User talk:Synchronism/Archive 1
Federalism : capitalization of CommunitiesHi, First let me apologize for deleting the referenced sentence you re-added. I didn't see why it was relevant at that place in the article. You re-added it at a more logic position. Secondly, I saw you removed the capitalization from the Communities in Belgium. You should know that the Belgian Communities are official bodies, at the same level as the American States. The names Flemish Community, French Community and German-speaking Community are their official names, so they should be capitalized. (Please refer also to the corresponding Wikipedia articles, that also have the capitalization. --Luxem (talk) 10:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Daft PunkI'm sorry if my edits confused you, so I'll clarity: D.A.F.T. is a collection of music videos. Interstella 5555 is a feature film conceived by Daft Punk using their album Discovery as its soundtrack. Electroma is a feature film by directed by Daft Punk that does NOT feature any Daft Punk music. The only unifying factor of all three is that they were released in the home video format. Feel free to contact me if you have any concerns. just64helpin (talk) 18:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm not going to do anything to the article right now. Nor will I continue this discussion. Note that Intastella5555 aired on the cartoon network episodically, and that these two are collaborative works, like Wikipedia. Really you are correct. And still: I don't really understand how 'filmography' was ever misleading, except in the sense that it didn't acknowledge the collaborative efforts of the various directors, which 'home video' also fails to do. They are all indeed films. Note home video is unreferenced and that wikipedia is not a dictionary. (Some of my favorite porn is home video) Synchronism (talk) 19:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC) FederalismI will change only one thing: the word "new" in 'the new aspect' because it is an old aspect. I would write 'This aspect' without saying if it is new or old. I did'n't edit in order to say a quick separation is impossible. I focused only on the fact that we have both a Federalism with two and with three components (important components). But it is right also to say that the existence of Brussels is an obstacle on the way of a quick separation (but not the only obstacle). On the other hand, Belgium will become more and more a Confederation. I hope Luxem will agree with that all. There are twe views. For a Fleming it is self-evident that we are in a Federalism with two (important) components, and it is not wrong 5i understand that). But for a Walloon it is also self-evident that we are also in a Federalism with three components and for the people of Brussels (In my Walloon point of view, it is impossible to accept a Federalism with only two beacause if it is the case Wallonia doesn't exist. But on the other hand this is the reality...). So the two things are true: two and three and that is in the structure of the State since the beginning of the firrst reformation in 1970. You have a very adapted name (Synchronism), I hope you succeed to make it! Sincerely and friendly:thank you José Fontaine (talk) 23:31, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Why did you undo the change? This page is superflow, and discussion say to keep SD Frwy merge with I-405. You seen discussion, my changes was valid, I didn't do anything wrong. Can you just discuss on the talkpage, please? Do this page have special infos?--Freewayguy 22:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC) Please talk over at Talk:Interstate 405 (California). Gateman agree ith the emrge--Freewayguy 22:05, 24 October 2008 (UTC) please DO NOT undo it AGAIN, until you give me an answer, besides saying it's a vandal when it's NOT a vandal. You didn't see past discussion page.--Freewayguy 22:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Missing reference for "water strategy" at Albuquerque, New MexicoHello! In this edit to Albuquerque, New Mexico you added a reference to a reference named "water strategy", but there's no reference named that so it comes up unresolved. Could you supply the reference? Thanks. --Uncia (talk) 13:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Out of curiousity....After seeing your edit get undone, I was wondering if you'd like to weigh in on the massive discussion about it here. Cheers, —Ed 17 for President Vote for Ed 00:37, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Freewaywell it seems that Freeway is but one word of many that can be used to describe full limited access highways. Per the first sentence of the article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by hmains (talk • contribs) Please explain on the freeway article's talk page as it is the proper place to discuss this. Others will want to know that this change is being contermplated. And please use maintenance templates.Synchronism (talk) 05:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC) Pacific Biosciences pageHey Synchronism, Gimme some time. I've not worked on a Wiki page for a few years. I know the rules and am doing this while doing my regular work. Am not a IT guy. Am lending a helping hand. Please don't cripple my effort within minutes of