I have deleted my private IP as this is a total invasion of privacy irrelevant to Wikipedia and this issue at hand. Starstylers ( talk) 09:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
You will need to read carefully about language used in this article - this is an online encylopedia - some terminology used is not appropriate - a good read of WP:MOS would be well worth it - as well as the issue of citations - some assertions you make need citations otherwise someone will revert them as of dubious claims Satu Suro 14:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, a lot of work needs to be done on that article. Very WP:POV language and no references. It might even be better to start again, using only strictly referenced material. -- Merbabu 03:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
undefined
A {{
prod}} template has been added to the article
Sayogo Hendro Subroto, suggesting that it be deleted according to the
proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{
db-author}}.
Davidelit
05:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Please don't remove "fact" tags without providing the reference. It won't be tolerated. Thanks. -- Merbabu ( talk) 12:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I am happy to raise this issue of the article name with Indonesia editors - I agree, perhaps the name could be improved. Please wait and contribute to the discussions.
In the meantime, will you please improve your act by ensuring you write in a WP:NPOV tone, use reliable references for absolutely everything you add (fugly bali is not a reliable source - it makes wikipedia look stupid), and stop using unprofessional language (ie, "moral masturbation") on talk pages. thanks and kind regards. -- Merbabu ( talk) 12:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you learn to sign - the four thingies up on the left hand side of your keyboard - it would be appreciated - thanks Satu Suro 13:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Starstylers. We need to sign out posts on user talk pages and on article talk pages, but, NOT on articles. To sign, all you need to do is to type four tildes " ~ " (ie, ~~~~) and when you click “save page” it will automatically convert to a time and date stamp with your user name. Alternatively, just press the sig button above the edit box and this will give you the same result. If you want detailed info see WP:SIG. -- Merbabu ( talk) 22:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
My apologies about not clarifying for talk items only - theres no big deal about it but after a while on talk pages - automated bots will perpetually follow you like a bad smell thats all :( Satu Suro 23:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Nafas enak - its ok now - :) Satu Suro 10:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Please don't reintroduce incorrect wikipedia formatting 1 day after it's already been removed. here Please reinstate the heading and section formatting per this change. It's really annoying seeing the same formatting errors and bad English re-entered only a day after it was cleaned up. -- Merbabu ( talk) 11:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I hate to be so pedantic but the astana giribangun was looking like dogs breakfast
References never are located below category labels
Please help by keeping articles laid out correctly, thanks Satu Suro 23:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The article is just too long and detailed. I will be working to reduce other sections further (the 'Health Crises' and 'purges' sections are good examples). That 'death' section was difficult to read with many details. Yes, possibly a separate article could be made. I'd suggest more info would be needed - could be quite nice. You put together some good info and references - why not use that as your start and add to it. I can review. The info i removed is still in the history. -- Merbabu ( talk) 14:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
++me++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Neutrality_and_verifiability
Please do not tag the Featured Article of the Day as an advertisement. It is not an advertisement. It is a featured article about a business. There is a difference. DS ( talk) 05:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Please do not use tildes (~~~~) in your edit summary. Tildes are only meant for talk pages, like what you're looking at right now. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 05:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Please quit saying that it "reeks of advertising". The article is written entirely from a neutral point of view and is very well sourced -- so well sourced in fact that it's today's featured article. There is no way that a featured article could be shot down as "advertising". Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 16:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
A glance at your Talk page indicates that you have been having a bit of difficulty adjusting to the Wikipedia style. First and foremost, assume good faith ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assume_Good_Faith). That means that when I point out mere common characteristics, you don't assume that I am stating those characteristics to be the (sole?) reasons for the success of the NICs.
Next is simple courtsey. In our first ever exchange, you made two mistakes, neither of which was necessary. First, you assume that I am of or represent Hong Kong. It is where I live, and that is all. Second, you made a derogatory personal attack (see Ad hominem for more on this flaw).
