This is an archive of my Talk page containing the discussion from about mid-January, 2006 to mid-May 2006 minus a few things I want to keep "current".
The current page is, of course, located at User talk:Atlant, as per usual.
You know perfectly well that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is an irrelevant "See also" for the meatball topic. The following topics also link to meatball, but I don't see them in the See also list: IKEA, Spaghetti, Cuisine of Turkey, Tofu, Paella, Saffron, Lutefisk, Reindeer, MRE, Smorgasbord, Reser's Fine Foods, Russian jokes, and so on. Any one of these would be more relevant to the topic. Shoehorn 19:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits to Stainless steel. Sorry I had to revert some of that earlier. Someone threw in a few 'tests'. Monkeyman 15:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Tom Harrison Talk 16:53, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Is it short for MaryAnn Coulter? Google isn't solving this when I looked. DyslexicEditor 13:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the information, I was wondering if there was an easier way to fix vandalism and hadn't gotten around to checking. Looking back though, it appears that I didn't actually revert any vandalism on Benedictine, Antandrus got there a minute before I did. I already had the edit window open and consequently I didn't realize. -- Lewk_of_Serthic 00:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
-- Lucinor 20:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Why did you consider my edit "SPAM"? It is not - it was a factual statement and should be considered an edit. Also, why would you be watching "garnish" anyways? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kati@garnish.us ( talk • contribs) .
I reccomend you rename it (Move) to something like {{ LightSources}}, since I think I misspelled "Artificial" and the template now includes non "Artificial" sources. 68.39.174.238 23:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi! You asked in an edit summary about the link in Mainframe computer. I removed it because it was in the intro where it doesn't belong. Seems like you were moving the link to a better place at the same time. Wikipedia is supposed to show an "edit conflict" page when two edits happen simultaneously but I'm starting to suspect the conflict detection and the popups tool don't work well together. The link indeed does have good info; of course it would be better to have any pertinent information in Wikipedia itself and not use Wikipedia as a link collection. Weregerbil 14:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. I just read your message,
I did in fact do a little edit there, however I only did what I said in the edit summary. I only removed two characters so I didn't care to log in. The nonsense was added by the user appearing after me in the edit history. Please be careful, when looking at diffs, which side shows the old and which side shows the new version. You might want to direct your message at the real editor.
Atlant, thanks again for the pointers. I'm thinking of updating some of the electronics articles with symbols (both American and European where they differ). I was reading the graphics tutorial and it said .png is preferred. Ideally I'd want a vector format, but the only way I know to do that is with Visio, and I know that's not an open format. The other question is whether filled-in or outlined diode triangles are preferred. Maybe I should just show both representations. - W0lfie 16:37, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I notice you revert my edit 'revert odd edit'. If you look at the page there are some problems. For example in the section of (design and manufanture) the 'pic' of the 3 minifigures hides or covers some of the words in the paragraph. Also in the ' Triva' section the number chart or 'Blocks/Configurations' overlaps the line of 'See also'. It doesn't matter if I use 3 different web browers or adjust the brower to fit. In other words it doesn't look very good. I hope you can see and understand what I am talking about. So if you know how to fix or clean the page. It would be great. Thanks.
Have you any interest in working on the Highland games article in an attempt to raise it to Wikipedia good article status? Right now, there are a bit too many red links, the article needs references and footnotes, an expansion of the music section (coming soon). Also, the intro paragraph is not so good and there are some questionable statements early on in the history section. The photos are good (and good licenses) with a couple more coming (music and clan parade). What do you think?
JFPerry 19:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Excellent! Even if all you can do is read over the article with a critical eye to catch areas that need further elucidation or support, that would be great. JFPerry 23:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Atlant. I see that you have downcased my upcased ' Trisil'. My reason for capitalising it was that it, like Transil, is a registered trademark. I found it in the European, UK and US patent office databases. ST capitalises it in the PDF app note that I referred to in the articles, and in every other app note I can find. Are you convinced by this? Regards, -- Heron 10:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
There are lots of web sites nagging us to use trademarks as adjectives, but even the owners of the trademarks don't follow their own advice. See the above-mentioned app note for starters. I stumbled on this rant against the "noun modifier" rule, and it makes some good points. There is something fishy about the uniformity of all those nagging web pages, and I suspect that the rule was just made up by lawyers to keep themselves busy. Now it has become an internet meme. I prefer to ignore prescriptivism and write according to common usage, although I will respectfully bear your advice in mind. -- Heron 19:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
(This is a comment I made to Lindosland on his talk page which he then copied here.)
