User talk:Stephenb/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Stephenb. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Having been alerted to user Yogesh Khande, who's comments are in clear breach of Wikipedia NPOV policy.. his quote; "Dickens was a b****y, f*****g, r****t. A white chauvinist p*g. No offence ment to the later. This aspect of his personality is absent in this biographical article of him, and the void has been filled imho by my additions"

With his set agenda and extreme bias, vitriol, this user is contravening one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. Furthermore... he has highlighted certain comments to fit his set agenda. As a repeat offender i propose user ban from this article. BobSilverman (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BobSilverman (talk • contribs)

Not being an Administrator there is not much I can do about that, although I suppose you (or I, if I was that concerned) could raise it at WP:AN/I Stephenb (Talk) 18:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Stephenb, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to IDumbization has been removed. It was removed by Bkf1 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Bkf1 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 16:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hi,

I was thinking about the Justin Webb/Ed Sturton swap ... but you got there before me. I have rationalized the main text and adjusted the ref. list which meant taking out the direct xlinks (that's how I refer to external links) and adding a 'name="WEBB"' to the primary ref. markup.

Hope this is OK with you ... as fellow editor I try to bear such things in mind ... because I've had my fair share of being 'kicked around.'

Best

Lomcevak (talk) 09:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Nope, absolutely fine by me! I ought to have done the work when I added the link, but sometimes I'm just too lazy (or, I think in this case, not feeling too well). Thanks. Stephenb (Talk) 09:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Feel better soon Stephenb ...

Kindest

Lomcevak (talk) 09:22, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Its an odd one, all the slightly more reliable sources say that he was born in August, and then we have these twitter posts by Armstrong claiming that its in March. I reckon Armstrong can properly remember when his birth date is and I don't really doubt that March is the correct date. Although policy would dictate that we should display his birthday as being in August per WP:RS, I don't really object if you want to apply WP:IAR here and put his birthday in as March using the twitter post as a source. Do what you like.
If you do change it though, I don't think we should display it as the second of March until we find some solid proof for that, Armstrong only ever stated that his birth date is in march, but not exactly when. In short, I don't object if you want to change it, but I do think that it would have to be a WP:IAR case. Kind regards Spitfire^Tally-ho! 14:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Stephenb! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 327 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Clayton Hickman - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Haha, by mistake I reverted the page to a different vandalism, good thing you sorted it out. ValenShephard 18:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ValenShephard (talk • contribs)

You seem to do a lot of anti-vandalism work, at least lately (I didnt look through all 500 pages of your edit history, of course) ... have you ever thought about asking for rollback permissions? It's better than Twinkle. —Soap— 12:20, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. :) I'm only a casual editor really, just back from a fairly long break and not sure how long I'll stay. I'll read up on it and consider whether it would be worthwhile, since most of my edits are ant-vandalism reverts. Oh, and many thanks for reverting my user page! Stephenb (Talk) 12:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Linux For You, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linux For You. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 18:28, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Just popping in at the bottom to say I came in because I saw your contribution to Slipstream magazine and was impressed by your view on inclusion and deletion. Haven't decided if I want to stay on Wikipedia but if I do it will be to work with people with mindsets like yours. Tvaulto (talk) 07:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much :) Stephenb (Talk) 09:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from vandalism. Deleting referenced materials like you did in Athens is considered vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.9.100.167 (talk) 13:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't know WHAT you're talking about. I removed the word "Unsurprising" which, as I said in the edit, was a POV (point of view), frowned upon in Wikipedia. Stephenb (Talk) 08:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Just passing on my thanks :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.123.189.116 (talk) 23:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Look stepenb, it justs looks better if we have the same page on cheltenham and cheltenham spa rather than a redirect. RCSprinter123 (talk) 17:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

That's not an explanation, merely an assertion (and is wrong - it doesn't "look" better at all). I ask again: WHY are you doing this? Stephenb (Talk) 17:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

i'm putting it back again and if you don't like it tough because i'm protecting it. if you want to discuss further see an administrator.

What? Please explain! Stephenb (Talk) 17:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

WILL YOU PLEASE STOP UNDOING MY CHANGES IT IS BETTER WITH NO REDIRECT A DUPLICATE PAGE

RCSprinter123 (talk) 20:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No. Stop vandalising Wikipedia. The redirection is entirely correct as there is no need for two articles about the same town with the same content. If you have a problem with a page that links to Cheltenham Spa then change it to link directly to Cheltenham. See the very first entry in the Purposes section of Wikipedia:Redirect. Stephenb (Talk) 13:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)