Finally, you made several simple errors in fact in your post on my Talk page that indicate to me it would be a waste of time to pursue this any further, until you get some basic education in the history of modern East Asia. DOR (HK) ( talk) 22:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, your recent edits or comments on Wikipedia, did not appear to conform with Wikipedia policies and guidelines:
As in the Law of Karma, do sit back and reflect whether your recent actions or comments may sully your standing in Wikipedia and your credentials (including your alma mater too), or incur any unpleasant follow-up action by the community later. Thank you. -- Aldwinteo ( talk) 02:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello, why are you commenting me without proof against me. I didn't alter the truth about the Chinese in Indonesia. What I edit is a wrong spelling and then I corrected it. Please, don't commenting me without proof. Thank you.-- Joseph Solis in Australia ( talk) 09:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, some of your recent edits have been reverted as they could be seen to be defamatory or potentially libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 17:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 17:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Is a mess - if your hard work or whatever gets reverted - its in the trying to restore the article after some nuisance vandalism- and from above stay cool in the face of maybe being reverted Satu Suro 09:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok so youre still cleaning up ill wait till you have finished to see what the hell has been going on with the article Satu Suro 09:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Some deadhead with typical xenophoibic rubbish had preceded you - ill get back to it later - and sorry my javanese and indonesian side of the brain has lapsed today - expect only bloody australian from me at the mo - cheers Satu Suro 09:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah well maybe - the big prob with the art is inadequate WP:RS if you ever trip over of throw up any sometime - they might be needed in the yarticle (Sir Less Patterson comes to mind - but i dont think he ever had a word for the Indonesians) Satu Suro 09:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Starstylers, You said You have a pathetic comprehension of history and economics for someone claiming to be an expert. And, There was no personal attack at all- point it out if there was any- I attacked your KNOWLEDGE not your PERSON.
As an exercise in humility, I leave it to the student to explore the contradiction between the two statements.
FYI, you may have noticed that I have not said anything about Indonesia. Why you persist in bringing up that country is beyond me. Is there some personal connection? If so, please stop inserting your personal interests into the middle of my considered opinion. It just makes you look foolish. DOR (HK) ( talk) 15:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 18:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia. If you would like to experiment please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 18:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Kindly leave content discussions in the talkpage of the article in question, instead of initiating debate in my talkpage. This is a community-focused site for a reason.-- Huaiwei ( talk) 05:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Coloursfest, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.colours.co.uk/page_view.html?page_id=29. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 14:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Braehead International Arena, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/events-venues/braehead.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 15:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Coloursfest requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Dave1185 (
talk)
17:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Braehead International Arena requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Dave1185 (
talk)
17:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is your final warning. If you continue to add content to Wikipedia in violation of copyrights you will be blocked from editing. Do not add copyrighted content from websites or other sources without first obtaining permission to do so. -- Dave1185 ( talk) 17:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Guy Ornadel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.
Dave1185 (
talk)
17:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to
Braehead International Arena, you will be
blocked from editing. Do not remove templates from copyrighted articles if there is a requirement for you to put up a hang on sign while you attempt to rewrite it
Dave1185 (
talk)
18:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Talk:Singapore Airlines, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Please refrain from using weasel words. Also, read up on WP:NPOV & WP:SUBSTANTIATE Dave1185 ( talk) 18:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Talk:Singapore, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Please refrain from using weasel words. Also, read up on WP:NPOV & WP:SUBSTANTIATE Dave1185 ( talk) 18:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is your only warning.
The next time you make a
personal attack as you did at
User talk:Dave1185, you will be
blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.
Dave1185 (
talk)
19:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Starstylers ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Cultural differences in use of language, disputation of racism claims, sincere attempts at apology made- some evidence of Wikipedia:HUSH
Decline reason:
I don't see any sincere attempts at apology. Your talk page seems to indicate that you don't have the temperament to contribute in a collaborative environment. See also WP:GAB. – xeno ( talk) 02:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Evidence of harass from user:Dave1185- persistent and provocative haranguing regarding edit pages and private discussion not relevant nor of interest to said User- see talk. Provocative comments were indeed made by myself. I did attempt apology and distancing from user:Dave1185 see here (deleted by said user. I do acknowledge some comments may be taken as offensive, and I am indeed sorry they take offence. See further details below.
Evidence of attempts to resolve conflict: [1] [2] [3] [4]
Evidence of harassment and provocation by User_talk:Dave1185 is detailed above in talk.