Hi! I reverted the change you recently made to Programmable logic device. I did this because you apparently had more in your paste buffer than you thought: the contents of the Digital circuits article (or some such) became melded with the PLD article.
Please note that I have nothing against your template; from what I've seen, it looks like a good idea, so as far as I'm concerned you can re-apply your edit to PLD (with a bit less stuff in your paste buffer ;-) ).
Atlant 13:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for noting the POV statements made by Pollinator. I am not sure if you are speaking of the end of the section or the entire section itself, but I have tried my best to make the section a bit less biased and expand it a bit, but he keeps adding biased material to it and as a result it's actually -more- biased than when I first edited it. If you could maybe give me some advice or voice your concerns on the talk page, that would be great. Thank you for pointing out that some of the statements are POV, also.
Mister Mister 15:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Atlant, it's a relief to see there are some sane people in the United States. All we usually see in this country, day after day, are endless examples of the kind of brain-dead cavemen who graffitti your page or applaud that microbe currently sitting in the White House. It's truly heartening to see that there are some sensible Americans out there! Keep up the good work and all the best :-) Rusty2005 15:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Atlant,
I was a little offended when you characterized my linking to "deconstructing a traction motor" on the electric motor article as "link-spam". While I am not about to revert to an earlier version of the site, I’d like to state for the record that I felt you were unfair. While, granted, I was linking to a commercial website, and I did have a commercial interest in people visiting that website, it was indisputably pertinent, well-produced content that a person researching electric motors would find useful, Regards, Peter Geoghegan peterg@iol.ie
I noticed your revision of my "messages and themes" section on Howard Dean and I didn't want to just revert your change without conversation. I wasn't implying that all of Dean's supporters are far-left, just that it was those supporters who were more radical (combined with his tenor) that led to centrists considering Dean to be a radical himself. I agree that my original phrasing made that unnecessarily vague, but your change removes the point I was trying to make (one which I think summarizes Dean's plight well). Can you think of phrasing that restores the point without the ambiguity of my language?
Wellspring 00:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I've just rewritten the VAXcluster article. You seem to know a lot about OpenVMS and VAXclusters; if you have time, could you please check out my work and boldly improve it? Thanks. — Chris Chittleborough 17:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd removed the link to Language reform from the Metrication article. You've added it back. I'm not convinced. Please see Talk:Metrication/Archive 1#Language reform. Jimp 07:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Cow_tipping&diff=46008685&oldid=45979747 DyslexicEditor 16:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Is this the same thing as a back-to-back DC link/tie/intertie common between grids? I noticed this article on the request for photos and I was trying to figure out exactly what it is. I'm an EE, but i've only been on the generation side of things, so substations and DC links are a bit foreign to me. I should be able to find one of the ERCOT interties to take a picture of, if it is the same thing. -- W0lfie 17:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Atlant, Wondering if you would be interested in clarifying some issues regarding classification of Arc lamps, all the groups in the {{ Template:ArtificialLightSources}}, and the strange, but perhaps true article regarding Overdriven fluorescent light. P.S. Thanks for your part in developing the PDP and VAX systems. The graphics system installed at Penn State in the 80s kept me busy for (literally) days and nights on end. — Dogears ( talk) 19:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I reverted the link addition because the person who added the links was from the chamber of commerce and was indescriminately adding links to their sites (4 or 5 of them) to every locality inside the county. They also added a whole bunch of WP:POV and WP:NOR that read like advertising text to other articles. -- waffle iron 19:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem and sorry about marking it for speedy deletion. If it's any comfort it took about 2 seconds of checking out your previous contributions to realise that you're not the kind of user to go around creating nonsense orphan pages that redirect to themselves. -- Spondoolicks 20:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Please don't go on other websites asking people to vote keep on afd's as you did here. It is considered highly inappropriate Sockpuppet#Advertising and soliciting meatpuppets. Thank you.-- Jersey Devil 02:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
PI article is down, and probably the PFC article will suffer the same fate, maybe the notability guidline must be discussed. Amfortas 03:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Regarding your change to pepper, isn't it the case that nouns in German are *always* capitalized? It's a matter of grammar. Mark Nesbitt 13:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for indenting my contribution to the Oryx and Crake discussion. It makes sense. -- Jottce 09:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, parallel computing is usually done with many more than two. At least on a server level. So, the definition and page is a bit weak ... But; as I am quoting from memory, it would be a good idea to hunt for a whitepaper on it and add a reference. Are you up for it?
a few sites that popped in google;
-- ∞ Dbroadwell 16:46, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Atlant,
I´m sure you will read this text in a minute or so.
