Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:51, 31 December 2007

Archives

Archive 1. Archive 2. Archive 3. Archive 4 Archive 5.

Please post all entries below the line below, and start new entries at the bottom of the page. Thank you.

is it not?

how can it not be up to dawat e islami? we can ruin your servers in a day with our resources... we can get tens of millions of people to spam the dawat e islami page, render it useless, unless you show some respect. i don't want you to allow a fawning article, only the truth - preferably the truth authored by someone with a half decent command of the english language.

Hi, It was a Betabot Malfunction

Hi,

The IRC Group Misplaced Pages Group did it as it was a bot function, Sceptre told me to simply report as vandalism as it was quicker.

Please join the discussion to discuss it with everybody if required. We also had an admin doing it to, placebo_effect.

The Helpful One 21:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The general wikipedia one.

irc://irc.freenode.net/%23wikipedia

They have told me what is going on...

The Helpful One 21:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I verify that I asked s/he to do it. Most of them were invalid tags, and I chose to revert as vandalism because of the amount of tagged images and the speed needed. Will 21:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The second a bot malfunctions, it becomes a vandalbot. Will 21:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Still, given the fact it made 750 edits in six minutes, that is spamming. It's allowed to spam image pages for specific reasons. Tagging used images as orphans is not one of them. While BC didn't intend to, it still did it. Will 21:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Maytableinc

I've changed the above from a delete to a speedy - don't know what you reckon, but I think it falls foul of db-bio. Giles Bennett 21:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Db-bio covers "web content" - would fit under that, I think, since it's a pretty non-notable youtube video. Giles Bennett 21:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it hit the spot - it's gone. Giles Bennett 21:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably just as well. There's also a User:Maytableinc, though they don't seem to have been involved in this article. Corvus cornix_talk 21:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Hi please be cautious re blocks as I am being defamed daily on your site and am subject of your sites' articles and you are not regulating this or many other BLP issues

opiumjones 23 00:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

ok thanks for the hint but this has had admins asking admins to get involved and it has been ignored in the last 24 hours.

so they are shirking their volunteer roles opiumjones 23 00:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Re Joujouka jajouka An informal mediation process

Please have a look at User:FayssalF/JK

opiumjones 23 00:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Fuck ashton Kutcher

It wasnt an attack, it was a poem by Dave Chappelle. I was adding it and then linking it to his page...

It actually is a notable poem, this is one of the two poems he wrote and recited on tv when he came back from africa. If theres a way of linking the poems to his page and not have to put them on wikipedia, I wouldnt mind doing that. But, this is a notable poem. Theres also a second poem. The Orators has its own page, a notable poem by a famous poet.Peoplez1k 04:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

K delete the page, Ill just add a redirect to the webpage that has the poems on them. If that is against the rules just put it in my discussion page and Ill take it off.Peoplez1k 04:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The poems are written on his official Forums. The forums belong to him.

User: *bj*

Even while Administrator intervention is being requested? ++Arx Fortis 04:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems very counter to common sense that a user would be allowed to remove warnings from their talk page while they were in the very act of vandalism. Regardless, in addition to your "advice" to me, why didn't you also discourage the user against obvious vandalism and harassment of me? I'm just wondering why you singled me out. ++Arx Fortis 04:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

While recent changes is a wonderful tool, your comments "I have no idea what your disagreement is. I don't know if or what the other person did. I'm not really interested." epitomize the issue at hand. You didn't consider the context which resulted in a somewhat knee-jerk reaction. Even under the most pedantic interpretation of WP:DRC, it is not intended as means for a vandal to hide their warnings so they can continue vandaling. Given the examples shown, there wasn't a snowball's chance in hell this guy was going to stop his vandalism until it was noted by an administrator and appropriate action taken...in this case a three-day ban. Regardless, I don't make it a habit of reverting talk pages. ++Arx Fortis 05:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether I was wrong or right, my point is, if you're trying to make a constructive contribution to Misplaced Pages, perhaps you should find out the context before applying a virtual template to a page. As WP:DTR says, "for most editors that have been around a while....telling them "did you know we had a rule against this" tends to be counterproductive in resolving the issue." ++Arx Fortis 05:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't attack you? Where did I do that??? ++Arx Fortis 05:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I know you have said that you have "nothing further to discuss" on this matter but I thought you might like to know that I raised this discussion on the Don't restore removed comments Talk Page, here. Apparently this is still just a proposed guideline and how it might apply to removed vandalism and block warnings is still to be determined. Thanks. Shawn in Montreal 22:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

"...and editors are not obliged to follow it." Cheers. ++Arx Fortis 23:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

User: Flashish

I removed the notability tag from the Chymax article as Chymax is a patented Pfizer product.

