This page 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. |
You can revert the knighting edit, but i'd apprciate it if you would keep the rest of my post. The knighting might have been a joke, but the baby and quiting aren't. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobbieG2448 ( talk • contribs) 00:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently drafted a proposal for an Ethnobotany WikiProject ... check out the project proposal for more details. I thought you might be interested due to your interest in anarcho-primitivism.
Cheers! Jrtayloriv ( talk) 06:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Your ER has been open for over 2 months. It has gained a couple of reviews. It has exceeded the 30 days time limit, it will need to be archived, do you still wish to keep it open any longer?--Best, ₮RU CӨ 03:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Terrillga, you have removed my comments twice. I ask that you please stop doing so. They are on topic, in fact central to the topic and therefore valid. Further they are on the talk page not in the main article. They are not slanderous, obscene, or otherwise delete worthy. Therefore you do not have the right to remove them. See Wikipedia Behavior that is unacceptable. Quote: "Do not strike out the comments of other editors without their permission." 63.196.193.94 ( talk) 05:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} My good sir, I put it to you, that you, my friend, are a person of a very boring and whiny disposition. If you would like to kindly prove to me that "Ian" Fleming is not Darth Vader, nor did fight Ammit in a epic battle, then I would gladly admit my mistakes, but as of now, there is no formidable evidence to support your claims.
I would also like to suggest that you not be so boring, and that you "live a little" on the "wild side" and hopefully search and find a "life". If you would please stop being such a stickler for lameness and boredom, maybe this world wouldn't be such an awful place. It's all on your shoulders. Only you can make a difference.
-Nerlo (The Queen of Sealand)
P.S. Only you are the Chosen One
P.S.S. Only you can prevent Forest Fires —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelro ( talk • contribs) 18:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}
The subject of the Granite page is not 'Radiation', the subject is GRANITE, which is a relevant construction material worldwide. There is an attempt being made to make this page a discussion forum for the radiation issue, which is still an undecided debate underway (solely) in the USA, and is not too relevant to the overall subject, which is Granite, its properties (in short), its occurances, its uses et.al. Maybe the debaters can make a seperate page on the "Radiation in Granite" and carry on the one sided attack thereof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kulveer ( talk • contribs)
No problem, I sometimes hit the wrong button too. On my second day as an admin I accidentally blocked another admin instead of the vandal he was warning. OOPS! Don't worry about it. Chillum 14:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I was just browsing the page for a science project, and some guy just wrote a bunch of stuff on there. You're welcome. <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 ( talk) 17:35, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I haven't really been a member all that long, so I probably shouldn't have any vandalism history! Come to think of it, I didn't even know about vandalism history...well, anyway, thanks for offering your help! <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 ( talk) 22:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Terrillja. Thanks a lot for your welcome. I´m a medium-advanced user in the spanish Wikipedia, and sometimes I try to help in this Wiki. My english level is mediocre, so I´ll limited me to make minor changes (interwikis, categories, references...). Bye and thanks again ;) -- Montgomery ( talk) 00:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC) P.S: I´m a newpage patroller too, happy coincidence.
Hi, could you please comment on your edits to File:M777 Light Towed Howitzer 1.jpg at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/M777, as there is a question about the copright? Thanks, — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 14:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} You lost me with your removals of the improvement tags from various RIT-related articles on March 26th. Can you clarify what your intent is? Do you believe these articles should not be improved by proper sourcing?
I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
You state at the top of your talk page that "If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page", and then you answered on User talk:129.21.179.65?