I quote relevant text pursuant to personal attack blockages from [ [5]] "...However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking'' for less severe situations when it is unclear if the "conduct severely disrupts the project"'. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered "disruption". 'Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment. A block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks..." With respect to the last Wikipedia policy statement I refer to admittedly heated and barbed comments: "
I further assert numerous editors I have had disagreements with in the past devoid of [ [6]] and are evidentially devoid of [ [7]] with a personal interest in furtherance of this block despite any past conflict with aforementioned past history. Such editors are namely:
user: merbabu User:Aldwinteo user:Dave1185 User:Malleus_Fatuorum
Their detailed collusionary and planned conspiratorial defamtory tactics are detailed below:
and I quote "but that bugga [sic bugger] was fighting with his own ghost. Cheerio! -- Dave1185"
The above clearly demonstrates collusive effort on those above to undermining the consensus approach of Wikipedia and effect an unfair action.
Additionally the Decline reason: "I don't see any sincere attempts at apology. Your talk page seems to indicate that you don't have the temperament to contribute in a collaborative environment" shows less than cursory examination and an obvious attempt at psychological evaluation=- stated beyond the compass of Wikipedia arbitors here"
I wish to resolve this whole sorry issue in a manner as non-emotive and neutral as possible. I am prepared to offer full unequivocal apologies. However, collusion and interference of previous parties indictae in may only be resolved Privately.
I formally request Third party closed-session arbitration. I have contacted User:FayssalF in attempt to resolve this between effected parties only.
Furthermore, the computer is a shared resource therefore:
Block message:
Personal attacks or harassment of other users: d
Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.
A couple of thoughts here:
I am unblocking based on this apology. However, let it be known that you will be re-blocked on the next incidence of any personal attack. Toddst1 ( talk) 15:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
These were removed from my page, now listed for you to read: -
I think everyone will know who this bugga really is after reading through them so have fun reading, Cheers! -- Dave1185 ( talk) 18:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Comment: I'm appalled by the quick turn-around decision despite the merits of the case, & would like to make some comments here as I'm being dragged unwittingly into this case now. I'm a member of the CVU & a RCP granted with rollback rights, helping to patrol Singapore-related articles for any attacks, esp from hardcore vandals, trolls or troublemakers, as a result of a rash of similar cases encountered in recent time (mentioned below). It's amusing that my previous message to the disruptor was conveniently left out, except for the diffs being highlighted above. Can I stop anyone from posting any notices on my talkpage? Has anyone read the ' 'Do not disturb' notice' I placed on my talkpage earlier? For the record, I'm known for being honestly blunt & for giving spot-on comments. As such, I'm fully aware that I've attracted quite a following, both online & offline folks, who either follow on my DYK/GA efforts, or watchlisted my talkpage for any occasional 'fireworks display'. As someone who was trained & exposed to criminalogy, penal law & justice, courtesy of my National Service, I make no bones nor hiding the fact of making personal educated predictions on observed cases or in the cases I initiated, or RfC to date. Kindly refer to the earlier open group discussions mentioned on the same talkpage itself, Case 1, Case 2, & its associated links, in order to see the proper context of my later comments in which I was wrongfully accused of earlier. See for yourself why fellow RCPs, including Dave1185 or others, posting notices or messages frequently on my talkpage for advice or requesting my participation at ANI, AfD, GA Project etc, even though I'm currently semi-retired. (I'm currently using a self-designed program to monitor & alert me when offline). As expected by his behavorial profile, even casual remarks & factual comments made by uninvolved editors like Malleus, Merbabu etc, were seen in conspiratorial tone too. Instead of stepping back for a honest self reflection on why he landed himself in this plight - sadly, he see 'spooks' at every shadowy corners now. To rub salt to open wounds, his victims, or even to casual observers, would concurred that he has not demonstrate any sincere concrete actions to apologise to all the parties concerned as a reconcilatory gesture to date. Instead, he switches roles conveniently in his defence to either portraying himself as a 'victim', or as a 'unknowing newbie' (since Sep 2007!), & even had the audacity to accuse almost everyone except himself - respected admins, senior editors, members of CVU & RCPs, and including his known victims, for conducting an unfair 'witch-hunt'. Do such acts demonstrate to us clearly that he has fully learnt his lessons now or his pettiness & double-speak again?