I was given permission...

I was given permission by the band themselves to use it. They said I could file it under "My Own Work". The band are friends of mine (Dr Manhattan (band)). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot provide for those. I was going to put it as the band's work, but, the website was going to delete it. Can't you help me out? I'm new. I haven't been on. They might even take the article about the band off the site yet the band is going to have a release on an important indie label (Vagrant Records). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

First, will you help me out to actually keep the image on?

And also, here is the rule:

  Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable). 

They have a release day set for their debut album. It is a self-titled album and is coming out March 11, 2008, so yes, I am quite sure the band meets the requirements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Will you explain to me why that is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkalinetrio78 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh no, I swear, this is no garage band. I totally and completely understand the "garageband rule", but Dr Manhattan (band) is legitametly (sp?) signed by a record label that held Alkaline Trio for 3 or 4 albums. They also signed Saves the Day and The Get Up Kids. They are a legit band and are no longer a little garage band. Alkalinetrio78 23:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Isn't there any way that we can keep the article on here until the cd is released? Alkalinetrio78 23:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Nah, their single hasn't really been released yet. 2 song samplers have been released at their shows, but not like, on the charts. Wait, did you check them out? Alkalinetrio78 23:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Can't you just take the tag off? Haha, that would be my best guess.-Alkalinetrio78 00:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh come now, have I not defended my case effectively?-Alkalinetrio78 00:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Yo man? What's the deal? You deleted it.-Alkalinetrio78 01:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Freshslice

If you tell me the reason why Freshslice is in for speedy deletion, I'll try to fix it since I see nothing wrong with the article/stub. ~~Annoyomous24~~ 00:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Myanmar

According to ALL and EVERY wikipedia and sub-/partner- project page regarding 'edit warring', by it's various names and terms, I must partake in multiple changes of edits. No such "warring" has taking place as I did not make more than one REVERT or SUBVERT edit. I also did not cut and paste, I was simply blocked out before finishing the modification (changes made since I hit the edit tag). I've been here quite some time. You, or others ma block my account if you wish for removing a political bias and point-of-view, for updating a collection of articles to CURRENT INTERNATIONAL REALITY, but call it as it is and don't hide behind fantasy charges of actions I did not commit. As for copyright, I am a legal practitioner (records and licence verifiable), I am well aware of what copyright is and challenge you to prove that I violated any such legal regulation and that the intended finished set of edits (a re-direct) would have violated any legal law.

Rather than attack; you would find a more interested listening reaction by discussing. Your charges are unfounded and statements of claimed or intended criminal activity without proof and documented evidence, as well as court decision (copyright violation) to any party other than site management, the claimed infringer, or law-enforcement, is a good way to find yourself in serious legal trouble. Misplaced Pages has various copyright DISPUTE tags you could have notified me with. You are flat out WRONG in the statement that I have violated copyright. You have now committed an act of defamation in public record. Do NOT do that again, to myself or anyone else.

Take into account I'm not threatening you, I'm warning you; use your head! My intentions AS STATED ON MY USER PAGE are to remain politically neutral. The current Myanmar series of redirects (fact: there is no legally recognized entity in current existence know as or with the inclusion of Burma) are a spider's web mess. Half the wikipedia SITE's links go nowhere. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Redirect#Undesirable_edirects. How-about another fact of this situation; I was working from the bottom of the pile up; to correct EVERY redirect. That's something no one else has taken the time to do, including yourself.

