This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MaxwellTeke (talk | contribs) at 07:10, 3 June 2007 (→Racism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:10, 3 June 2007 by MaxwellTeke (talk | contribs) (→Racism)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Archives |
---|
More than you are aware of
Please also see List of IRA Chiefs of Staff. Note that Adams being CoS is referenced by three sources, and includes a denial from Adams as a footnote which could be somewhere more prominent possibly. So that's three sources saying he was, and a denial from Adams. Now see this version, quite a difference isn't there? One Night In Hackney303 23:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Because I have no barnstars to give, nor am I near any barns from which to steal any...
- Sweet. With the American dollar continuing to lose value I desperately need to diversify my portfolio in foreign cash. :)
- Thanks! --ElKevbo 14:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
iraq war casualties
The number is good enough for the Iraq War article, so it's good for the GWB article too. --CTho 00:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Stoopid Monkey Logos
As you are probably aware, the Stoop!d Monkey page was the subject of an AfD and the result was, of course, "Keep". Currently, the logos are a point of contention with myself saying that they were part of the "Keep", while User:Calton saying they were to be dropped and the article was to remain.
I asked the admin who closed the AfD his opinion and he replied, "I just said the article was to be kept, I don't know about the logos". There wasn't a decision given on the logos and in the AfD only 3 users said the logos should go, only 1 said keep the article, lose the logos.
I am not sure how to handle this, but since the admin who closed the AfD made no decision and the AfD wasn't about the logos in the first place (and the majority said to keep the logos if you want to be picky about it, as far as I can tell).
This wasn't an issue from April 16th (immediately after the AfD) to May 3rd when User:Calton realized that I was blocked for 48hours (not related to this) and I couldn't revert his changes. User:Calton had no interest and made no changes on the page itself or the talk page during that time. So, to me, his initial revert on May 3rd was done because of my block.
I have asked two admins (in case one is offline) to revert his changes and put a block on the page until this can be worked out. I am also asking you, since you contributed to the AfD, what your opinion is on just the logos themselves. I appericate you input one way or the other. Thanks...SVRTVDude
- Thanks for your help on the Stoopid Monkey page. Calton retorted by calling me "Mr. Low Impulse Control Stalker", to which I had a good laugh at. Can you be a stalker and have low impluse control? :o)
- Anywho, I think I am going to move the Stoopid Monkey lines/links and incorporate them into the Robot Chicken episode list. That should work for everyone. Have a good rest of your weekend....SVRTVDude 22:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Happy editing! --ElKevbo 22:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The talk entry is up...
on the University of Phoenix link...we can talk about it over there, but wanted to reply here first. Flowanda 15:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks so much! --ElKevbo 15:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Vandal revert
Thanks. GDonato (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Welcome! --ElKevbo 16:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks ElKevbo for keeping an eye on the Social Networks page. I've been on holiday for the past 10 days. Bellagio99 19:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome. It's a group effort, of course. :) --ElKevbo 19:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Deuce22
Yeah, I figure he/she's simply not reading the warnings or ignoring them, but I figured I'd at least going through the motions so it goes past the level 4 warning. But really, if a block doesn't get the message through, I don't know what will. --Ytny (talk) 03:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Jocelyne
There was a first DRV, resulting in overturn, and a second AFD, resultnig in no consensus, here. This lack of consensus is being endorsed. HTH! >Radiant< 16:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, gotcha. Twisted path to reach that result. :) Thanks for setting me straight! --ElKevbo 16:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
plagiarism source
Hi ElKevbo,
Did you happen to see my post on Talk:Plagiarism about Cassandra Clare citations? I tried to find if there had been consensus reached before but couldn't, and I didn't know if it was a big enough concern. Thanks. Flowanda 18:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
ANI
Thanks for the notification, I've responded. One Night In Hackney303 10:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Washington College Article & Image
As I mentioned on ESkog's page, I have put in to kuru (the admin who currently oversaw this months ago) to protect the articles in question, as it seems no one wants to use the discussion page. The conflict seems to be revolving around someone's person thought that "images" can not be used as references. Who made this rule up in the past 2/3 months since that revision was made? D-Hell-pers 03:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- I haven't seen you make an effort to use the Talk page, either. Take the initiative! Use the Talk page instead of relying on edit summaries. --ElKevbo 03:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
It's hard to rely on the discussion page when many users just edit to what they see fit. Normally, someone adds the section back and the editor who deleted information moves on. This is the first time in several months that a person was persistent on removing this section, not to mention making up new "wikipedia rules" to back his bark. D-Hell-pers 03:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- I wouldn't worry about it too much. Apparently there are still a few experienced editors keeping an eye on this article. I don't know if the other editor is "right" but I'm sure that consensus will win out the day. --ElKevbo 03:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Coalition Against Militarism in Our Schools
Hello,
I've removed your proposed deletion tag from this article, as it appears to have been cleaned up quite a bit by Terjen since the tag was initially placed there. You may, of course, nominate the article for AfD in response to this removal if you wish.
