All my previous discussions have now been Arcihved. The talk page is now open for fresh discussions. Looneyman ( talk) 21:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Ah yes, I remember that mistake: I was attempting to block someone that Cluebot had reverted, but didn't realize I had clicked on Cluebot instead of the other account. I realized almost as soon as I hit the button, but alas it was too late and --for a few seconds-- Cluebot had been banished. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, just to alert you, I am new to Wikipedia, so apologies in advance if I'm in breach of any etiquette. I believe that you removed my article on Frontier Economics yesterday. I was therefore wondering if you could offer me some guidance as to why this was and more specifically, what edits you'd suggest making in order for the article to be acceptable? I have read the first article guidance on Wikipedia and thought I'd complied with this. I'd therefore be very grateful for any specific advice on edits you might provide. For example, were there particular phrases in the article that were deemed promotional? Note my intention is absolutely not to advertise or promote, but rather, provide only a factual description of the organisation Frontier Economics, which has a high profile in the UK. Thanks in advance for your suggestions. ( Samwilliams Frontier ( talk) 08:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC))
Well done in organising the Top Gear criticism section. The article will benefit from that change no end! TopGearFreak Talk 20:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Looneyman I'll have to look at the discussion you've referred me to before I can answer, but do know I have a real issue with this use of lame that will color my opinion. I'll get back to you shortly. Drmargi ( talk) 17:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, I took a look. I wouldn't bother. We're nowhere near there yet. Maybe Top Gear Dog and Sabine Schmidt, although that's one part edit war and one part nutty sockpuppet case, but not Stig/Schumacher, at least until it settles down and we see the final pattern. Drmargi ( talk) 17:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
*cough*-- 99.181.164.155 ( talk) 16:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure it's a joke. scope_creep ( talk) 19:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
It's a joke. You've seen the show right? Everyone knows he's not a real person, just whomever they hired to drive that week. Why would you block edits that make that clear? It's insane. Are you being intentionally destructive? 169.233.38.156 ( talk) 02:55, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Looneyman! I thought I'd give you a heads up. It appears Davesmith is back with a new sockpuppet, User:Looneymann. He's done a couple edits to the Top Gear article, including adding, you guessed it, Top Gear Dog. I left a message on the talk page of the admin who handled the original sockpuppet blocks, but you might want to nip this in the bud. Drmargi ( talk) 19:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
All my previous discussions have now been Arcihved. The talk page is now open for fresh discussions. Looneyman ( talk) 21:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Ah yes, I remember that mistake: I was attempting to block someone that Cluebot had reverted, but didn't realize I had clicked on Cluebot instead of the other account. I realized almost as soon as I hit the button, but alas it was too late and --for a few seconds-- Cluebot had been banished. -- Bobak ( talk) 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, just to alert you, I am new to Wikipedia, so apologies in advance if I'm in breach of any etiquette. I believe that you removed my article on Frontier Economics yesterday. I was therefore wondering if you could offer me some guidance as to why this was and more specifically, what edits you'd suggest making in order for the article to be acceptable? I have read the first article guidance on Wikipedia and thought I'd complied with this. I'd therefore be very grateful for any specific advice on edits you might provide. For example, were there particular phrases in the article that were deemed promotional? Note my intention is absolutely not to advertise or promote, but rather, provide only a factual description of the organisation Frontier Economics, which has a high profile in the UK. Thanks in advance for your suggestions. ( Samwilliams Frontier ( talk) 08:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC))
Well done in organising the Top Gear criticism section. The article will benefit from that change no end! TopGearFreak Talk 20:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Looneyman I'll have to look at the discussion you've referred me to before I can answer, but do know I have a real issue with this use of lame that will color my opinion. I'll get back to you shortly. Drmargi ( talk) 17:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, I took a look. I wouldn't bother. We're nowhere near there yet. Maybe Top Gear Dog and Sabine Schmidt, although that's one part edit war and one part nutty sockpuppet case, but not Stig/Schumacher, at least until it settles down and we see the final pattern. Drmargi ( talk) 17:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
*cough*-- 99.181.164.155 ( talk) 16:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure it's a joke. scope_creep ( talk) 19:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
It's a joke. You've seen the show right? Everyone knows he's not a real person, just whomever they hired to drive that week. Why would you block edits that make that clear? It's insane. Are you being intentionally destructive? 169.233.38.156 ( talk) 02:55, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Looneyman! I thought I'd give you a heads up. It appears Davesmith is back with a new sockpuppet, User:Looneymann. He's done a couple edits to the Top Gear article, including adding, you guessed it, Top Gear Dog. I left a message on the talk page of the admin who handled the original sockpuppet blocks, but you might want to nip this in the bud. Drmargi ( talk) 19:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)