One does not have to agree with a situation to admit it exists. I myself practice a branch-offshoot of Buddhist Philosophy. Personally knowing people who live there, and having visited Myanmar; I feel deeply for the people struggling in that country. My personal feelings did not hinder in my recognition of the legal reality that the country is not called Burma. When completed; the series of edits, would have be complete, USABLE, correct, and free from POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostinlodos (talk • contribs) 23:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Is R. Winston Morris still unnotable? Pensil 01:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

RickK

I was not part of the dispute RickK had. I was completely uninvolved. I was on a vacation back then. To but it bluntly I do not understand what you are getting at. -- Cat 16:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You were inserting a copyvio into an article, and RickK kept reverting it. He got blocked for vandal fighting. Corvus cornix_talk 17:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I think RickK got blocked for revert-warring. I do not clearly recall the details on that particular case but IIRC he was having an interaction (revert war) with SPUI ( ) not me. He also seems to have wheel wared over SPUI's block. I was NOT the person blocking him and I was not revert/wheel waring either. While I did revert him once, that alone was not the reason for his block. He was only blocked for 24 hours which was pardoned several minutes later. I had taken the time and looked at the 3rr history as this particular case happened before we had 3rr archives. I have this link to the case which I was not a participant. In sum, I did not drive anyone away. My involvement with that particular case can be said to be minimal. -- Cat 18:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It was your copyright violation that SPUI, who had problems with RickK anyway, kept re-inserting. Corvus cornix_talk 18:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

How are edits by someone else my responsibility? Please do not get this the wrong way but it appears you are blaming me for SPUI's edits. SPUI might have just as easily picked some other case and things would end up the same way. I did not invite SPUI. In fact I did not even know SPUI... In fact I never liked SPUI. -- Cat 18:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Jack Pickford

Your right it had many edits needed. I did it at 5am originally thus probably the reason. I cleaned up the spelling errors and tried to make it more readable. Should be good now. --Thegingerone (talk) 00:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Chandrabhanu

I know you mean well, but that article was an absolute mess, it had nothing to do with WP:BIO of that king. I have the citations and I am developing a series of articles on Jaffna Kingdom related rulers. I am going to take a break now, not going to indulge in a revert war. If you do care do some search on the subject and try to clean that mess up. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Really

Where do you live? Hm? Where?--Cody6 (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Tactical Girls

I am a big fan of female action heroes and think the Tactical Girls free website and calendar is as relevant as many of the others listed under "See Also". The Bikini Bandits entry is practically a fan site for them, with myspace listings. When it comes to girls with guns, there is not much out there and a lot of it is in extraordinarily poor taste.

As far as encyclopedias go, I thought the whole idea of wikipedia was to include subjects from current pop culture and other sources that might not be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica. I rewrote the listing with a more neutral tone in the hope that it would satisfy the wiki requirements.

After all, the whole Girls with Guns genre is about entertainment. However, if I were a Sociology Major interested in the relatively recent development of the female action hero, or portrayal of women as action heroes, I might want to discuss the entire spectrum, from the over the top Bikini Bandits to the obviously right wing and chauvinistic Stacked and Packed to Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider.

I believe this entry is relevant to a pop culture subject. Would it be more appropriate in the external links section? I want to do this right. Thanks,--Hbflp07 (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The subject is new enough that reliable sources discussing it do not yet exist. Therefore, would it not be appropriate to simply at least list it as an external link, related to the overall genre, as a way for a user to come to their own conclusions about its relevancy?--Hbflp07 (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

If I examine the Bikini Bandits entry, I do not see a reference from Ted Koppel from Nightline discussing them, their entry seems to be written by a fan of theirs also. It is information about pop culture entertainment. The Tactical Girls website, just like the Bikini Bandits films (films made and sold for profit . . .) exists and is relevant to to the genre of Girls with Guns. It it least deserves mention as an external link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hbflp07 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion to use Twinkle

Hi, I have a suggestion that you should use Twinkle which is a bot that helps speed up the process of tagging speedy deletion.