trying. Vcrist (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Vcrist I'm sorry, but it wasn't just me, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pacific Biosciences, please read it. You could create a sandbox to work on a new Pacific Biosciences page with SMRT Sequencings page as a template to avoid this in the future.Synchronism (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC) I notice that you tagged the page (k)no(w)here for speedy deletion with the reason "WP:CSD#A9". While that's a valid reason for speedy deletion in general, this page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because A9 is for articles on albums for which an article on the artist does not exist, which was not the case here. If you still want the page to be deleted, please consider tagging it with a speedy deletion template which does apply, redirecting it to another page, or using the WP:AFD process. Thanks!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
QuicknessSorry I wasn't too hasty to respond on this article. The Internet was down at my house. Jonathan321 (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you please explain more fully...In this comment did you overlook that William T. Coleman Jr. was a former Secretary of Transportation? Did you overlook that Edward G. Beister Jr. served ten years in Congress and was a former State Attorney General? I'd appreciate it if you explained what you meant by:
Do you know the story of "False Geber"? I first read about him when my brother loaned me his copy of Isaac Asimov's Biographical Encyclopedia of Science. Geber was tenth Century Arab alchemist and polymath, whose works were widely copied back when every copy had to be manually transcribed. Scholars of Medieval texts determined that later writers published new works under his name, because his fame would make it more likely that the works of these anonymous men would be copied. Through detailed analysis they determined that one of these anonymous men had made important new developments of his own. We know almost nothing about this second man. Scholars think he might have lived in Muslim Spain -- but they don't know for sure. They only have an approximate date of when he lived. They don't know his real name, his real job, or what religion he was. Biographical information should be included -- if verifiable references to it can be found. But, I am frankly at a loss to understand how not including dates of birth and death, educational institutions attended, etc, should be grounds for deletion -- when that information has not been published. Even if it has been published, if it is missing from the article then surely that simply means it should be included -- not that the article should be deleted. The nominator called the Court of Military Commission Review "marginally notable". AGF. I am sure that the nominator didn't mean to taint the {{afd}} with his or her personal bias. But, I think that is the effect. In my experience other contributors similar comments reveal strong biases -- they reveal that the challengers have chosen to accept, without question, the official Bush administration line that everything at Guantanamo is mundane, normal, routine, legal. Having accepted these very controversial claims they think it is obvious that hardly any Guantanamo topic is notable. I don't know if the nominator would be an exception, who can offer a meaningful explanation as to why these highly controversial topics are "marginally notable". I would have asked for an explanation earlier, but frankly I find pointing all this out very draining. {{Afd}}s exhaust me, becasue lapses from civility are so common, and it is so rare anyone ever changes their mind, or is willing to acknowledge someone they disagreed with made a good point. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
False Geber legitimized—and made practices of alchemy mundane for a longer period of time, by crediting his ideas to 'credible sources' or higher authorities. Obscure but clever, Geo Swan.Synchronism (talk) 00:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC) SchoolSchool is the place wherroke ur assthey be the teachers can torture you until —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.254.252.79 (talk) 03:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Chapmanville Regional High SchoolYou tagged Chapmanville Regional High School for speedy deletion. The consensus at AfD is that high schools are generally automatically notable, even without references. Please consider removing the speedy tag. -- Eastmain (talk) 05:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