I've removed the report on User:DeveloperBenny as it appears there was agreement by admins that it was not a blatant violation of user name policy. Essentially until we have evidence that shows otherwise it is always best to AGF. We don't want to welcome new users to Wikipedia by blocking them straight away. If you are concerned you may request the user to change name on their talk page by using {{subst:uw-username}}, or consider WP:RFCN. Cheers. Nja 247 08:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, good work. :) I'll take another quick look and see if it passes. Have a great day! CarpetCrawler ( talk) 19:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The edit is about who founded Greenpeace, and Greenpeace is the principal authority on that issue, I would think. This makes the distinction between primary and secondary sources moot, in this case. Who knows more about its founding than the group that was founded? Probably not a person who was expelled from the group, or anyone who interviewed him. Besides, I think there are probably other sources that dispute how involved Watson was in the actual formation of Greenpeace. Being around at the time is not quite the same as being a principal actor in the act. Thanks for your discussion. Mervyn Emrys ( talk) 23:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
What in heaven's name is the problem here this time?! – Ms. Sarita Confer 03:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Mervyn, Suggesting that an advocacy group - ANY advocacy group - is by default the "primary source" of information regarding it's history is absurd. In fact, by default it should be assumed that all information disseminated by such a group is self-serving to the group as it exists at the publication date. I've been involved with enough non-profits to see the ebb and tide of personality wars within the group regarding who did what, when. The "powers that be" at any given moment will write or re-write history to their convenience. Third party sources are the ONLY legitimate way to confirm any self-serving statement by an advocacy group. 76.27.199.240 ( talk) 18:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I knew it was going to be deleted, lol. I didn't mean any harm, really. Sorry about that :} Tribal44 ( talk) 01:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Tribal44
Hi.
I've been off-line for a while. Previously ISP 76.27.193.128
I've done considerable work on the Sea Shepherd article, and am gratified to see most of it intact.
Most frequently, I have defended the integrity of the article against detractors of the Society who are not too keen on using encyclopedia-quality entries to make their point.
This time, under this ISP address, I am proposing making revisions which move the other direction; removing terminology which is prejudicial in favor of the Society. You may recall that, although I oppose the society's tactics, I support their goals and am most interested in an accurate, neutral and properly cited article.
I have made suggestions on the Sea Shepherd "discussion" page in that regard, and would invite your opinion on the proposed changes. Keep up the good work. 76.27.199.240 ( talk) 18:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to do that.
I was freaking out trying to correct it.
Thank you,
Mando —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.22.108.64 ( talk) 05:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
This page 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. |
You can revert the knighting edit, but i'd apprciate it if you would keep the rest of my post. The knighting might have been a joke, but the baby and quiting aren't. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobbieG2448 ( talk • contribs) 00:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently drafted a proposal for an Ethnobotany WikiProject ... check out the project proposal for more details. I thought you might be interested due to your interest in anarcho-primitivism.
Cheers! Jrtayloriv ( talk) 06:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Your ER has been open for over 2 months. It has gained a couple of reviews. It has exceeded the 30 days time limit, it will need to be archived, do you still wish to keep it open any longer?--Best, ₮RU CӨ 03:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Terrillga, you have removed my comments twice. I ask that you please stop doing so. They are on topic, in fact central to the topic and therefore valid. Further they are on the talk page not in the main article. They are not slanderous, obscene, or otherwise delete worthy. Therefore you do not have the right to remove them. See Wikipedia Behavior that is unacceptable. Quote: "Do not strike out the comments of other editors without their permission." 63.196.193.94 ( talk) 05:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} My good sir, I put it to you, that you, my friend, are a person of a very boring and whiny disposition. If you would like to kindly prove to me that "Ian" Fleming is not Darth Vader, nor did fight Ammit in a epic battle, then I would gladly admit my mistakes, but as of now, there is no formidable evidence to support your claims.
I would also like to suggest that you not be so boring, and that you "live a little" on the "wild side" and hopefully search and find a "life". If you would please stop being such a stickler for lameness and boredom, maybe this world wouldn't be such an awful place. It's all on your shoulders. Only you can make a difference.
