Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:01, 15 July 2009

I periodically go through and clean out the old comments... This is because they refer to old situations or that the discussions are otherwise no longer current. Those looking for archives are invited to refer to the history.

If you have a demonstrated history of personal harassment on these pages, your posts are not welcome here. If you do post, your comments will be removed without being read. If there's any chance that you might not know that your behavior is considered harassment, I will tell you, and from that point on you will not be allowed to post here. To anyone who doesn't know what I am referring to here, this warning does not apply to you, so by all means leave a message.

Please add new comments to the bottom of the list below (you can use the handy dandy "new section" tab next to "edit this page" at the top of the screen).

TO DO LIST:

• Hawley Harvey Crippen (someone with a clear COI consistently adding a personal website as a source to article and to top of external links... no independent, reliable sources have called this person's views or website notable in the slightest, clear spamming -- recent edits also added a source to a claim saying something had been disputed that actually has nothing in the source disputing it)

Lore Sjöberg

Thank you for putting up that quote and a link to the Wired article on your user page. It's been a while since I've laughed so much. As they say, it's funny because it's true :) §FreeRangeFrog 21:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, once I saw that one I knew I had to include it.DreamGuy (talk) 15:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI

I thought you should know that Arcayne's complaining about you in http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard

From what I'm seeing here, he didn't bother to inform you.

It's really sad. I'm actually starting to feel sorry for this guy. Doesn't he have anything else in his life? Erikeltic (talk) 17:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have ANI watchlisted, and whenever I see him posting there I check to see if he's complaining about me or not, so I already replied.

He's frankly obsessed with me and constantly seeks out ways to get into conflict with me, but thankfully he usually loses. At this point he's been stumbling so badly and doing the same to so many other people that I suspect he's probably heading for some serious consequences soon. DreamGuy (talk) 17:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

God I hope so. It's just unfair that he gets to abuse the system the way that he does. Erikeltic (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism to my user page

Hi. I just wanted to stop by and say thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. I think that they didn't appreciate my removal of their spam from the Untouchable (Girls Aloud song) page. ~~ 18:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Urban Legends

Your edit, summ'd "this list is full of content that has very list purpose for being here, if any -- clearing out ones already linked to in article, that aren't ULs or related" -- has needed doing for a loooong time. thanks! DavidOaks (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. DreamGuy (talk) 14:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Serial deproder

Hi there. I'd just like to add my personal support to your efforts against the disruptive edits by the likes of Varbas. Keep up the good work. Don't let thugs stop you. Duffbeerforme (talk) 19:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. From the sea of red links showing up on my watchlist currently it looks like a whole lot of articles deprodded by Varbas/User:Azviz for no good reason are finally getting deleted, and I expect more soon. With any luck the sockpuppet investigation will finally get him banned for good... until he pops up using yet another new account again. DreamGuy (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI - in case you missed it, Varbas has indeed been blocked as a sockpuppet. -- The Red Pen of Doom 19:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Awesome. Thank you for letting me know. Didn't see a notice pop up anywhere. DreamGuy (talk) 19:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

courtesy notification

Your Canadian friends have opened a thread about you on AN/I. Looks like you might have hit a nail on the head..
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 23:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Saw that he reverted the IP talk page. The ANI post certainly doesn't help his case any. DreamGuy (talk) 23:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

IP blocked for two weeks as a sock of you-know-who. I think everyone is catching on by about the fourth time that this has happened. :) MuZemike 00:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for filing that report and letting me know the results. DreamGuy (talk) 00:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Columbus'(s) egg

Learning something new every day... Thanks, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 17:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Ambigram

Hi DreamGuy, I have recently made some changes to an article, Ambigram, you have previously edited and have shown some interest in. Another similarly interested editor has suggested my changes are outside expressed consensus and has an interest in discussing my edits upon his return from vacation. As you were actively involved in previous discussions I would humbly request your participation or that you watch developments on this page. Duffbeerforme (talk) 15:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes I have seen his ownership issues along with his clear misunderstanding on consensus and his lack of understanding of wikipedea policies. I have seen your attempts to point out the obvious to him and his dismisal of such attempts. Aggressive owners do not stop me. My changes to EL are the only changes I made and I see as questionable. DMOZ seemed to me to be close to a social site, that opinion may be outside consensus and is so reverted. Duffbeerforme (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Revert of contribution to intelligence

Hi DreamGuy, As I've mentioned to Storm Rider, a wholesale revert of an edit which was made after careful review of every definition in the article, and attempted to summarize and integrate every point in each definition, should not be casually dismissed by means of a wholesale revert. If it was worth 30 minutes of my time to research and craft the edit, the next editor should also spend some time evaluating the content of the edit. I will accept substantial revision of my changes, but not a wholesale revert. Pooryorick (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Whether you choose to accept it or not isn't relevant. You do not WP:OWN the article, so you will have to accept that you don't get to set up rules other people have to follow when editing your content. DreamGuy (talk) 18:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

contribution to the article 'Serial killers'

Your statement, "..the majority of serial killers is white" is improper english grammer. Some may even find it bizarre.Dopplegangerr (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

See McKean's law. DreamGuy (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for helping - I've left this message for him. Shiva (Visnu) 21:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. DreamGuy (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Leprechaun

Hello. As a major contributor to this article, I thought you would want to know that it has been placed on hold as a result of its GA Sweeps Review, which can be found here. –Whitehorse1 18:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Ambigram

I have reverted your archiving for a second time. This is because your edit resulted in the selective loss of certain sections and comments, in particular the removal of comments from line 254 onwards which selectively removed RoyLeban (talk · contribs)'s comments to both you and others. This is obviously wholly inappropriate to try and mask the removal of comments by others whilst archiving, and could be considered a personal attack against that user (and if this continues, you will be blocked from editing: please read WP:NPA). I therefore ask that you see my talk page discussion on the subject, and contribute to reach a consensus before taking any action on the page (if a consensus cannot be reached, nothing will change and auto-arching will continue as ever). I hope this clarifies matters. Ian¹³/t 20:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)