-- Eastmain (talk) 05:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Grand Duchy of MachiasYou nominated the Grand Duchy of Machias for deletion. I am new to writing wikipedia but recognized your want for citation. As for a hoax, I have photo evidence but do not know how to add it to wikipedia. If you could offer help and guidance it would be most welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGrandDuke (talk • contribs) 02:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Prince OkamYou changed the {{db-person}} tag on the Prince Okam page to a {{prod}} tag instead. Can you explain why? Just curious. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Shells Yonge![]() An article that you have been involved in editing, Shells Yonge, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shells Yonge. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 19:17, 14 November 2008 (UTC) Active LancerI added some references to Active Lancer. You might want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Active Lancer. -- Eastmain (talk) 03:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Never welcomedI was never welcomed to Wikipedia, it's so sad. If only... —Synchronism (talk) 07:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC) Welcome! Hello, Synchronism, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place User:Synchronism/Gadsby: Champion of Youth (book) User:Synchronism/SLBC FailureYou win my best edit summary of the day award with this. :) --GraemeL (talk) 21:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
RE:Speedy deletion of Drones(halo3)Section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion does not apply does not apply to Drones(halo3) because it is not about a person or group it is about a thing in a video game C.JD 00:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cryptod (talk • contribs)
Thank you for your supportYes, i will provide an edit summary. I am still very new to Wikipedia, but i will try, and do my best to improved, and support the Philippine article. Its a pleasure. :) $antander 24 November 2008 (UTC)
In regard to this article, {{db-notenglish}} does not apply, because there is no corresponding article on a foreign language Wikipedia; ta:சேரமான் பெருமாள் does not appear to exist. Just being in a foreign language is not a speedy deletion criterion unless the article exists on another Wikimedia project. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:13, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Rodney KingI'm sorry, I don't really understand how the previous edit of Rodney King was any less reliably sourced then the current version, as it uses the same sources and, in my opinion, more neutrally reflects what actually happened. In my opinion, it makes it seem like he got pulled over for speeding and the police officers started beating him, which is obviously not the case. However, I do not know how to make this more neutral, so, in accordance with consensus, I will refrain from further editing of that article, save for obvious vandalism. Thanks.
1) The video tape that KTLA initially aired was edited. It has led to a fairly common misonception that King was initially complying or lying prostrate when the beating occured. He wasn't. There are good sources for this: namely, http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/lapd/kingvideo.html and Lou Cannon's book. I don't speculate as to why the tape was edited. Regardless, it has led to the widespread misconception that King was an innocent random African-American motorist, who got singled out by rogue cops. He wasn't. 2) It's not one lone author--Lou Cannon--who asserts King resisted arrest. Rather, it is widely accepted view among people familiar with the facts of the case. In the words of Supreme Court Justice Kennedy: "Officers Powell, Wind, Briseno and Solano tried to force King down, but King resisted and became combative, so the officers retreated." This is also stated in other fairly reputable sources like US News and World Report 3) There is a reason why I included information as to why Judge Kamins was removed from the case. Namely, because a California appellate court unanimously ruled that Judge Kamins would be partial towards the prosecution. I cited the New York Times, which quoted directly from the court's ruling. 4) I removed Tom Bradely's quote: "the jury's verdict will not blind us to what we saw on that videotape. The men who beat Rodney King do not deserve to wear the uniform of the L.A.P.D." Mayer Bradley wasn't part of the jury. He did not hear the evidence in it's totality. As if that wasn't enough, the four officers were tried again at a federal level. The second time two officers were acquited. The Mayor paints the case as being an unambigous case of police brutality. Meanwhile, two juries' verdicts painted a much more ambigious picture. Why are the mayor's comments even relevant here? 5) In California, DA's don't charge people with felonies. Grand juries do that. Anyway, I have used five sources: Newsweek, a law professor's webpage for the video (which was a source before I even made an single edit), an opinion by Justice Kennedy, an opinion by an California appellate court, and Lou Cannon's book. Also, I include in my edits the number of times the officers struck King: above 50. I also pointed out that Powell repeatedly struck King, even when he was down. I'm not seeing the non-nuetral point of view here. StarbuxRedux (talk) 03:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
re: Cheraman PerumalHi Sync. The article சேரமான் பெருமாள் is about Cheraman Perumal (Islamic convert). The author was perhaps unaware that a separate Tamil Wiki existed. I've copied the former to the Tamil Wikipedia and explained it to the the author at their talk page as well as over email. They've started editing it in Tamil Wikipedia. This article can be deleted here. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 03:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your reversal of removal of text by User:$antander. You'll see from a survey of his/her recent edits that s/he has been similarly removing text from numerous Philippines-related articles across Wikipedia, never with an explanation or use of "Discussion." Combined with the prolificacy of the edits, it's become quite disruptive. Badagnani (talk) 22:20, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