Thanks, JavaTenor 09:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
FA candidate comments fixed
Sorry. I was making changes when you guys commented. In the merging I missed that. My bad! Edit was not in bad faith, just in stupidity! What do you expect from a mere Aggie? :-) — BQZip01 — 13:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- No problem! I was sure it was just a mistake as you made some pretty significant edits. --ElKevbo 14:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
This page is deliberately blank
Is your main page really blank if it has "This page is deliberately blank" on it? — BQZip01 — 13:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yup. Just like the government manuals and documents that have that phrase printed on "blank" pages. :) --ElKevbo 14:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Why the ATM revert?
Hi... I see you reverted the edits to Asynchronous Transfer Mode by User talk:Arunachalammanohar -- but why? It looks like a valid contribution, and your change description doesn't give a reason, and your message to Arun... doesn't seem to fit his contribution at all. (The warning talks about external links, and there are none in his edits.) Paul Koning 15:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Never mind. I looked more closely. I see the external links now. Sorry. I think I'll re-add Arun's text with the external links removed. Paul Koning 15:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- That user added a bunch of spam links to several articles and I may have missed some things as I busily cleaned up after him or her. I apologize if I caused any confusion or additional work! --ElKevbo 15:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Response
... on my Talk page! :) Joie de Vivre 20:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Toby Meltzer
Seeking assistance. One editor is including multiple extraordinary claims about Meltzer's career that do not have multiple verifiable sources.
"Exceptional claims should be supported by multiple reliable sources, especially regarding scientific or medical topics, historical events, politically charged issues, and biographies of living people."
Would you take a look in at Talk:Toby Meltzer? Thank you! Joie de Vivre 19:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I see that you are overhauling the Facebook article. Could you please look over the April Fools section and the discussion on the talk page. Your input would be appreciated. Gdo01 21:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Not overhauling - not right now, at least. Just hit a few of the most obvious sections. I'll take a look at the Talk page and offer constructive input if I have any to share. --ElKevbo 21:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
University High School (Los Angeles, California) and the ANI
Okay, this is becoming really brutal. There are lots of revertings going on. WhisperToMe 22:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Then request it be protected. I just think that jumping straight to ANI for a dispute between a handful of editors in a low-traffic article is likely premature. If it's so bad that it needs immediate admin attention then I would expect experienced editors like yourself and SwatJester to make specific recommendations at ANI. Or, more likely, report the problem at 3RR or RFP as appropriate and then continue the dispute resolution process as appropriate. If these editors are truly problematic (history of blocks, sockpuppets, etc.) then that should be mentioned.
- It just seems like a garden variety heated content dispute and I don't see why that should be immediately posted to ANI. --ElKevbo 22:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- You know what? Fuck it. The trolls win, I'm out. I'm not touching that article again, nor am I touching the AN/I section again. If something this mind numbingly simple can't be dealt with intelligently, and after repeated attempts she can't come up with a good source for it by now, it's not going to get done, and I just don't care anymore. I've got too much other shit to deal with at the moment, and if I continue on in this dispute, and Miss Mondegreen keeps trolling me the way she's been (successfully) doing, I'm liable to do some rouge shit, and then we're really in a bad spot.
