Misplaced Pages

User talk:Dennis Brown

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dennis Brown (talk | contribs) at 14:26, 19 December 2007 (→Richardson, Tx vandal(s)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:26, 19 December 2007 by Dennis Brown (talk | contribs) (→Richardson, Tx vandal(s))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archiving icon
Archives

Read Before Posting, Please

If your message is about an ARTICLE, please use the talk for the article so everyone can participate in the discussion. I automatically watch all articles I edit so I will see the edit. You can put my name in the SUMMARY if you really want to get my attention. If the talk is about procedure, methods, personal stuff, or other more general topics then please leave a note here. I check here frequently. This isn't Misplaced Pages policy, it is just my preference. Pharmboy 15:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Richardson, Tx vandal(s)

Pharmboy, after you called us spaz, we had a intervention and realized that you are right and we are wrong. We want to apologize and become solid wikipedians. No more inaccuracies, no more non-sense. No more factual info to the cooper high page, you can have the taping, and groin conversation. We want to be productive members of wikipedia, true wikipedians, we are going to start collecting star wars men, and cutting our hair like spock. We want to spend our days like true Wikipedians living for vandal hunting, Doom, dungeons and dragons, and eating that the Golden Corral with friends discussing pascal, and whether superman could beat aquaman.

Thank you for making us better men and solid wikipedians, you may now go back to the tanning salon selling speedos anf goggles. group hug! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.118.82 (talk) 02:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Biodiesel

Hi. I'm not really sure how to use this talk thing any more than I know how to edit a Misplaced Pages article page. Regarding the biodiesel contribution, I had just hopped in and saw such a glaring error on the hydrocarbon emissions, I had to create a username to change the article. I saw the citation was to the Union of Concerned Scientists, and knew somebody had to make some kind of mistake to mischaractorize UCC published information. I missed the "summary" field on my first go around, then when I saw it change back, I just thought I made a mistake, and tried again, this time noticing and filling out the "edit summary" box. I did do a very minor change once upon a time to another article, but not as a registered user. I hope I haven't messed up this talk page with this article as I don't know how to create a new section. Just delete this after you've read it I suppose. Thanks for the heads up on why my article changes were initially rejected too. Steve B., aka beltrams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beltrams (talk • contribs) 03:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

evolvingenergies.net

Pharmboy, i apologize if i appeared to be spamming, i understand that can be an issue, i wasnt though. I actually was researching for a paper on bio-diesel, and found the sites listed to be rather difficult to navigate through, then i found the other site, www.evolvingenergies.net This site had all of the history, all of the info, and had a better nagivational field. I got more out of that site than any of the others. So that is why i kept it up, i actually had a friend call me and tell me he couldnt find the link, thought i messed it up, then afterwards i got your warning. Wasnt spamming, i assure you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.155.49.37 (talk) 14:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

  • When someone reverts an edit you made, and you know they did it in good faith (meaning they gave a detailed reason why in the summary) you probably should go to the talk page for that article before adding anything back, and get the input from other users. Sometimes, you will be right and others will agree. Sometimes, not. The goal is to create consensus on stuff like that. The problem is that thousands of people every day add links to their websites, thinking it will get them traffic or better page rankings (it wont: [REDACTED] uses NO FOLLOW tags). There has to be a limit somewhere as to how many links are on an article. Pharmboy (talk) 14:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Dennis Brown Add topic