And again, [4]. Badagnani (talk) 05:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Santa Fe InstituteHello. I apologize for not putting the reason for the edit with the Santa Fe Institute article. The name "Brian Goodwin" is on the list of scientists twice. I'll re-edit.Oo7akbnd (talk) 00:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Help
Thanks Discospinster, :)Synchronism (talk) 01:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC) Your request for rollback![]() After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! —αἰτίας •discussion• 12:42, 7 December 2008 (UTC) Typo redirect Fred youtube![]() Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Fred youtube, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Fred youtube is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3). December 2008
Can you please leave me to finish off what I was doing? The page on Robert Tounson, a 17th century bishop also spelled Townson (see article) contained the biography of Robert Townson (producer), which is utterly inappropriate. I therefore forked it off into a separate article. Please read ALL the articles involved before interfering. I have already had to remove a bot-geenerated tag, which may be what stired you up. I explain to the bot, why his tag wrong and was then removing his tag, when I found you messing around. Please be more careful. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Loma lindaThe "Controversies" or "Scandal" section is inappropriate in the Loma Linda University entry. It was entered by a user (Johnathankincaid) who was disgruntled about the university. It only adds a negative light to the school. None of the other universities have such a section. Please reconsider the vandalism by that user, and please block that user from making changes to Loma Linda University. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Namja (talk • contribs) 16:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Changed your speedy delete tagHi. I changed your speedy 'nonsense' tag on Superlata into a 'no context'. Felt it was a bit closer to the truth. Happy editing,
Streamlined handling for socks of PoliticianTexasThanks for helping track down sockpuppets of PoliticianTexas! Because he has been community-banned from Wikipedia, there's a streamlined procedure for getting his sockpuppets blocked. You don't have to open a case at WP:SSP, just present the evidence at WP:ANI. See an example here. If WP:ANI doesn't work, you may have to file a report at WP:SSP. Also note that WP:SSP reports are filed by puppeteer (not puppet), so any suspected PolTx socks would be filed as "PoliticianTexas (nth)". See for example Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/PoliticianTexas (3rd). I think you are correct in flagging AndrewGirron (talk · contribs), although the evidence is not really strong yet. You may have to collect some more evidence (or give more specifics for the evidence you have, such as diffs). DoriSmith and I have been pursuing PolTx for a while, and Dayewalker has started recently. Dori maintains a log at User talk:DoriSmith/PoliticianTexas that has a lot of history and may be helpful. Thanks again. --Uncia (talk) 03:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello!Man, you're quick at reverting. I kept trying to catch one of those anon's spurious redirs on Hermione Granger so I could revert it, and you kept beating me to the punch. :-) Are you an admin, a bot, or just really on top of things? Cheers, Hermione1980 03:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Mitsubishi Lancer EvolutionThe content was sourced. Removed by IP and I restored it. Has been in article for months with those citations. Please check history and dont revert again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitzinriyadh (talk • contribs) 21:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC) sorry for any misco
Thank you......for this: [5] Keep up the good work. Willking1979 (talk) 21:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
My Recent RevisionHello, I am posting this message because you said I "revised" my recent experiment. I should tell you that this never happened, the only time I ever revised an edit was when I called the chairman of some Jew committee a faggot, I'll have you know I never change my edits back, so please don't paste such incorrect facts on my page.
Re: your revert on the artical Rebecca Peters Hi, you changed my edit noting "For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English." You reverted my edit to Australian English and Rebecca Peters is an Australian person so why not use Australian English as per your own criteria? The words in quotation marks were not changed even though it contained foreign spelling, as they should remain as quoted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.184.142 (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC) Thank you I didn't know how to do that...