Enjoy! If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on my Talk Page

The Helpful One 19:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Response

Sorry, I didn't know that was the policy on those list pages. My bad. I'll create a new article and then re-add later. :) 70.146.67.72 (talk) 23:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Apologies

Thanks for reminding me about toning down my temper. With all drama surrounding wikipedia, both in press as well as inside, shame on me for being so easily inflamed by issues quite far from my heart. `'Míkka>t 01:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll just condense mine in here :-) I should have looked further back in the page histories to see that. You have my apologies. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 00:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Musee de beaux arts

I noticed that too. However, the article says that they are examples of them. There was only one source I could find that said the location of the painting (sources have been very hard to find) . As for whether it exists, I believe it does from some other websites, but it's rather hard to find (perhaps I'm just hindered by my illiteracy in French). bibliomaniac15 03:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

copyright in lists

Corvus, I think you're wrong this time on Computer Gaming World list of the best games of all time. What is on WP is only an excerpt and would qualify as fair use. Please compare with and probably remove from afd for a better place to discuss it. DGG (talk) 17:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It's a report of what games they listed. A reproduction of the actual extensive text of their report would be a violation. Take a look--the amount used just about 1% of the original. DGG (talk) 17:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Menudo

Those articles on Menudo are all sourced do not let that guy bully you. Letter from Menudo boys to the department of Justice

What precisely is your problem with me?

I find it hard to AGF when you immediately run to WP:ANI without even poking me on my talk page to ask what's up. Jtrainor (talk) 07:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Korphai AfD

Finally some editors have responded in detail in Talk:Korphai, listing the criteria from WP:MUSIC with corresponding references. Were you going to respond? --Ronz (talk) 02:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Phi technology

I did not protect it. In fact, I stubbed it. You shoulda seen what it was before. If you need support in deleting it, let me know. Danny (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Help desk

Rather or not your guess is correct, I think it would be best if you remove this comment, keep in mind many new editors that go there, thanks.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 19:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Lir is a disruptive editor with a long history of disruption. New editors need to know this. Corvus cornix_talk 19:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Some editors are reminded to comment on content not the editor and to Assume good faith, when they see experience editors talking like that they may think, So why can't I do the same? but in different circumstances, That's all I was thinking, but if you wish to leave it I won't fight you on it.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 19:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

AGF is not a suicide pact. Lir has lost any good faith he might have had, five years ago. Corvus cornix_talk 19:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

RIT Model RR Club Article Notablility

What am I missing for a certain level of notability in this article?

If I look at Student Organizations listed on the Rochester Institute of Technology article, the only other one to have an article is WITR - with what seems to be little information other than some basic facts. Would it help to cite external references of the club? Such as this article D&C article I must admit there are not a overwhelming amount of external information about the club - but to the Students, Alumni and Community we are involved with we do try to make a difference.

Perhaps it is best that I remove the Rochester & Irondequiot Terminal article and merge it with this one. It had been created long ago by a different member of the club. I will not argue that it is confusing fiction & non-fiction and how it has survived this long I am somewhat amazed.

As for this one, I can re-write it to eliminate the usage of first person without issue. As this is my first exerpience contributing to Misplaced Pages please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boblenon (talk • contribs) 03:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Orland Park

First off, they were already inserted, and second off, who doesn't know who Andy Avalos is? I won't reinsert them but I thought you removed them for no reason. Sox23 03:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Its not that big a deal, I didn't even know they were redlinks- I just saw they were deleted and since the intro was deleted as well, I just reinserted the whole thing. Its fine. Sox23 03:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Robert C. Beck article and Blood electrification

MastCell has weighed in with a comment question to you about what Gov articles there are in support or even mention of Blood electrification.

If you could look at the article & talk page, perhaps you could be of assistance?

MastCell has also suggested deletion of my under development Robert C. Beck article that was AFD in June or so.

I am trimming the Dr. Bob Beck article now, and most of it is now gone.

If you have any suggestions for the Beck article, then feel free to reply here. Oldspammer (talk) 04:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I added extensive comments to your list of Gov references provided in the AFD debate. The comments should explain some of the political happenings of the AFD situation.

One fellow there has more or less discounted completely that the method of action of BE could possibly be that of electroporation (even a very weakened form of it). He accused me several times so far of being deceptive because of mentioning of electroporation in the article in the first place, and of using Pub-Med sourced information that he had opinioned as having only slightly to do with the BE article topic, but that you and I have associated with pathogen destruction in liquids--the dental scientist work with oral bacteria in-vitro and plaque in-vivo.