I don´t know anything about you, just read this page, but as you removed a little thing I just added to the ´Hot tub´ page (and yes, it was a link to our company, but is this forbidden?), I think you can give me some explanation.
Was I violating any rule?
How did you come to the conclusion the link is Spamlink?
Why are the other two links allowed?
I don´t want to do anything anonymous, I want you to know who I am, without any hidden name. I don´t have any political message. Please reply to theo@illice-spas.com.
Best regards.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.1.198.110 ( talk • contribs) .
You are invited to vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). The issue of the name has not been resolved and therefore people are now recruiting others to delete. Feel free to make your judgement known, thank you. Nomen Nescio 21:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Soooo...how does that lock work? :) I've never used it before but I remembered seeing it on other pages so I rooted it out. Doesn't seem to be doing much though... -- Colm O'Brien 16:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind help on fighting vandalism, a critically important task here. It is obviously equally vital that we not bite the newcomers, and I am glad that you are looking out for that.
However, for the record, I feel it is right for me to vindicate myself in this instance.
As seen in the ip's contributions, we have eighteen edits, none being helpful. "If the edit is clearly vandalism, consider using blatantvandal or starting with test2. For continuing severe vandalism, test3 may be skipped and a test4 given straight after a test2." from wp:vand. He/she was already issued warnings in this manner when I had to revert repeatedly.
I do apologize for the confusion. I realize I have not earned trust here yet, but looking at my contributions, you will see I have not shown "frustration" yet, on the contrary, I genuinely enjoy playing the friendly policeman. I always issue warnings before posting on wp:aiv, and I usually assume more good faith than I probably should! I was just bored of writing "rvv" all the time. Of course, I won't do that again. -- MrFish Go Fish 15:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
The apologies are mutual, sir. How new do you think warning templates should be?-- MrFish Go Fish 15:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick revert on my user page. The chap is a returning vandal; last time he started switching to sequential IPs. We'll see what happens now, but in any event, I appreciate it. -- TeaDrinker 15:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, same from me. -- MrFi s h Go Fish 16:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
LOL Please Don't Contradict yourself in you edit summary. If you say (Revert; please don't make gratuitous changes between British English and American English.) Don't RV. It not only applies to other people. Revert warring over optional styles is unacceptable. I gave him a warning asap and To be fair i have to give you one too . I am Surprised with you. If you know the rule you have no Excuse to break it. And a RV to a good faith edit like that seems harsh. The best you can do is include both to fix any ambiguity because personally i didn't know what a tyre was Because i am fro the us and it took me a while to find the right link.-- E-Bod 22:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Remember to stay COOL and don't jump to revert-- E-Bod 22:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
It Doesn't matter who wrote it first. What matters is that we get the least changes back and fourth. Any Person who changes it knowing both are acceptable did a bad faith edit. 2 reverts is not better than one
Further talk on the Talk page-- E-Bod 20:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Atlant! I saw your edit summary ("Revert; function main() is of type implicit integer and so must return a value to be valid") on C programming language and the corresponding change. While I prefer your version for stylistic reasons, the C standard does not require a return from main(). See e.g. section 5.1.2.2.3 from the ANSI-99 standard: "If the return type of the main function is a type compatible with int, a return from the initial call to the main function is equivalent to calling the exit function with the value returned by the main function as its argument;reaching the } that terminates the main function returns a value of 0". Also, there is nothing implicit about the int in C99, it is required. -- Stephan Schulz 19:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
You changed your password right? It is not "(censored)" correct? IF it still is change it immediately. Prodego talk 00:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Not a problem. I don't know about the second IP, but I reported the one I reverted and it's blocked for 24 hours by Tawker. You might want to archive your talk page, it's getting long. Happy editing! T e ke 02:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of my Talk page containing the discussion from about mid-January, 2006 to mid-May 2006 minus a few things I want to keep "current".