At the gist of the matter, I still stand by what I've said earlier & even now, as they're based on fair comments & factual evidence which are open for all to see & verify. As such, I'm not afraid that my previous comments or edit history are subjected to any further scrutiny by anyone else. Since I'm being regarded by the disruptor as the 'bad guy' now, I would like everyone to know that I'll act on this assigned 'role' with immediate effect. I'll set my program to actively monitor his edits, comments, any acts of sockpuppetry ( removed -> PT TELKOM, Indonesia) , COI, or any mischief on a 24/7 basis now, in order to report him swiftly to any of the admins involved here in future. I strongly believe I'll not be alone in doing this task nor will I be surprised if anyone still continue to post me any notices like what Dave1185 or Malleus did, on my talkpage for my info or advice again. As I've mentioned earlier: "You may fool most of the people sometimes, but not all the people, all the time" -- Aldwinteo ( talk) 07:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
With reference to your comment on user talk:Davidelit; please be advised that there is NO privacy on wikipedia, and no editor, including you, I or Davidelit owns any pages, including our own talk pages. Please also be aware, in the light of your comment on his userpage, that accusations of wikistalking will need to be supported by the firmest of evidence. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 15:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for doing well since I unblocked you. Please keep up the good work. Toddst1 ( talk) 18:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Istiqlal_Mosque&diff=230344952&oldid=230344747 - now that is weird (please do not reply in javanese) 0 that is not WP:MOS in a million years. I do hope you are ok. Satu Suro 05:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
For a start a paragraph like that in an article like that should never be there as - it is POV, and it would offend all sides for a start - in at least three corners of the boxing ring - and i think the invisible one lurking in the fourth corner would get you in the solar plexus bfore the other three knew what was going on - yo muncul's - youre heading for self destruct if you try those sort of paras - why not do locations or inert value free items like the unfilled regencies of sulawesi or something, and avoid cats like the plague Satu Suro 06:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Lets face it your agenda to date has some eds hoping you would go up in a puff of smoke (that you should be so lucky) - and doing an agenda number - and there are not articles to accommodate some of your issues - youre in no mans land - if you want to apply an idea into articles - you have chosen some which simply have NPOV sticklers foaming at the mouth - and I have a project management agenda of mine where i would rather be tagging for assessment rather than delve into stuff that some eds creep in - maybe you would be happier battling the malay centrists - with their perception that the whole of south east asia comes from malay sources - that would test whether you could hold your tongue in the face of instant blockng. Nah you delve into issues that we really dont have articles for. Maybe you should try finding one that fits. But beware youre on the precipice - dont push yourself unless you really want to. Satu Suro 06:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Message received not yet digested - off again - will try to respond to re the indonesian project over a day or so or even later real life has stuck her pretty little face around the corner :)
Satu
Suro
01:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
As I stated in the article Talk, I have no problem with those terms being used, provided a clear definition is given of what the difference between them in the context is. But they are too vague and controversial to simply use them without explaining the meaning. -- SJK ( talk) 10:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cinema_of_Indonesia - If you want to stay unblocked I would strongly suggest you refrain from repeating all that somewhere else if you are still capable of that. One thing to be poetically various ...ist manner in your attitude and spray, another to stay free of the prying eyes wondering if youre going to slip up on your shirt tails or entrails or slander trails or what. Take it easy - if you can - when you sit in front of a computer keyboard, and gag your mouth, and put blinkers on - it might help :( - and ask for help :) Satu Suro 04:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
If you could just stay away from the invective and try to find time to edit/contribute - with refs - I would be interested - but hey we all have our bad days (with or without hair) cheers Satu Suro 13:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
There is something about your writing tone that never gave a slightest clue you were female (sic) - as for your alun alun - it is looking good - and havent looked at military of indonesia yet - too distracted by off wikipedia things to dig through my resources for further refs for alun alun - it looks good though Satu Suro 04:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hehehe ahem pardon the assumption there was a suggestion of menstruality so to speak - but hey the average Australian knows nothing about ketoprak or cross dressing in javanese popular culture - there are probably at least a thousand barry humprhies a la dame edna everages in java and they probably know nothing about him/her as much as he has probably never seen it himself being a melbourne boy :) Satu Suro 12:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually my only edits were to disam British and Dutch on the page. -- User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 23:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I have deleted my private IP as this is a total invasion of privacy irrelevant to Wikipedia and this issue at hand. Starstylers ( talk) 09:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
You will need to read carefully about language used in this article - this is an online encylopedia - some terminology used is not appropriate - a good read of WP:MOS would be well worth it - as well as the issue of citations - some assertions you make need citations otherwise someone will revert them as of dubious claims Satu Suro 14:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, a lot of work needs to be done on that article. Very WP:POV language and no references. It might even be better to start again, using only strictly referenced material. -- Merbabu 03:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
undefined
A {{
prod}} template has been added to the article
Sayogo Hendro Subroto, suggesting that it be deleted according to the
proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{
db-author}}.