Ah yes, that's a better target, thanks. 05:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
HYCThanks and sorry for my error. I was attempting to make a sandbox section specific to my account but initially screwed it up. Im not sure about the actual creation of a Huguenot Yacht Club(HYC) article, but that is the subject/article that I was working on (which I wanted to test out in my sandbox area). I will attempt to recreate the page but this time will include all the relevant substance and content. Is there anything I need to be aware of when I re-make the article? Thanks --Ansehnlich (talk) 10:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
HeyRegarding the message you left on my talk page about an edit I made to the Salvation Army, there appears to have been a mistake, as I had only attempted to remove a bit of what I regarded as unsourced information bordering on vandalism. I think that message may have been meant to go on the previous editor's talk page. If it wasn't a mistake, please tell me what went wrong and I will be careful not to do so in the future. Cheers, ruby.red.roses (talk) 21:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Re: December 2008Hello. I was just wondering if you meant to post this on my talk page in response to this. Cheers. – Alex43223 T | C | E 04:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Move of Interstate Highways in PRInterstate Highways is capitalized. I have reverted the move. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you SynchronismI don't know how was this template on English WP.José Fontaine (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
THANKS!Hey! Thanks for the reply. Sorry for deleting my earlier question - I just didnt want to be a bother if you were busy or anything. I will be adding references once I have them in order and am also trying to get additional historical information to add. Thanks for your helpful comments and suggestions. I appreciate it!--Ansehnlich (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC) You're welcome...That IP troll was very scary. Thanks, Willking1979 (talk) 03:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC) User talk:86.156.121.237I am aware of Wikipedia's rules on varieties of English. The article in question was concerning a book by British author Terry Pratchett, originally published in Britain, so I felt the use of British English was appropriate. That is why I made those changes. 86.156.121.237 (talk) 23:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
86.156.121.237 (talk) 00:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Hey Chris Pirillo reverterPlease watch some of Chris Pirillo's videos. You will soon find reason to hate him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.0.11.97 (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC) BudgiekillerHey Synchronism, thanks for your note. I left that user name behind quite a while ago but it's interesting to see that Grawp has found that one to use. Not to worry. Doesn't bother me, he appears to have been swiftly indef blocked which is perfectly correct! Cheers for letting me know, Happy Christmas! The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 04:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Cheers, Synchronism (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC) White Flags Of Winter ChimneysAnother user may have already corrected my errors. however, i did make some additional edits as well as adding the cover art for the album. we are the copyright and content owners of the work and are just trying to add factual information on wiki. sorry first stab at it was too much like an advert. hopefully adding relevant information on making record has corrected this. --Renatak (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Interstate highway capitalizationI'm not sure an AWB run should be used for this purpose. "Interstate highway" and "Interstate Highway" refer to highways in the Interstate System, while "interstate highway" refers to any highway which is interstate. So I-27 would be an Interstate highway but not an interstate highway. Stupid distinction, I know, but believe it or not we've had edit wars over it... —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 17:22, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
The Wild Mercury SoundPlease can I request a copy of " The Wild Mercury Sound " page which was nominated for deletion. Regards Cotty21 (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Outstanding leadership theoryI found the content's notability questionable myself, that is why I included that the sentence saying that it was only cited 3 times. Did not wanted to do an OR and say that the theory was new or that the authors failed in making it prominent, so I decided to depict it by facts rather than opinions. I don't think it is notable enough to stay in the leadership main article, but the authors and the book do meet the notability criteria. As a relatively new editor here, what should I do then? Just delete it? It sounds too arbitrary to me, so I decided to save someone's else work in respect to their effort. Editor br (talk) 06:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Joshua Lang post/Joshua Lang (screwing with information)I am working of this persons profile, please be patient. thanks Greystone36 (talk) 07:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Why are you screwing from the hard work I posted about this person? Seriously???? _worked for the governor Schwarrzenneger hmmm! -married to the first African born playmate -NBC TV he was on just some of Notable things, please. Seriously thats rude!!!! Greystone36 (talk) 08:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Joshua Lang :)The article "Ida Ljungqvist" also has many different names mentioned non related to her or