another problem. (I checked all 56 templates that use this master template, and they all seem to be ok to me). --CapitalR 18:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, just cacheing on my end. Thanks for the help, that is way better! :) - Denny 18:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism Template

Hello, DennyColt! I saw that message you posted on that IP page about Ford. I've been looking for a good vandal warning, so do you think you could show me the one that you use? Thanks!! Cremepuff222 (talk, sign book) 00:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

hi! It's WP:TW, check out my monobook.js file's code for how I'm using it currently... the monobook has a few tools, that I cribbed and took from other's pages after I saw what they were using. TW--it's an awesome tool. I usually do that, and the tools provided by the script's amazing author, and run it vs. recent changes. The messages are just the template ones that are standard, but TW has a simple way to spread them out in the 1-2-3-4th warning formatting... - Denny 00:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you! (Sorry about spelling "vandalism" wrong above! :) ) Cremepuff222 (talk, sign book) 00:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strange comment

Hello! Could you explain exactly what you meant with this comment? To the best of my recollection, I've never deleted the fascist category under discussion. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 00:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind that, I'll go reply on drv--sorry! I completely misread the deletion log I suspect or had a minute of total brain stupidity as to who actually deleted it... - Denny 00:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

No worries! Best regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Here ya go

User:DennyColt/Back to the Future themes --w^{L<speak·check>} 02:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding v/d/e links in US state templates

Hello, DennyColt. Thanks for being bold and adding the v/d/e links to every state template (with the help of CapitalR). I have some bad news for you, however — you see, before you added those links in, there was a discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates (currently the focal point of discussion on state template standardization) regarding whether any links should be included in the template header or not (our discussion focused primarily on show/hide links). Ultimately, it was decided that show/hide links should not be placed in the state template headers, and I know that I assumed that this was a consensus to omit all links except for the "State of (State Name)" and "(State Capital) (capital)" links in the header.

Originally, we used this basic example as a basis for state template standardization (with CapitalR's later edits), and if you observe the efforts we have made at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates, you'll notice that we spent quite a bit of time on conciseness and clarity (perhaps these are constituted of clean aesthetics; in my opinion, they are)!

I think that you and I should start up a discussion over at that Wikipedia talk page regarding whether the v/d/e links should be included. Thanks very much! ;) — † Webdinger ^{BLAH | SZ} 02:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding! — † Webdinger ^{BLAH | SZ} 17:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Double Up

Hello. I got the message you left on my page. I will have you know there was nothing unhelpful to what I just did. Double Up is the name of more than one album now and I diasambiguated the page to show the changes. Maybe you should have double-checked the page before you left a message on my talk page. Admc2006 04:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, it was a general message. I'm pretty sure you should create the Double Up album for R Kelly before making the diambig page, since only Ma$e's album is that now on Wikipedia. It shouldn't be a redlink disambig until... Mayish 2007. - Denny 04:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:71.104.125.246

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thanks. TigerShark 20:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for pointing me to WP:FORTHEPEOPLE

That was a good read, as I said I rarely hang out at AfD so hadn't thought too much about it. Also edited a poorly worded sentence while I was there. Geez, I'm getting bold... Risker 20:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] High volume traffic links

Hi Denny!

I'm more than a bit confused about the high traffic website banners being on the Terry Shannon discussion page, not the actual page that is cited in the referring article, especially since the referring articles are about the Wikipedia article itself.

Dan Schwartz, Expresso@Snip.Net Discpad 13:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Hi Denny. Thank you for participating in my RfA. Rest assured that I heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner (talk, email) 13:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Template:Wikipediahistory

Do you think Citizendium should be there as a fork of Wikipedia? I added it, feel free to rv it out if you don't think so. Also, how can I get your ads centered on my user page? I can't seem to get the code right to have it center-aligned... - Denny 20:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Citizendium isn't actually a fork of Wikipedia (it originally was but they decided to delete all the Wikipedia articles and start again), but I think it definitely qualifies as a related project because it compares itself to Wikipedia and is generally regarded as an attempt to re-invent Wikipedia with different policies in order to eliminate percieved flaws – Qxz 20:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

To center something, use:

<div align=center>

[insert item here]

</div>

– Qxz 20:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Denny! I love Wikipedia and just edited vandalism from the Roger Mudd Article. (Today is 3/15/2007.) The user who inserted the vandalism (on 3/12/2007) received a message from you the same day for his vandalism to Connie Chung and Maury Povich. I don't know much about Wikipedia -- this is the first article I've ever edited -- but I would love to see the vandal blocked from editing. Thanks for your good work on Wikipedia! Curt

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Scwartzbarbaratribune.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Scwartzbarbaratribune.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Essjay picture

Denny Colt, regardless of whether or not it gets used I just wanted to tell you, "Well done on that". :-) (→Netscott) 06:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sandbox for Essjay controversy

I moved it to Talk:Essjay controversy/sandbox. Cheers!-- Chaser - T 13:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I know you had something else in mind altogether :/ Gwen Gale 05:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks for helping as always... I seriously don't understand why Quack is getting so wound up. :( - Denny 05:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RegisterFly

Only to let you know, blogs shouldn't ever be cited or linked to (they don't meet reliability or verifiability needs). I've left them be cuz there's an exceptional "public service" helpfulness to them but they'll have to go sooner or later. Gwen Gale 05:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sandbox/Fork link

This is the POV/content fork link: WP:POVFORK. Interesting reaction. Risker 06:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you for your support during my recent RfA. I'm glad to say it was successful, and I hope to put the new tools to good use. Shimeru 16:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Editing time lag.