The current page is, of course, located at User talk:Atlant, as per usual.
You know perfectly well that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is an irrelevant "See also" for the meatball topic. The following topics also link to meatball, but I don't see them in the See also list: IKEA, Spaghetti, Cuisine of Turkey, Tofu, Paella, Saffron, Lutefisk, Reindeer, MRE, Smorgasbord, Reser's Fine Foods, Russian jokes, and so on. Any one of these would be more relevant to the topic. Shoehorn 19:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits to Stainless steel. Sorry I had to revert some of that earlier. Someone threw in a few 'tests'. Monkeyman 15:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Tom Harrison Talk 16:53, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Is it short for MaryAnn Coulter? Google isn't solving this when I looked. DyslexicEditor 13:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the information, I was wondering if there was an easier way to fix vandalism and hadn't gotten around to checking. Looking back though, it appears that I didn't actually revert any vandalism on Benedictine, Antandrus got there a minute before I did. I already had the edit window open and consequently I didn't realize. -- Lewk_of_Serthic 00:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
-- Lucinor 20:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Why did you consider my edit "SPAM"? It is not - it was a factual statement and should be considered an edit. Also, why would you be watching "garnish" anyways? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kati@garnish.us ( talk • contribs) .
I reccomend you rename it (Move) to something like {{ LightSources}}, since I think I misspelled "Artificial" and the template now includes non "Artificial" sources. 68.39.174.238 23:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi! You asked in an edit summary about the link in Mainframe computer. I removed it because it was in the intro where it doesn't belong. Seems like you were moving the link to a better place at the same time. Wikipedia is supposed to show an "edit conflict" page when two edits happen simultaneously but I'm starting to suspect the conflict detection and the popups tool don't work well together. The link indeed does have good info; of course it would be better to have any pertinent information in Wikipedia itself and not use Wikipedia as a link collection. Weregerbil 14:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. I just read your message,
I did in fact do a little edit there, however I only did what I said in the edit summary. I only removed two characters so I didn't care to log in. The nonsense was added by the user appearing after me in the edit history. Please be careful, when looking at diffs, which side shows the old and which side shows the new version. You might want to direct your message at the real editor.
Atlant, thanks again for the pointers. I'm thinking of updating some of the electronics articles with symbols (both American and European where they differ). I was reading the graphics tutorial and it said .png is preferred. Ideally I'd want a vector format, but the only way I know to do that is with Visio, and I know that's not an open format. The other question is whether filled-in or outlined diode triangles are preferred. Maybe I should just show both representations. - W0lfie 16:37, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I notice you revert my edit 'revert odd edit'. If you look at the page there are some problems. For example in the section of (design and manufanture) the 'pic' of the 3 minifigures hides or covers some of the words in the paragraph. Also in the ' Triva' section the number chart or 'Blocks/Configurations' overlaps the line of 'See also'. It doesn't matter if I use 3 different web browers or adjust the brower to fit. In other words it doesn't look very good. I hope you can see and understand what I am talking about. So if you know how to fix or clean the page. It would be great. Thanks.
Have you any interest in working on the Highland games article in an attempt to raise it to Wikipedia good article status? Right now, there are a bit too many red links, the article needs references and footnotes, an expansion of the music section (coming soon). Also, the intro paragraph is not so good and there are some questionable statements early on in the history section. The photos are good (and good licenses) with a couple more coming (music and clan parade). What do you think?
JFPerry 19:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Excellent! Even if all you can do is read over the article with a critical eye to catch areas that need further elucidation or support, that would be great. JFPerry 23:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Atlant. I see that you have downcased my upcased ' Trisil'. My reason for capitalising it was that it, like Transil, is a registered trademark. I found it in the European, UK and US patent office databases. ST capitalises it in the PDF app note that I referred to in the articles, and in every other app note I can find. Are you convinced by this? Regards, -- Heron 10:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
There are lots of web sites nagging us to use trademarks as adjectives, but even the owners of the trademarks don't follow their own advice. See the above-mentioned app note for starters. I stumbled on this rant against the "noun modifier" rule, and it makes some good points. There is something fishy about the uniformity of all those nagging web pages, and I suspect that the rule was just made up by lawyers to keep themselves busy. Now it has become an internet meme. I prefer to ignore prescriptivism and write according to common usage, although I will respectfully bear your advice in mind. -- Heron 19:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
(This is a comment I made to Lindosland on his talk page which he then copied here.)