I'm quite disappointed that you'd think that I was trying to WP:OWN the article though. I'd think you'd know my editing better than that to make that kind of accusation. ⇒ SWATJester 00:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Take a break, man! It's not worth getting this worked up about an article about an obscure high school. --ElKevbo 11:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I think
Hey, I saw you had a vandalism issue with wiki member 72.209.34.111. I think that IP may be a shared computer, however I am not quite sure. I figure if a few people watch over the IP we can get a grip on what the deal may be. I'm not quite sure how to get an abuser blocked anyway, LOL. Hellswasteland 17:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
It's a real thing
My nephew is a WMU student. Everyone is being hush hush. Don't accuse me of vandalism just because you're not informed. James Roberts 18:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't believe you but until you can provide a source it doesn't matter. If you can cite a reliable source, then it might belong in the article. If you can't, then it doesn't belong. --ElKevbo 18:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- What the fuck? People add unsourced shit to the wikipedia all the time. Why the fuck are you picking on me? Shit, god forbid there be something unsourced about a fucking current event. They should have put you in charge during the Pearl Harbor bombings... your response time would have been bloody brilliant. James Roberts 19:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just because it happens in other article doesn't make it acceptable. And your Pearl Harbor statement...doesn't even make sense. --ElKevbo 19:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- What the fuck? People add unsourced shit to the wikipedia all the time. Why the fuck are you picking on me? Shit, god forbid there be something unsourced about a fucking current event. They should have put you in charge during the Pearl Harbor bombings... your response time would have been bloody brilliant. James Roberts 19:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to punch you in the ovaries
That's right. Right in the babymaker. Get a fucking life. James Roberts 19:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well that's not very nice! --ElKevbo 19:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- CAPTAIN FACEBOOK TO THE RESCUE. Jesus, at least you could babysit an article that wasn't so queer, like a sport or something. Sport is what happens when men go outside. Look into it. OH BURN. James Roberts 19:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Please do not mistake my playful "ribs" as warning-deeming "personal attacks". Please lighten up, good sir. I respect you wholeheartedly. James Roberts 19:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Get your own entry
The assignment was not to edit another person's wiki, it was to make your own. I created the reserve design page entry on the 23rd of May, making it my project, not yours. Get your own topic.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Flying mermaid (talk • contribs) 09:24, May 25, 2007 (UTC)
- First off, you may be under the impression that I am a student in your class; I am not. Second, no one in Misplaced Pages owns an article. As noted at the bottom of the "Editing" page, your contributions are licensed under the GFDL and you have no right to blank information from an article to which other editors have contributed. I don't know whether the article you initially wrote is terribly good or if it is, as another editor has wondered, virtually identical to another article and thus should be merged or deleted. But this isn't just some class assignment - this is a large community with a goal and cultural norms. Aggression ("Get your own topic") and ownership of articles are not values we cherish or tolerate. --ElKevbo 14:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
On the discussion page, you did in fact say that you were doing this for a class project:
Talk:Reserve Design
Jump to: navigation, search
Salvaging this article
I am not sure what this article is supposed to be about based on what is written now. Its not sourced very well and lacks context. Can it be re-written? —Gaff ταλκ 02:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I am in the middle of putting it up. It will be done tonight. This is the first time I have used Misplaced Pages so it is slow going. There will be references, I just haven't figured out how to put them up.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flying mermaid (talk • contribs) 22:23, May 24, 2007.
- Do you happen to be posting this for a class project?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 169.233.59.58 (talk • contribs) 23:05, May 24, 2007.
- Yes. --ElKevbo 04:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
So either you were lying or didn't understand the question.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Flying mermaid (talk • contribs) 10:39, May 25, 2007 (UTC)
- If you had actually followed the link you would have seen that I was linking to your response and I was TRYING TO HELP YOU OUT. --ElKevbo 15:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Reverted self-revert
Oops. Thanks for sorting out this, which unbeknownst to me actually re-instated the domain spamlink. I think "D'oh!" is in order. Cheers. Ref (do) 19:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- No problem! :) --ElKevbo 21:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Sorry about that; I wasn't aware of the date policy. And I was mainly labelling the edits as bad because of the "and Thomas Miller as Samoht Skywalker" that got thrown into the article by an unregistered user... and, yeah, because I didn't know about the date thing. --Hotdoglives 01:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 22 | 28 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Second nominations
The correct wikitext is the very simple {{subst:afd|Jocelyne Couture-Nowak 2nd nom}}. This is explained in the documentation for Template:afd. There is no need to substitute twice, and depositing masses of wikitext into the start of an article like this is exactly what that template avoids doing. Uncle G 21:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. Appreciate the heads up! --ElKevbo 21:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Missing image Image:PolishSalute.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:PolishSalute.jpg, by Strangerer, another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:PolishSalute.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:PolishSalute.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:PolishSalute.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Wall Street Journal - India Edition
Why dont you remove the CNN-IBN link at the bottom of the CNN page? Tri400 19:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Because I don't monitor that article. It does appear a bit suspicious so if you know more about it, please contribute! --ElKevbo 19:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Godsmack
Hey i'm new to all this so i'm Just wondering why you got rid of the DVD section --Will Scot 55 04:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry about that! It looks like I may accidentally removed it as I was making some significant edits to the article. Go ahead and throw it back in but please edit it down and correct the grammar. Thanks for asking and catching my mistake! --ElKevbo 06:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Racism
As a clarification, calling another person a racist is not racism. Enough said. MaxwellTeke
- Examine the editors' other edits. --ElKevbo 06:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- I did, he just called Tiger a racist, called the black communities racist and called him a failure at golf. Doesnt mean hes a racist. MaxwellTeke
- I regard you a racist. I will request you be banned from life.