Davidelit
05:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Please don't remove "fact" tags without providing the reference. It won't be tolerated. Thanks. -- Merbabu ( talk) 12:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I am happy to raise this issue of the article name with Indonesia editors - I agree, perhaps the name could be improved. Please wait and contribute to the discussions.
In the meantime, will you please improve your act by ensuring you write in a WP:NPOV tone, use reliable references for absolutely everything you add (fugly bali is not a reliable source - it makes wikipedia look stupid), and stop using unprofessional language (ie, "moral masturbation") on talk pages. thanks and kind regards. -- Merbabu ( talk) 12:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you learn to sign - the four thingies up on the left hand side of your keyboard - it would be appreciated - thanks Satu Suro 13:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Starstylers. We need to sign out posts on user talk pages and on article talk pages, but, NOT on articles. To sign, all you need to do is to type four tildes " ~ " (ie, ~~~~) and when you click “save page” it will automatically convert to a time and date stamp with your user name. Alternatively, just press the sig button above the edit box and this will give you the same result. If you want detailed info see WP:SIG. -- Merbabu ( talk) 22:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
My apologies about not clarifying for talk items only - theres no big deal about it but after a while on talk pages - automated bots will perpetually follow you like a bad smell thats all :( Satu Suro 23:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Nafas enak - its ok now - :) Satu Suro 10:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Please don't reintroduce incorrect wikipedia formatting 1 day after it's already been removed. here Please reinstate the heading and section formatting per this change. It's really annoying seeing the same formatting errors and bad English re-entered only a day after it was cleaned up. -- Merbabu ( talk) 11:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I hate to be so pedantic but the astana giribangun was looking like dogs breakfast
References never are located below category labels
Please help by keeping articles laid out correctly, thanks Satu Suro 23:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The article is just too long and detailed. I will be working to reduce other sections further (the 'Health Crises' and 'purges' sections are good examples). That 'death' section was difficult to read with many details. Yes, possibly a separate article could be made. I'd suggest more info would be needed - could be quite nice. You put together some good info and references - why not use that as your start and add to it. I can review. The info i removed is still in the history. -- Merbabu ( talk) 14:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
++me++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Neutrality_and_verifiability
Please do not tag the Featured Article of the Day as an advertisement. It is not an advertisement. It is a featured article about a business. There is a difference. DS ( talk) 05:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Please do not use tildes (~~~~) in your edit summary. Tildes are only meant for talk pages, like what you're looking at right now. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 05:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Please quit saying that it "reeks of advertising". The article is written entirely from a neutral point of view and is very well sourced -- so well sourced in fact that it's today's featured article. There is no way that a featured article could be shot down as "advertising". Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 16:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
A glance at your Talk page indicates that you have been having a bit of difficulty adjusting to the Wikipedia style. First and foremost, assume good faith ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assume_Good_Faith). That means that when I point out mere common characteristics, you don't assume that I am stating those characteristics to be the (sole?) reasons for the success of the NICs.
Next is simple courtsey. In our first ever exchange, you made two mistakes, neither of which was necessary. First, you assume that I am of or represent Hong Kong. It is where I live, and that is all. Second, you made a derogatory personal attack (see Ad hominem for more on this flaw).
