Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:33, 2 August 2012

Please note: If I gave you a warning and reverted edits that you do not think were disruptive, leave me a note below and I'll look into it as soon as I possibly can. You might also try checking out this page, for common reasons that edits will be reverted. If I tagged your article for speedy deletion, please don't yell at me. It won't help your case. You are welcome to contest the speedy deletion nomination by clicking the appropriate link in the template notice. It will probably help if you specify a valid reason, though. With the exception of warning templates, if I've left a message on your talk page, it is already on my watchlist and I will see your reply shortly. There is no need to leave me a talkback notice in these cases. And finally, if I've done something mind-blowingly stupid, trout me!

Kuwait/IOA Total

I agree with the points you made on S&P's talk page. However, it's also bad to report information that is most likely false, even if we have no verifiable sources saying it is. Perhaps we should just leave the IOA total blank for now, with a footnote explaining the situation? Smartyllama (talk) 01:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like a good compromise. Do we just set the athlete number parameter to "unknown"? I'm not quite sure if that might break the template, but I'll let you handle that if you like. The footnote is already in place, so we should be fine in that department. Evanh2008 01:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll try "unknown". If that doesn't work, I'll leave the field blank, which should work. Smartyllama (talk) 01:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

It worked with unknown. Once we figure out what the deal is, we'll replace it with the correct number. Smartyllama (talk) 01:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

London 2012's site has been updated; the three Kuwaitis formerly listed as independents have been moved to the Kuwaiti roster. Unfortunately, their total for that roster only comes to ten, rather than the number of eleven given by other sources. I don't think that this is a problem, however, as I'm no longer interested in citing London 2012 for information on which they have proven themselves to be unreliable. Evanh2008 04:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Something involving Rob Liefeld

Yeah, um, maybe you should lighten up? Rob Liefeld is absolutely terrible and "vandalism" doesn't really apply here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.97.104.66 (talk) 17:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Who said anything about vandalism? Evanh2008 19:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, you're talking about this thing you did five months ago. Yes, that's vandalism. Don't do it again, please. Evanh2008 19:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For alerting me to a BLP violation. Done. Dougweller (talk) 07:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Doug! I see now that there were two more that I missed, so thanks also for being thorough. Evanh2008 07:44, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

For telling me of what to know about Jaosn Russel, again, thanks. =)184.98.143.25 (talk) 09:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! Evanh2008 10:23, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Reply to Note

I'm not sure what I did wrong and am hoping you can advise me. All I was trying to do was to agree with the mediators' decision about the Beatles "compromise." Did it seem like I was trying to do something else? I added my agreement under the "Your views" section on the mediation talk page. Wasn't that right? The note said I had refactored someone else's talk page. I'm not sure what that means, but, if I did a no-no, it was an accident. Thanks for any advice you can give me.Jburlinson (talk) 04:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)