-Nerlo (The Queen of Sealand)
P.S. Only you are the Chosen One
P.S.S. Only you can prevent Forest Fires —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelro ( talk • contribs) 18:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}
The subject of the Granite page is not 'Radiation', the subject is GRANITE, which is a relevant construction material worldwide. There is an attempt being made to make this page a discussion forum for the radiation issue, which is still an undecided debate underway (solely) in the USA, and is not too relevant to the overall subject, which is Granite, its properties (in short), its occurances, its uses et.al. Maybe the debaters can make a seperate page on the "Radiation in Granite" and carry on the one sided attack thereof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kulveer ( talk • contribs)
No problem, I sometimes hit the wrong button too. On my second day as an admin I accidentally blocked another admin instead of the vandal he was warning. OOPS! Don't worry about it. Chillum 14:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I was just browsing the page for a science project, and some guy just wrote a bunch of stuff on there. You're welcome. <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 ( talk) 17:35, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I haven't really been a member all that long, so I probably shouldn't have any vandalism history! Come to think of it, I didn't even know about vandalism history...well, anyway, thanks for offering your help! <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 ( talk) 22:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Terrillja. Thanks a lot for your welcome. I´m a medium-advanced user in the spanish Wikipedia, and sometimes I try to help in this Wiki. My english level is mediocre, so I´ll limited me to make minor changes (interwikis, categories, references...). Bye and thanks again ;) -- Montgomery ( talk) 00:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC) P.S: I´m a newpage patroller too, happy coincidence.
Hi, could you please comment on your edits to File:M777 Light Towed Howitzer 1.jpg at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/M777, as there is a question about the copright? Thanks, — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 14:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
{{ User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} You lost me with your removals of the improvement tags from various RIT-related articles on March 26th. Can you clarify what your intent is? Do you believe these articles should not be improved by proper sourcing?
I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
You state at the top of your talk page that "If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page", and then you answered on User talk:129.21.179.65?
I've removed the report on User:DeveloperBenny as it appears there was agreement by admins that it was not a blatant violation of user name policy. Essentially until we have evidence that shows otherwise it is always best to AGF. We don't want to welcome new users to Wikipedia by blocking them straight away. If you are concerned you may request the user to change name on their talk page by using {{subst:uw-username}}, or consider WP:RFCN. Cheers. Nja 247 08:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, good work. :) I'll take another quick look and see if it passes. Have a great day! CarpetCrawler ( talk) 19:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The edit is about who founded Greenpeace, and Greenpeace is the principal authority on that issue, I would think. This makes the distinction between primary and secondary sources moot, in this case. Who knows more about its founding than the group that was founded? Probably not a person who was expelled from the group, or anyone who interviewed him. Besides, I think there are probably other sources that dispute how involved Watson was in the actual formation of Greenpeace. Being around at the time is not quite the same as being a principal actor in the act. Thanks for your discussion. Mervyn Emrys ( talk) 23:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
What in heaven's name is the problem here this time?! – Ms. Sarita Confer 03:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Mervyn, Suggesting that an advocacy group - ANY advocacy group - is by default the "primary source" of information regarding it's history is absurd. In fact, by default it should be assumed that all information disseminated by such a group is self-serving to the group as it exists at the publication date. I've been involved with enough non-profits to see the ebb and tide of personality wars within the group regarding who did what, when. The "powers that be" at any given moment will write or re-write history to their convenience. Third party sources are the ONLY legitimate way to confirm any self-serving statement by an advocacy group. 76.27.199.240 ( talk) 18:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I knew it was going to be deleted, lol. I didn't mean any harm, really. Sorry about that :} Tribal44 ( talk) 01:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Tribal44
Hi.
I've been off-line for a while. Previously ISP 76.27.193.128
I've done considerable work on the Sea Shepherd article, and am gratified to see most of it intact.
Most frequently, I have defended the integrity of the article against detractors of the Society who are not too keen on using encyclopedia-quality entries to make their point.
This time, under this ISP address, I am proposing making revisions which move the other direction; removing terminology which is prejudicial in favor of the Society. You may recall that, although I oppose the society's tactics, I support their goals and am most interested in an accurate, neutral and properly cited article.
I have made suggestions on the Sea Shepherd "discussion" page in that regard, and would invite your opinion on the proposed changes. Keep up the good work. 76.27.199.240 ( talk) 18:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to do that.
I was freaking out trying to correct it.
Thank you,
Mando —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.22.108.64 ( talk) 05:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)