Finally, you made several simple errors in fact in your post on my Talk page that indicate to me it would be a waste of time to pursue this any further, until you get some basic education in the history of modern East Asia. DOR (HK) ( talk) 22:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, your recent edits or comments on Wikipedia, did not appear to conform with Wikipedia policies and guidelines:
As in the Law of Karma, do sit back and reflect whether your recent actions or comments may sully your standing in Wikipedia and your credentials (including your alma mater too), or incur any unpleasant follow-up action by the community later. Thank you. -- Aldwinteo ( talk) 02:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello, why are you commenting me without proof against me. I didn't alter the truth about the Chinese in Indonesia. What I edit is a wrong spelling and then I corrected it. Please, don't commenting me without proof. Thank you.-- Joseph Solis in Australia ( talk) 09:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, some of your recent edits have been reverted as they could be seen to be defamatory or potentially libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 17:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 17:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Is a mess - if your hard work or whatever gets reverted - its in the trying to restore the article after some nuisance vandalism- and from above stay cool in the face of maybe being reverted Satu Suro 09:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok so youre still cleaning up ill wait till you have finished to see what the hell has been going on with the article Satu Suro 09:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Some deadhead with typical xenophoibic rubbish had preceded you - ill get back to it later - and sorry my javanese and indonesian side of the brain has lapsed today - expect only bloody australian from me at the mo - cheers Satu Suro 09:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah well maybe - the big prob with the art is inadequate WP:RS if you ever trip over of throw up any sometime - they might be needed in the yarticle (Sir Less Patterson comes to mind - but i dont think he ever had a word for the Indonesians) Satu Suro 09:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Starstylers, You said You have a pathetic comprehension of history and economics for someone claiming to be an expert. And, There was no personal attack at all- point it out if there was any- I attacked your KNOWLEDGE not your PERSON.
As an exercise in humility, I leave it to the student to explore the contradiction between the two statements.
FYI, you may have noticed that I have not said anything about Indonesia. Why you persist in bringing up that country is beyond me. Is there some personal connection? If so, please stop inserting your personal interests into the middle of my considered opinion. It just makes you look foolish. DOR (HK) ( talk) 15:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 18:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia. If you would like to experiment please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dave1185 ( talk) 18:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Kindly leave content discussions in the talkpage of the article in question, instead of initiating debate in my talkpage. This is a community-focused site for a reason.-- Huaiwei ( talk) 05:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Coloursfest, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.colours.co.uk/page_view.html?page_id=29. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 14:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Braehead International Arena, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/events-venues/braehead.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 15:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Coloursfest requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Dave1185 (
talk)
17:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Braehead International Arena requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Dave1185 (
talk)
17:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is your final warning. If you continue to add content to Wikipedia in violation of copyrights you will be blocked from editing. Do not add copyrighted content from websites or other sources without first obtaining permission to do so. -- Dave1185 ( talk) 17:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Guy Ornadel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.
Dave1185 (
talk)
17:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to
Braehead International Arena, you will be
blocked from editing. Do not remove templates from copyrighted articles if there is a requirement for you to put up a hang on sign while you attempt to rewrite it
Dave1185 (
talk)
18:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Talk:Singapore Airlines, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Please refrain from using weasel words. Also, read up on WP:NPOV & WP:SUBSTANTIATE Dave1185 ( talk) 18:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Talk:Singapore, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Please refrain from using weasel words. Also, read up on WP:NPOV & WP:SUBSTANTIATE Dave1185 ( talk) 18:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is your only warning.
The next time you make a
personal attack as you did at
User talk:Dave1185, you will be
blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.
Dave1185 (
talk)
19:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Starstylers ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Cultural differences in use of language, disputation of racism claims, sincere attempts at apology made- some evidence of Wikipedia:HUSH
Decline reason:
I don't see any sincere attempts at apology. Your talk page seems to indicate that you don't have the temperament to contribute in a collaborative environment. See also WP:GAB. – xeno ( talk) 02:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Evidence of harass from user:Dave1185- persistent and provocative haranguing regarding edit pages and private discussion not relevant nor of interest to said User- see talk. Provocative comments were indeed made by myself. I did attempt apology and distancing from user:Dave1185 see here (deleted by said user. I do acknowledge some comments may be taken as offensive, and I am indeed sorry they take offence. See further details below.
Evidence of attempts to resolve conflict: [1] [2] [3] [4]
Evidence of harassment and provocation by User_talk:Dave1185 is detailed above in talk.