Hi! I reverted the change you recently made to Programmable logic device. I did this because you apparently had more in your paste buffer than you thought: the contents of the Digital circuits article (or some such) became melded with the PLD article.
Please note that I have nothing against your template; from what I've seen, it looks like a good idea, so as far as I'm concerned you can re-apply your edit to PLD (with a bit less stuff in your paste buffer ;-) ).
Atlant 13:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for noting the POV statements made by Pollinator. I am not sure if you are speaking of the end of the section or the entire section itself, but I have tried my best to make the section a bit less biased and expand it a bit, but he keeps adding biased material to it and as a result it's actually -more- biased than when I first edited it. If you could maybe give me some advice or voice your concerns on the talk page, that would be great. Thank you for pointing out that some of the statements are POV, also.
Mister Mister 15:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Atlant, it's a relief to see there are some sane people in the United States. All we usually see in this country, day after day, are endless examples of the kind of brain-dead cavemen who graffitti your page or applaud that microbe currently sitting in the White House. It's truly heartening to see that there are some sensible Americans out there! Keep up the good work and all the best :-) Rusty2005 15:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Atlant,
I was a little offended when you characterized my linking to "deconstructing a traction motor" on the electric motor article as "link-spam". While I am not about to revert to an earlier version of the site, I’d like to state for the record that I felt you were unfair. While, granted, I was linking to a commercial website, and I did have a commercial interest in people visiting that website, it was indisputably pertinent, well-produced content that a person researching electric motors would find useful, Regards, Peter Geoghegan peterg@iol.ie
I noticed your revision of my "messages and themes" section on Howard Dean and I didn't want to just revert your change without conversation. I wasn't implying that all of Dean's supporters are far-left, just that it was those supporters who were more radical (combined with his tenor) that led to centrists considering Dean to be a radical himself. I agree that my original phrasing made that unnecessarily vague, but your change removes the point I was trying to make (one which I think summarizes Dean's plight well). Can you think of phrasing that restores the point without the ambiguity of my language?
Wellspring 00:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I've just rewritten the VAXcluster article. You seem to know a lot about OpenVMS and VAXclusters; if you have time, could you please check out my work and boldly improve it? Thanks. — Chris Chittleborough 17:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd removed the link to Language reform from the Metrication article. You've added it back. I'm not convinced. Please see Talk:Metrication/Archive 1#Language reform. Jimp 07:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Cow_tipping&diff=46008685&oldid=45979747 DyslexicEditor 16:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Is this the same thing as a back-to-back DC link/tie/intertie common between grids? I noticed this article on the request for photos and I was trying to figure out exactly what it is. I'm an EE, but i've only been on the generation side of things, so substations and DC links are a bit foreign to me. I should be able to find one of the ERCOT interties to take a picture of, if it is the same thing. -- W0lfie 17:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Atlant, Wondering if you would be interested in clarifying some issues regarding classification of Arc lamps, all the groups in the {{ Template:ArtificialLightSources}}, and the strange, but perhaps true article regarding Overdriven fluorescent light. P.S. Thanks for your part in developing the PDP and VAX systems. The graphics system installed at Penn State in the 80s kept me busy for (literally) days and nights on end. — Dogears ( talk) 19:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I reverted the link addition because the person who added the links was from the chamber of commerce and was indescriminately adding links to their sites (4 or 5 of them) to every locality inside the county. They also added a whole bunch of WP:POV and WP:NOR that read like advertising text to other articles. -- waffle iron 19:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem and sorry about marking it for speedy deletion. If it's any comfort it took about 2 seconds of checking out your previous contributions to realise that you're not the kind of user to go around creating nonsense orphan pages that redirect to themselves. -- Spondoolicks 20:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Please don't go on other websites asking people to vote keep on afd's as you did here. It is considered highly inappropriate Sockpuppet#Advertising and soliciting meatpuppets. Thank you.-- Jersey Devil 02:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
PI article is down, and probably the PFC article will suffer the same fate, maybe the notability guidline must be discussed. Amfortas 03:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Regarding your change to pepper, isn't it the case that nouns in German are *always* capitalized? It's a matter of grammar. Mark Nesbitt 13:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for indenting my contribution to the Oryx and Crake discussion. It makes sense. -- Jottce 09:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, parallel computing is usually done with many more than two. At least on a server level. So, the definition and page is a bit weak ... But; as I am quoting from memory, it would be a good idea to hunt for a whitepaper on it and add a reference. Are you up for it?
a few sites that popped in google;
-- ∞ Dbroadwell 16:46, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Atlant,
I´m sure you will read this text in a minute or so.