towards her the facts are the facts as stated. Its in regards to this persons personal and family life as well as public ALL pertaining to him like others. Greystone36 (talk) 08:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC) Glenn RosewallTo Synchronism, My name is Anson (user account: Ansonrosew). I would like to better understand why you feel that 'Glenn Rosewall' should not have a wikipedia article associated with his role as CEO of BBY Group, one of Australia's uprising and largest investment firms. Glenn and BBY are both well regarded in the Australian and International financial sector, and as the company has grown in market share in terms of Australia's financial transactions, It would seem to make sense that Glenn should be duly noted as the leader of BBY. BBY's largest partner Jefferies & Company has a wikipedia page for their CEO Richard B. Handler, is it so unfair that Glenn shouldn’t? If you dont mind, I would like to request that you spend a few minutes researching Glenn in the Australian Media, CNBC and Bloomberg as well as BBY Ltd., so you can see for yourself that he has an important role in the financial sector in Australia. In reference to the Sockpuppet allegation, I apologize for not logging on occasion when editing the article on my home and work IP address, but please note that TTRevor () is a genuine colleague of mine and she supported the Glenn Rosewall wikipedia article. Therefore I feel that the allegations against my account are unwarranted. Kindest Regards, Anson Rosewall [email protected] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ansonrosew (talk • contribs) 08:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Concerning your query regarding the deleted articleHello to you; I found it at ka:wiki under თარგი:უმაღლესი ლიგა ვიკიპედიიდან. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not entirely enthused about this interaction either for a number of reasons, but I am sorry to start a deletion review. I'm also not the quickest at the keys either. To tell you the truth, for some reason much of my earnest activity at AfT gets a cold reception, so I tread carefully there now. I have been lambasted for suggesting CSDA2 there, even when I verified the article already existed elsewhere. Synchronism (talk) 10:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Yup, A2 is weird. Thanks for the tips, I'm trying to be a better editor, and my interest in linguistics often leads me to PNT. I look forward to seeing you around WP. :)Synchronism (talk) Transactional and transformational leadershipDear Synchronism, I would be happier if next time you research a little bit more on the notability of the articles you're proposing to delete before tagging them. Both theories are widely known among the leadership scholars, and a google or google scholar search would sufice. Also, it helps if you check the history page. There was some indication that some sort of bibliography existed before in transformational leadership, as the "years" were cited after the authors. In a couple of clicks, you could have discovered the bibliography that was deleted by some editor in the past. Happy edits, Editor br (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
The recent explorer's club "job 74" has confirmed that there was only 4 torpedo hits on Prince of wales, and two, possibly 4 hits on Repulse. The pdf file confirming this can be found here: http://www.explorers.org/expeditions/reports/Expedition%20Job_74_web_version.pdf I was attempting to edit the article to reflect this information, but it was reverted. 70.71.251.142 (talk) 05:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Open City InstituteI am sorry I deleted the tags, I didn't know they were deletion tags. Thanks for the heads up. It will not happen again. I have read the help editing files so now I think I know how to edit correctly the dcuments. Once again, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Triantafilo (talk • contribs) 10:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC) That's great news, sorry for the belated response.You're welcome.Synchronism (talk) 18:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC) Hi Synchronism, sorry the Dhawgl was a prank, I tried to delete it later but could find no way to do that then. This article is meant to be a stub but there is some complexity in creating stubs and articles which is really not very user friendly. I am a business analyst and would be happy to donate some time to define a spec to allow more user friendly editing, how about a form based editor for the first article attempts, your article writers are probably mostly subject-matter experts, not enuff time for learning and this will bias your knowledgebase. All the best, it would be great if you could convert it to a stub, it looks like an important enzyme. also it would be great to create a database of bio pathways/reactions publicly accessible and a notation so papers could have a small section at the bottom indicating the pathway knowledge in that notation which would allow auto incorporation into Wikipeda bio pathways. Also, futurepedia would be cool, so unpublished ideas and hypotheses could be released earlier to encourage faster synergistic idea synthesis and development, wikipedia is all about established knowledge, not future knowledge in development. Articles could be scored by readers and authors down-ranked if rubbish, regards.[Unsigned]