I quote relevant text pursuant to personal attack blockages from [ [5]] "...However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking'' for less severe situations when it is unclear if the "conduct severely disrupts the project"'. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered "disruption". 'Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment. A block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks..." With respect to the last Wikipedia policy statement I refer to admittedly heated and barbed comments: "
I further assert numerous editors I have had disagreements with in the past devoid of [ [6]] and are evidentially devoid of [ [7]] with a personal interest in furtherance of this block despite any past conflict with aforementioned past history. Such editors are namely:
user: merbabu User:Aldwinteo user:Dave1185 User:Malleus_Fatuorum
Their detailed collusionary and planned conspiratorial defamtory tactics are detailed below:
and I quote "but that bugga [sic bugger] was fighting with his own ghost. Cheerio! -- Dave1185"
The above clearly demonstrates collusive effort on those above to undermining the consensus approach of Wikipedia and effect an unfair action.
Additionally the Decline reason: "I don't see any sincere attempts at apology. Your talk page seems to indicate that you don't have the temperament to contribute in a collaborative environment" shows less than cursory examination and an obvious attempt at psychological evaluation=- stated beyond the compass of Wikipedia arbitors here"
I wish to resolve this whole sorry issue in a manner as non-emotive and neutral as possible. I am prepared to offer full unequivocal apologies. However, collusion and interference of previous parties indictae in may only be resolved Privately.
I formally request Third party closed-session arbitration. I have contacted User:FayssalF in attempt to resolve this between effected parties only.
Furthermore, the computer is a shared resource therefore:
Block message:
Personal attacks or harassment of other users: d
Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.
A couple of thoughts here:
I am unblocking based on this apology. However, let it be known that you will be re-blocked on the next incidence of any personal attack. Toddst1 ( talk) 15:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
These were removed from my page, now listed for you to read: -
I think everyone will know who this bugga really is after reading through them so have fun reading, Cheers! -- Dave1185 ( talk) 18:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Comment: I'm appalled by the quick turn-around decision despite the merits of the case, & would like to make some comments here as I'm being dragged unwittingly into this case now. I'm a member of the CVU & a RCP granted with rollback rights, helping to patrol Singapore-related articles for any attacks, esp from hardcore vandals, trolls or troublemakers, as a result of a rash of similar cases encountered in recent time (mentioned below). It's amusing that my previous message to the disruptor was conveniently left out, except for the diffs being highlighted above. Can I stop anyone from posting any notices on my talkpage? Has anyone read the ' 'Do not disturb' notice' I placed on my talkpage earlier? For the record, I'm known for being honestly blunt & for giving spot-on comments. As such, I'm fully aware that I've attracted quite a following, both online & offline folks, who either follow on my DYK/GA efforts, or watchlisted my talkpage for any occasional 'fireworks display'. As someone who was trained & exposed to criminalogy, penal law & justice, courtesy of my National Service, I make no bones nor hiding the fact of making personal educated predictions on observed cases or in the cases I initiated, or RfC to date. Kindly refer to the earlier open group discussions mentioned on the same talkpage itself, Case 1, Case 2, & its associated links, in order to see the proper context of my later comments in which I was wrongfully accused of earlier. See for yourself why fellow RCPs, including Dave1185 or others, posting notices or messages frequently on my talkpage for advice or requesting my participation at ANI, AfD, GA Project etc, even though I'm currently semi-retired. (I'm currently using a self-designed program to monitor & alert me when offline). As expected by his behavorial profile, even casual remarks & factual comments made by uninvolved editors like Malleus, Merbabu etc, were seen in conspiratorial tone too. Instead of stepping back for a honest self reflection on why he landed himself in this plight - sadly, he see 'spooks' at every shadowy corners now. To rub salt to open wounds, his victims, or even to casual observers, would concurred that he has not demonstrate any sincere concrete actions to apologise to all the parties concerned as a reconcilatory gesture to date. Instead, he switches roles conveniently in his defence to either portraying himself as a 'victim', or as a 'unknowing newbie' (since Sep 2007!), & even had the audacity to accuse almost everyone except himself - respected admins, senior editors, members of CVU & RCPs, and including his known victims, for conducting an unfair 'witch-hunt'. Do such acts demonstrate to us clearly that he has fully learnt his lessons now or his pettiness & double-speak again?