If you have more on this, please provide us your observations and input. Oldspammer (talk) 09:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

RFA part 2

I remembered asking if you wanted a RFA back in July and you declined, do you think you are ready now. Thanks Secret 00:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD reconsider?

I think you are wrong about this one, best regards, Pete.Hurd (talk) 06:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:DICK

Look I mistyped a word, there's no need for you to parade it around in quotes like a scarlet letter. If you want to discuss this rationally, I will, but you'll have to stop with venom first. Corvus cornix_talk 22:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You want to discuss this rationally so you start off by calling me a dick? The only venom here is coming from you Sir. I merely explained a cultural reference, which you didn't understand, found sources which you couldn't because you clearly don't know how to do a Google search properly and agreed with everyone else that your nomination of John Clare's most famous poem for AfD was flawed. If I were in your situation I'd acknowledge the fact that I'd been mistaken, thank everyone for their input and withdraw the nomination gracefully. If that's being a 'dick' then so be it. Anything else I can help you with? I'll pop this conversation on your talk page, just in case you miss it or want to call me anything else. Nick mallory (talk) 23:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Nick that you should withdraw the nom as a sign of good faith and as a way to save face.--Lenticel 01:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Robert M. Edsel Verified Sources

I understand that the three sites listed are run by Robert Edsel's organization and may not prove to be verified sources. Instead I would like to resubmit the White House website and the National Archives website for your review. --Armcandy101 (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

IMDb

Don't know if you saw my response, but it's on my userpage. Thanks. Bouncehoper (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: AFD

Corvus, you're correct, I didn't handle that correctly. I've just been getting irritated at seeing articles nominated minutes after creation. I struck the comment. Replied on the users talk page. I didn't agree that i disagree with the sentiments expressed, but the way they they were expresses was not the correct way. Hope it's acceptable. Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I added a new comment suggesting that the article be given a moment to grow. It's the last comment i'll make on the afd page. Hope it's in bounds. I'll live with consensus however it proceeds. Let me know if that one is some how out of process.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look, I'll be honest, I don't have a personal attachment to the article, But more a personal reaction to what I see as continued poor practice on AFD. Almost like it's a prize to be the first to nominate an article instead on carefully considering, does the inclusion of this article help or hurt WP.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Guess it's a bit of a catch 22. I see where you're coming from. I'm a bit of a longtime lurker short-time editor and AFD's probably the area i've spent the most time reading. I probably don't have a full understanding of what does into the work others put in. And I do know that some articles just don't belong. (I've commented delete on a few myself.) I just have a commiseration with someone who creates an article only to see it hit afd before they can take a sip of their drink.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

General (United States)

I'm making this article conform with the other ranks of the United States on Wiki. I made a History of United States Generals as a seperate history article which is linked to the main one. Neovu79 (talk) 00:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm not claiming this as my own work, I'm just trying to improve it to make it cleaner. Neovu79 (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

If it helps, I made a note in the History of United States Generals's discussion page crediting the orginal authors. Neovu79 (talk) 00:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD

Thank you for your advice. Billscottbob (talk) 00:51, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Please mind your own business

Hi there... Please do not accuse me of making "unconstructive" edits on my own user page again. Get your facts right next time. --118.92.22.70 (talk) 04:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

some help..

Sorry am new to this editing, deleted by accident while modifying the page.After adding the rationale i have to remove the tag? RyosukeDG (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:Jammulapalem

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know that. I'll keep that in mind for now on. --Kannie | talk 22:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:Speedy deletion

I think I'll defer to you to whether or not the article should be deleted. --Kannie | talk 23:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Ankle

Thanks for your concern. However, I'm in bed not because I'm ill, but because it's currently quarter to midnight where I am! J Milburn (talk) 23:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Same to you. Eight minutes to go :-) J Milburn (talk) 23:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes to {{Nn-warn}}

Hello, Corvus cornix ... I wonder if you have any comments on the changes I made to the warning template ... I added the same RED warning icon as the other Nn-warn-* templates, and I copied the language directly from WP:CSD#A7 ... I wish that Some Other Editor would fix {{Nn-welcome}} to use the same language as well. :-) ... Happy Editing! —72.75.72.63 (talk · contribs) 23:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Help!