User pageThanks for the revert. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 04:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Are you a lawyer by any chance? Having tidied up some appallingly written text in the article Budgie (TV series) it seems you have reverted it back on some minor technicality. If you aren't a lawyer I suggest you contact the Department of Justice as they are looking for people just like you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.68.13 (talk) 00:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Parapsychology is a pseudoscience and you guys are promoting it as science.Cluebot reverted my edits removing unreliable sourcing on that article. Now, when I try to point out it is a pseudoscience, you revert my edits again. All you are are a bunch of frauds who want to promote ignorance and superstition. Why else would you revert edits which call a pseudoscience for what it is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeptic24 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)< !-- Template:Unsigned -->
A centralised discussion which may interest youHi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping. If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker. P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC) USRD-CRWP WikiCup StatusThis is just to let you know that you have been eliminated from the USRD-CRWP WikiCup. However, Scott5114 is planning another contest to open within the next few weeks. Also, there is always next year :) Good luck. --Rschen7754 ([[User talk:Rschen7754|T]] C) 08:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Another contest from USRD!Hello there! Now that round 1 of the USRD Cup is over, we're starting another USRD participation contest. The USRD Road Trip will involve expanding articles to B-Class in cities throughout the United States. Signups are open and the game will begin on at 0 UTC on February 17. Hope to see you play!—Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
From NovasourceHi, thanks for your comment on my page. I have generally given up on Wikipedia editing, so I wish you good luck maintaining the sanity of the speed limit pages. Novasource (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thanks!Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. I wonder what this IP has against me and so many others? Ahh well, ours is not to wonder wy. Thanks again. Dbrodbeck (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
The work of deleting IP vandalism on chem element pagesSince you're involved, I wonder if you'd like to comment on this discussion on semi-protection for element articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elements Thanks! SBHarris 00:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Islam in IndiaHey! Have you gone through my edits before reverting them? You haven't given any reason for the revert. --128.211.201.161 (talk) 03:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
CreatesubjectCareful, I think you accidentally gave Createsubject a warning. Or did you mean to? ~SunDragon34 (talk) 03:57, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't block Cuddles734!
I can't block you. Relax.Synchronism (talk) 05:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. =) On a completely different note, the thread above this one is one of the funniest I've read in a long time. "bluffering", I'll have to remember that. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again for reverting that vandalism on my talk page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
HondaHey. I noticed that you blanked the Honda page. From looking at your talk page and history, I know it either had to be a mistake or a compromised account. Please don't think I'm here to warn or anything like that. Is it possible that someone got a hold of your account info? It happened twice in a short period of time (another time from an IP address) so it could have even been a mistaken revert. Just thought you might like to know. OlYellerTalktome 15:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
sockI've made a report here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zip1010. LibStar (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigationI have one for you. I've made a report here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robgugli.,--Michael (Talk) 17:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Avenida General PazPlease notice that National Route A001 must not be a redirect to Avenida General Paz, since this highway is only a part of that Route. Refer to es:Ruta Nacional A001 (Argentina) for more information. Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
TortillasThanks for your work in cleaning up the mess left from the artice forking and page title moves of corn tortilla. Yay! Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Please take more careYou claimed to be reverting a removal of content at Parker Hale M85 when you in fact removed more content yourself. 07:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC) You're right, I meant to only undo the unexplained removal that you made immediately afterwards[7].Synchronism (talk) 07:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC) FascismYou might also look at the deleted sentence (the RfC above the OED section) which said that the historians disagree about the position of Fascism in the political spectrum (which had a dozen RS cites). In one form or another it had been part of the article for four years until the current move to use a single "right wing only" position started. Thanks! Collect (talk) 03:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC) Vladan SlijepčevićYou should ask sr:User:dungodung why he removed the information and made it into a redirect. According to his user page he understands English. There is not hint in the edit summary. Andreas (T) 14:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Fascism in the political spectrumThe RfC on Fascism#Fascism in the political spectrum has now run one month and there are now two versions of the intro para:
Could you please comment at Talk:Fascism#RfC. The Four Deuces (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
|