I don´t know anything about you, just read this page, but as you removed a little thing I just added to the ´Hot tub´ page (and yes, it was a link to our company, but is this forbidden?), I think you can give me some explanation.
Was I violating any rule?
How did you come to the conclusion the link is Spamlink?
Why are the other two links allowed?
I don´t want to do anything anonymous, I want you to know who I am, without any hidden name. I don´t have any political message. Please reply to theo@illice-spas.com.
Best regards.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.1.198.110 ( talk • contribs) .
You are invited to vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). The issue of the name has not been resolved and therefore people are now recruiting others to delete. Feel free to make your judgement known, thank you. Nomen Nescio 21:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Soooo...how does that lock work? :) I've never used it before but I remembered seeing it on other pages so I rooted it out. Doesn't seem to be doing much though... -- Colm O'Brien 16:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind help on fighting vandalism, a critically important task here. It is obviously equally vital that we not bite the newcomers, and I am glad that you are looking out for that.
However, for the record, I feel it is right for me to vindicate myself in this instance.
As seen in the ip's contributions, we have eighteen edits, none being helpful. "If the edit is clearly vandalism, consider using blatantvandal or starting with test2. For continuing severe vandalism, test3 may be skipped and a test4 given straight after a test2." from wp:vand. He/she was already issued warnings in this manner when I had to revert repeatedly.
I do apologize for the confusion. I realize I have not earned trust here yet, but looking at my contributions, you will see I have not shown "frustration" yet, on the contrary, I genuinely enjoy playing the friendly policeman. I always issue warnings before posting on wp:aiv, and I usually assume more good faith than I probably should! I was just bored of writing "rvv" all the time. Of course, I won't do that again. -- MrFish Go Fish 15:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
The apologies are mutual, sir. How new do you think warning templates should be?-- MrFish Go Fish 15:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick revert on my user page. The chap is a returning vandal; last time he started switching to sequential IPs. We'll see what happens now, but in any event, I appreciate it. -- TeaDrinker 15:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, same from me. -- MrFi s h Go Fish 16:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
LOL Please Don't Contradict yourself in you edit summary. If you say (Revert; please don't make gratuitous changes between British English and American English.) Don't RV. It not only applies to other people. Revert warring over optional styles is unacceptable. I gave him a warning asap and To be fair i have to give you one too . I am Surprised with you. If you know the rule you have no Excuse to break it. And a RV to a good faith edit like that seems harsh. The best you can do is include both to fix any ambiguity because personally i didn't know what a tyre was Because i am fro the us and it took me a while to find the right link.-- E-Bod 22:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Remember to stay COOL and don't jump to revert-- E-Bod 22:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
It Doesn't matter who wrote it first. What matters is that we get the least changes back and fourth. Any Person who changes it knowing both are acceptable did a bad faith edit. 2 reverts is not better than one
Further talk on the Talk page-- E-Bod 20:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Atlant! I saw your edit summary ("Revert; function main() is of type implicit integer and so must return a value to be valid") on C programming language and the corresponding change. While I prefer your version for stylistic reasons, the C standard does not require a return from main(). See e.g. section 5.1.2.2.3 from the ANSI-99 standard: "If the return type of the main function is a type compatible with int, a return from the initial call to the main function is equivalent to calling the exit function with the value returned by the main function as its argument;reaching the } that terminates the main function returns a value of 0". Also, there is nothing implicit about the int in C99, it is required. -- Stephan Schulz 19:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
You changed your password right? It is not "(censored)" correct? IF it still is change it immediately. Prodego talk 00:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Not a problem. I don't know about the second IP, but I reported the one I reverted and it's blocked for 24 hours by Tawker. You might want to archive your talk page, it's getting long. Happy editing! T e ke 02:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)