This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Evanh2008 (talk | contribs) at 04:36, 2 August 2012 (→Reply to Note: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 04:36, 2 August 2012 by Evanh2008 (talk | contribs) (→Reply to Note: re)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Please note:
|
Skip to table of contents |
This is Evanh2008's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 |
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)
- 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)
- 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)
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)
- If you check the diff I posted at your talk page, you'll see that you accidentally removed two other editors' comments (and inserted one with Yeepsi's signature attached to it). If I misplaced your comment in repairing the damage, I apologize, and you can feel free to move it to wherever you think it belongs. Evanh2008 04:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)