At the gist of the matter, I still stand by what I've said earlier & even now, as they're based on fair comments & factual evidence which are open for all to see & verify. As such, I'm not afraid that my previous comments or edit history are subjected to any further scrutiny by anyone else. Since I'm being regarded by the disruptor as the 'bad guy' now, I would like everyone to know that I'll act on this assigned 'role' with immediate effect. I'll set my program to actively monitor his edits, comments, any acts of sockpuppetry ( removed -> PT TELKOM, Indonesia) , COI, or any mischief on a 24/7 basis now, in order to report him swiftly to any of the admins involved here in future. I strongly believe I'll not be alone in doing this task nor will I be surprised if anyone still continue to post me any notices like what Dave1185 or Malleus did, on my talkpage for my info or advice again. As I've mentioned earlier: "You may fool most of the people sometimes, but not all the people, all the time" -- Aldwinteo ( talk) 07:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
With reference to your comment on user talk:Davidelit; please be advised that there is NO privacy on wikipedia, and no editor, including you, I or Davidelit owns any pages, including our own talk pages. Please also be aware, in the light of your comment on his userpage, that accusations of wikistalking will need to be supported by the firmest of evidence. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 15:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for doing well since I unblocked you. Please keep up the good work. Toddst1 ( talk) 18:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Istiqlal_Mosque&diff=230344952&oldid=230344747 - now that is weird (please do not reply in javanese) 0 that is not WP:MOS in a million years. I do hope you are ok. Satu Suro 05:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
For a start a paragraph like that in an article like that should never be there as - it is POV, and it would offend all sides for a start - in at least three corners of the boxing ring - and i think the invisible one lurking in the fourth corner would get you in the solar plexus bfore the other three knew what was going on - yo muncul's - youre heading for self destruct if you try those sort of paras - why not do locations or inert value free items like the unfilled regencies of sulawesi or something, and avoid cats like the plague Satu Suro 06:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Lets face it your agenda to date has some eds hoping you would go up in a puff of smoke (that you should be so lucky) - and doing an agenda number - and there are not articles to accommodate some of your issues - youre in no mans land - if you want to apply an idea into articles - you have chosen some which simply have NPOV sticklers foaming at the mouth - and I have a project management agenda of mine where i would rather be tagging for assessment rather than delve into stuff that some eds creep in - maybe you would be happier battling the malay centrists - with their perception that the whole of south east asia comes from malay sources - that would test whether you could hold your tongue in the face of instant blockng. Nah you delve into issues that we really dont have articles for. Maybe you should try finding one that fits. But beware youre on the precipice - dont push yourself unless you really want to. Satu Suro 06:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Message received not yet digested - off again - will try to respond to re the indonesian project over a day or so or even later real life has stuck her pretty little face around the corner :)
Satu
Suro
01:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
As I stated in the article Talk, I have no problem with those terms being used, provided a clear definition is given of what the difference between them in the context is. But they are too vague and controversial to simply use them without explaining the meaning. -- SJK ( talk) 10:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cinema_of_Indonesia - If you want to stay unblocked I would strongly suggest you refrain from repeating all that somewhere else if you are still capable of that. One thing to be poetically various ...ist manner in your attitude and spray, another to stay free of the prying eyes wondering if youre going to slip up on your shirt tails or entrails or slander trails or what. Take it easy - if you can - when you sit in front of a computer keyboard, and gag your mouth, and put blinkers on - it might help :( - and ask for help :) Satu Suro 04:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
If you could just stay away from the invective and try to find time to edit/contribute - with refs - I would be interested - but hey we all have our bad days (with or without hair) cheers Satu Suro 13:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
There is something about your writing tone that never gave a slightest clue you were female (sic) - as for your alun alun - it is looking good - and havent looked at military of indonesia yet - too distracted by off wikipedia things to dig through my resources for further refs for alun alun - it looks good though Satu Suro 04:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hehehe ahem pardon the assumption there was a suggestion of menstruality so to speak - but hey the average Australian knows nothing about ketoprak or cross dressing in javanese popular culture - there are probably at least a thousand barry humprhies a la dame edna everages in java and they probably know nothing about him/her as much as he has probably never seen it himself being a melbourne boy :) Satu Suro 12:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually my only edits were to disam British and Dutch on the page. -- User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 23:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)