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ASALA attacks on Turkish diplomats

I have found four additional sources with identical content. Is this adequate citation? -- Cat ^chi? 06:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm looking at then now and replied to you on the afd also. My 5 days comment was just in regard to how long Afds typically might run... - Denny 06:40, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh sorry. :) I misunderstood you. In any case, I would welcome any assistance -- Cat ^chi? 06:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I have been sorting the article. It appears there are multiple groups doing the same thing. Do you think it would be better to change the scope to include all attacks by the various Armenian groups? Or maybe 3 separate lists? -- Cat ^chi? 09:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The main ASALA article only has a handful of attacks listed, so I'd guess it would be probably be easier/better to make it all-inclusive for now. all Armenian groups/attacks, then it can always fork later if that gets too big. - Denny 13:54, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. This has a lot of attacks listed, not all aimed at diplomats. Certain insignificant-looking events (such as incidents were one pesky security guard is killed) turns out to be a full fledged hostage crisis. The more I read about this stuff the more stuff that comes up. I haven't even mined half of the stuff on www.atmg.org. -- Cat ^chi? 14:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yo, would you care to assist with mining of this source? [2]. Its too demanding work for a single person to do. -- Cat ^chi? 09:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll try this week, but I'll be a bit pressed for time from IRL stuff the next 10~ odd days. - Denny 01:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CU

There's a speedy tag on the CU you posted. Gwen Gale 05:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

It's gone. Gwen Gale 05:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re; fundamentalist angle on Stonewall Jackson

Denny, it was removed for a reason. See the talk section. If you disagree, let's discuss it there...although the topic been open for a week without disagreement. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.130.23.77 (talk) 06:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] please remove my Wiki page

Hello, I am Archimedes Plutonium. I respectfully request that the Wiki page on Archimedes Plutonium be immediately removed because there is no fair and objective and reasonable editor in the Wiki organization. Wiki page of Archimedes Plutonium has been a ten year old joke and mockery.

Wikipedia does not deserve anything dealing with Archimedes Plutonium, please delete his page immediately and without having to go through any process, just delete

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Superdeterminism (talk • contribs) 18:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Information

I added info to the article. In what way is that being disruptive. I already took it to the talk. I fixed the wikiboxes and added more detail. :) - Mr.Guru (^talk/_contribs) 02:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I asked you a specific question. In what way am I being disruptive. I already took it to talk before I edited. This is a very serious matter about your allegations. :) - Mr.Guru (^talk/_contribs) 02:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anon Vandal question

Wondering if I could ask you, since I've seen you use it... how do I get the optional anon IP message to appear when using the new UW vandalism tags? Thanks, JRHorse 04:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mess

The AfD for AP has become a mess (due to edits by "AP")? I'm hoping you will reorganize it so newcomers don't first see his post ... and so readers can follow the discussion around his other inserted comments. I'm not quite brave enough to do it myself ... but will if asked by another. Thanks for your efforts! Kind regards, Keesiewonder ^talk 11:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

--Just taken care of by Uncle G. Keesiewonder ^talk 12:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shaking my head

What in heaven's name is he up to? I wasn't a huge fan of the article, but after so many people had worked on it to get it to survive AfD, and genuinely felt it was worthwhile, this must be a kick in the head to them. I am really drawing a blank on what is motivating him. Oh well - he has had many editors reach out to him and offer guidance (though some of it may have been less than completely helpful), he seems to be getting it then goes galloping off in all directions again. My patience is certainly wearing thin. Risker 22:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia community

If there's actually any content you believe ought to be preserved from the article, say what it is or merge it into the wikipedia article. I've had a discussion section open on Talk:wikipedia and no one has disagreed with the suggestion. Don't just revert unless you think you're actually making the encyclopedia better, instead of just trying not to go against a supposed consensus. We're supposed to be bold here. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 00:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Dennycoltmine.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dennycoltmine.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oops

Looks like you've double-voted here (support votes #12 and #26). It may be an idea to strike one. Cheers --Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 08:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] for editing the subject

i m very sorry for that but i m sincerely telling that i dont have any intentions to destroy the subject matter. so please forgive me and once again i am asking sorry for that thing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uplakshgupta (talk • contribs) 09:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC).