This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
It's a shame to see you go. You just left greetings for me a few hours ago, encouraging me to become involved in Taskforce Tulsa and WikiProject Oklahoma. You've done a lot of good work here. Best wishes! GreenGourd 17:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
You can reach me at User talk:Rickyrab. I just keep the sockpuppet account I have for the lulz and whenever it seems appropriate to have an obvious sock puppet do the talking. -- Sockpuppet of Rickyrab ( talk) 21:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Oufield1.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 22:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I know that your User page says you don't do Wikipedia alot anymore but I was wondering if you, or anyone you know, could help added some information to the Oklahoma State Capitol page. After seeing all of the really good stuff you have done to help other articles I thought I would come to you for help. I know that you have worked on alot of Oklahoma articles and this one has been passed over. As good as the Oklahoma and Tulsa articles are I know that the Oklahoma State Capitol article can be alot better. Thanks alot -- Cal ( talk) 07:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I guess you are gone, but maybe you check this once in a while. Just wanted to tell you I loved your picture of the Ouachitas. It's lovely. I was raised in McAlester. I tell people I'm from OK and they assume I grew up on the plains. I tell them my hometown is in a mountain range and they think I am joking (there are FIVE mountain ranges in Oklahoma, as my Civics teacher drilled into my head). Even if they are just "big pretty hills", thanks for the reminder. Typing Monkey - (type to me) 05:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
You need to get a grip on yourself and stop trying to ramrod speculation into every article remotely related to OKC and the Sonics.
Here is the deal. I am going to revert them all one last time and then we both leave this particular issue alone while you pitch your case via the talk Supersonics talk page. Whatever the results of that discusion we both allow someone else to post the agreed to edits but you need to stop your one man campaign to dominate these articles with your opinion. If you can't handle that as a resolution to this then we will have to have an admin block your account. -- Coz 17:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Rather than engage in a slow revert war over the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma article, please take it to the talk page instead. -- Kralizec! ( talk) 21:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
w00t, another self-proclaimed sockpuppet! how about that. -- Sockpuppet of Rickyrab ( talk) 21:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
My first instinct, honestly, was to cut the entire last part of the article, as it's a tangential advertisement for vegetarianism. As human beings are omnivorous by any definition of the word, I instead fact tagged the obvious sentence. Marskell ( talk) 21:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Seeing that you have made constructive edits to Wikipedia (and reviewing the account Okiefromokla), I have unblocked you. However, I strongly recommend you to select a different username. Regards, Mike Rosoft ( talk) 10:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't think there is any way of merging accounts. As for restoring access to an account you have lost a password to, it probably can be done; you should contact Jimbo Wales or another developer. Regards, Mike Rosoft ( talk) 20:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
It's good to see you back in action again as Okiefromokla. GreenGourd ( talk) 01:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
...Because I started an edit war that woke people up. Boldness attracts attention? :) Wrad ( talk) 04:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I am just trying to get some other opinions on the term Okie. I am pretty sure you are wrong about wanting to portray it as "Negative" in the article, but I would like to get the opinion of others. I think my view and your view is fairly well covered, but if you would like to discuss our difference of opinion on it we can do it here. Thanks -- Xltel ( talk) 15:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about the misunderstanding... Glad I "fooled you" with my practical joke. Timneu22 ( talk) 01:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Bravo. -- PTR ( talk) 16:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for contacting me in private to avoid confusion. I've replied "at home" — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ User_talk:Xiutwel#Confused 19:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I dont know if you could do anything to help me but I was wondering if there was anyway Image:Oklahomastateseal.jpg could be in the public domain, mabye as a federal work. I uploaded it under Oklahomastateseal.png on Commons but all of the state seals might be deleted. It is an important image that adds to alot of the Oklahoma articles. Thanks alot -- Cal ( talk) 06:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Like too many other editors who have contributed to the current renaming debate at 9/11 conspiracy theories, you claimed that what "reliable sources" call something is a consideration in choosing names for articles, despite the fact that it had already been pointed out that this was not the case. Please do not misrepresent wikipedia policy and guidelines in this way because it causes a lot of confusion. ireneshusband (talk) 09:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, but please do not misrepresent what I said either. I said: "It's as valid as anything that reliable sources (especially the media) refer to these as "conspiracy theories". It's just another idicator that the most used and widely-known term is indeed "conspiracy theories." Okiefromokla questions? 16:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I've added a source of scientific information regarding the debate on humans being naturally omnivores, herbivores, or carnivores. I object to your edit (removal of "carnivores") for these reasons:
1 - Your comment ("no. This is not a reliable source, and there are none.", emphasis provided by me) clearly indicates personal bias.
2 - By your logic, you would also have to eliminate "herbivore" from the argument and state that there is scientific consensus on humans being omnivores, because the argument for us being herbivores is pushed almost exclusively by animal rights and vegan extremists, who are also not "reliable sources".
3 - My sources are well sourced by scientific literature.
4 - The argument is not really about whether humans are actually herbivores, omnivores, or carnivore, but whether there is debate over the subject matter, which there most certainly is.
Thanks for your time. 70.145.15.83 ( talk) 00:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although no person is welcome to make unconstructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits appears to be constructive and has been smiled about or lauded. Please use every article for any great edits you would like to make, and take a look at the page for cool editors to learn more about contributing awesomely to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Colleenthegreat ( talk) 06:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Dear Okie, I am replying here because I do not want to go off-topic. You wrote:
I am sorry to hear you feel this way. I was not at all implying that we should resort to non-RS sources. I am just saying they can be wrong. They are only human. — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 18:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I prefer to speak about this with you in private; you wrote:
Thanks very much for the revert on my userpage! :-) Not sure what I did to deserve that... CaptainVindaloo t c e 20:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I figured I'd bring my response to your question [1] here rather than have it on the Sonics talk page. I don't think anything that you said was uncivil, it just didn't further the task of finding a consensus wording. I think if you had left off the last two sentences of your initial comment it would have been fine. Coz does tend to focus his editing on areas that he has strong opinions on and this can make him difficult to work with, but if you focus on the content and not the editor, you can generally get him to work with you on finding wording that is at least palatable to both of you. The biggest thing is to try and avoid using the revert button more than once. -- Bobblehead (rants) 04:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I have been fixing up the Oklahoma Portal and have nominated it for FP status, if you agree please support it for me at this link [2]. Thanks-- CPacker ( talk) 21:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
The Hidden Barnstar | |
This user has found Basketball110's secret hidden sub page! Can you find it? |
Good work. You can also have a ubx if you'd like. See User:Basketball110/Userboxes. Basketball 110 what famous people say ♣ 19:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Basketball
110
what famous people say ♣ has given you a cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
There you go. Basketball 110 what famous people say ♣ 20:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
It's a shame to see you go. You just left greetings for me a few hours ago, encouraging me to become involved in Taskforce Tulsa and WikiProject Oklahoma. You've done a lot of good work here. Best wishes! GreenGourd 17:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
You can reach me at User talk:Rickyrab. I just keep the sockpuppet account I have for the lulz and whenever it seems appropriate to have an obvious sock puppet do the talking. -- Sockpuppet of Rickyrab ( talk) 21:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Oufield1.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 22:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I know that your User page says you don't do Wikipedia alot anymore but I was wondering if you, or anyone you know, could help added some information to the Oklahoma State Capitol page. After seeing all of the really good stuff you have done to help other articles I thought I would come to you for help. I know that you have worked on alot of Oklahoma articles and this one has been passed over. As good as the Oklahoma and Tulsa articles are I know that the Oklahoma State Capitol article can be alot better. Thanks alot -- Cal ( talk) 07:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I guess you are gone, but maybe you check this once in a while. Just wanted to tell you I loved your picture of the Ouachitas. It's lovely. I was raised in McAlester. I tell people I'm from OK and they assume I grew up on the plains. I tell them my hometown is in a mountain range and they think I am joking (there are FIVE mountain ranges in Oklahoma, as my Civics teacher drilled into my head). Even if they are just "big pretty hills", thanks for the reminder. Typing Monkey - (type to me) 05:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
You need to get a grip on yourself and stop trying to ramrod speculation into every article remotely related to OKC and the Sonics.
Here is the deal. I am going to revert them all one last time and then we both leave this particular issue alone while you pitch your case via the talk Supersonics talk page. Whatever the results of that discusion we both allow someone else to post the agreed to edits but you need to stop your one man campaign to dominate these articles with your opinion. If you can't handle that as a resolution to this then we will have to have an admin block your account. -- Coz 17:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Rather than engage in a slow revert war over the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma article, please take it to the talk page instead. -- Kralizec! ( talk) 21:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
w00t, another self-proclaimed sockpuppet! how about that. -- Sockpuppet of Rickyrab ( talk) 21:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
My first instinct, honestly, was to cut the entire last part of the article, as it's a tangential advertisement for vegetarianism. As human beings are omnivorous by any definition of the word, I instead fact tagged the obvious sentence. Marskell ( talk) 21:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Seeing that you have made constructive edits to Wikipedia (and reviewing the account Okiefromokla), I have unblocked you. However, I strongly recommend you to select a different username. Regards, Mike Rosoft ( talk) 10:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't think there is any way of merging accounts. As for restoring access to an account you have lost a password to, it probably can be done; you should contact Jimbo Wales or another developer. Regards, Mike Rosoft ( talk) 20:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
It's good to see you back in action again as Okiefromokla. GreenGourd ( talk) 01:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
...Because I started an edit war that woke people up. Boldness attracts attention? :) Wrad ( talk) 04:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I am just trying to get some other opinions on the term Okie. I am pretty sure you are wrong about wanting to portray it as "Negative" in the article, but I would like to get the opinion of others. I think my view and your view is fairly well covered, but if you would like to discuss our difference of opinion on it we can do it here. Thanks -- Xltel ( talk) 15:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about the misunderstanding... Glad I "fooled you" with my practical joke. Timneu22 ( talk) 01:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Bravo. -- PTR ( talk) 16:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for contacting me in private to avoid confusion. I've replied "at home" — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ User_talk:Xiutwel#Confused 19:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I dont know if you could do anything to help me but I was wondering if there was anyway Image:Oklahomastateseal.jpg could be in the public domain, mabye as a federal work. I uploaded it under Oklahomastateseal.png on Commons but all of the state seals might be deleted. It is an important image that adds to alot of the Oklahoma articles. Thanks alot -- Cal ( talk) 06:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Like too many other editors who have contributed to the current renaming debate at 9/11 conspiracy theories, you claimed that what "reliable sources" call something is a consideration in choosing names for articles, despite the fact that it had already been pointed out that this was not the case. Please do not misrepresent wikipedia policy and guidelines in this way because it causes a lot of confusion. ireneshusband (talk) 09:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, but please do not misrepresent what I said either. I said: "It's as valid as anything that reliable sources (especially the media) refer to these as "conspiracy theories". It's just another idicator that the most used and widely-known term is indeed "conspiracy theories." Okiefromokla questions? 16:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I've added a source of scientific information regarding the debate on humans being naturally omnivores, herbivores, or carnivores. I object to your edit (removal of "carnivores") for these reasons:
1 - Your comment ("no. This is not a reliable source, and there are none.", emphasis provided by me) clearly indicates personal bias.
2 - By your logic, you would also have to eliminate "herbivore" from the argument and state that there is scientific consensus on humans being omnivores, because the argument for us being herbivores is pushed almost exclusively by animal rights and vegan extremists, who are also not "reliable sources".
3 - My sources are well sourced by scientific literature.
4 - The argument is not really about whether humans are actually herbivores, omnivores, or carnivore, but whether there is debate over the subject matter, which there most certainly is.
Thanks for your time. 70.145.15.83 ( talk) 00:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although no person is welcome to make unconstructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits appears to be constructive and has been smiled about or lauded. Please use every article for any great edits you would like to make, and take a look at the page for cool editors to learn more about contributing awesomely to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Colleenthegreat ( talk) 06:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Dear Okie, I am replying here because I do not want to go off-topic. You wrote:
I am sorry to hear you feel this way. I was not at all implying that we should resort to non-RS sources. I am just saying they can be wrong. They are only human. — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 18:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I prefer to speak about this with you in private; you wrote:
Thanks very much for the revert on my userpage! :-) Not sure what I did to deserve that... CaptainVindaloo t c e 20:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I figured I'd bring my response to your question [1] here rather than have it on the Sonics talk page. I don't think anything that you said was uncivil, it just didn't further the task of finding a consensus wording. I think if you had left off the last two sentences of your initial comment it would have been fine. Coz does tend to focus his editing on areas that he has strong opinions on and this can make him difficult to work with, but if you focus on the content and not the editor, you can generally get him to work with you on finding wording that is at least palatable to both of you. The biggest thing is to try and avoid using the revert button more than once. -- Bobblehead (rants) 04:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I have been fixing up the Oklahoma Portal and have nominated it for FP status, if you agree please support it for me at this link [2]. Thanks-- CPacker ( talk) 21:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
The Hidden Barnstar | |
This user has found Basketball110's secret hidden sub page! Can you find it? |
Good work. You can also have a ubx if you'd like. See User:Basketball110/Userboxes. Basketball 110 what famous people say ♣ 19:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Basketball
110
what famous people say ♣ has given you a cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
There you go. Basketball 110 what famous people say ♣ 20:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)