Kazumi Tanaka is being put up for deletion! Help me save it from deletion!Kitty53 (talk) 02:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Template:Db-bio and Twinkle re: CSD A7

Hello, Corvus cornix ... Please respond to this thread ... Happy Editing! —The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Ezdrummer

Hi Corvus. I have added a link to Toontrack's official site, which I think covers sourcing, and a reference to Devin Townsend's usage of the program, which I think covers notability, so I deleted the tags. Please let me know if the article is all right now. Thanks. --Thinking Stone (talk) 01:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

please dont change

i noticed you've been making some changes on page about Dr. Darko Trifunovic. Please dont do that. If you suspect in validity of any information, go ahead and google. I also left the link next to his name at the beginnnig.

thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh3 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

He is well known

No problem, but why would you remove the page? Just because you don't like him, you should not remove his page. He is very well known person in the Balkans. AccountInquiry (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You need to do something about this user!

Darko Trifunovic is hiding under these usernames: Sh3 and AlexandarNYC. He created pages slandering people who criticized him in the media, and also he opened other spam pages under different username - all of them were deleted. Take a look http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:AlexandarNYC&action=history and here http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Sh3 . AccountInquiry (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Response to Corvus - thanks man for pointing me in the right direction! They should put you as an admin! AccountInquiry (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:

I know, but removing warnings is considered disruptive.IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

So IPs cannot remove warnings but Users who are vandalising don't have to keep them?IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

User talk:QU109999

Regarding the unblanking of the above user: I realised that just after I did it - whilst you were typing your message on my page, I was adding a comment on the talk page to just that effect. I only did the unblanking once, and I won't do it again. StephenBuxton (talk) 22:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. Usually I assume someone who blanks the incident board is someone who knows what they're doing exactly so that's why I went with the warning for him. I will definitely learn from this, thanks for the reinforcement. Nate · (chatter) 22:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

hey

to: AccountInquiry

Look I am not Darko Triufunovic, I am just trying to sustain this article and prevent the campaign which is going against the antiterrorist intelectuals. I left the coment on the talk page and some links so you are welcome to go and read whatever interests you. I am not hiding behind any nicknames, this is the only one I have. Stop patronizing me and following my every step. Do you even have life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh3 (talk • contribs) 10:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Wallis, Duchess of Windsor

Whoops, sorry! DBD 12:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Amer10

I noted your remark on his talk page about the number of his hoaxes and why should anyone accept any of his edits, etc. I considered blocking him permanently after yesterday's brouhaha, but thought that he would just come back under another account name and create more subtle hoaxes that are tough to detect. So, I've resolved to simply revert any of his edits until he gets tired of this and leaves us alone, and I guess you'll be helping with that judging by your comment... if you have a plan that you prefer, though, I'm all for it; just let me know. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'd indefinitely block him in a New York minute if I thought it would be the last of his shenanigans. But I think I'd rather have him using an account that I know about rather than one I don't... his hoax pages are VERY subtle. There's a pattern to the type of hoax he perpetrates and I will be keeping an eye open for the names he's tried to bring to false prominence in the past. Too bad he can't bring his skills to contributing rather than vandalizing. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think your plan of just reverting everything he contributes is a good one, and I'll join in with you whenever I'm on-line -- I've made a note to check everything he does every day from now on and just revert him on sight. Thanks for your cooperation and assistance, it is appreciated. <sigh> Again, what a pity he can't bring those skills to good use here. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/StandWithUs

Nagle has drastically improved the sourcing for this article; do you want to check it out again and consider striking your nom? I don't blame you for taking the time to AfD it, but it looks like it's a keep.

--- tqbf 17:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Nake Women

Thanks. TW screw up most likely but I accept I should have checked. Thanks for catching this one. Spartaz 18:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Robot (t.A.T.u. song)

 Done   jj137 19:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland

An editor has nominated List of Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of Lords Justices of Appeal of Northern Ireland and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)