User talk:Blanchardb

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

FiveThirtyEight.com

Please do not delete this page. Their methodology is often sited for its new, innovative polling prediction methodology in the Democratic Primary Election 2008. It gained attention for beating out most pollsters projections in North Carolina and Indiana in the heavily contested political primary race between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008. New polling methodology in the political world is of enormous economic and political impact. Many major publications have mentioned the site in relationship to the elections.

Mackerel

My addition to the Mackerel article is by no means unconstructive - it is factual and corroborated in the St. John's Wood article. I filled in the Edit summary clearly, and see no reason to delete the new section.

Please tell me why you keep reverting my changes to the Mackerel article - you say that I am not leaving an Edit summary which is simply untrue.Royshearer (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I am reverting it for a simple reason: your addition has no pertinence whatsoever, regardless of whether or not it is true. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 00:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Surely the matter of pertinence is entirely subjective? I would like to see how many others deem it of no pertinence. Royshearer (talk) 00:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Let me put it this way: the article is about a species of fish, not about a combination of letters in an English word. Therefore, since your addition has nothing to do with fish, it is not pertinent. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 03:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

So in what article might this section correctly reside? Are you saying I should start a new article purely for the 'word' mackerel, rather than the fish? Given that the word pertains to several dozen species of fish, I would propose that this article is in fact on the subject of the 'word' mackerel rather than any one fish. Royshearer (talk) 12:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

You could do that. But I'm telling you, such an article probably won't last a week before it gets deleted. People will ask, "Why single out this word?", and "So, why should I care?". Does this work with the French equivalent, maquereau, with the same station? Is St John's Wood the only station with no letter from the Spanish word caballa (mackerel)? If not, I don't think such information belongs anywhere in Wikipedia. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 12:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I see. So does that mean that you are going to delete the same information from the St. John's Wood tube station article? The bottom line is, you seem to be taking your judgement of pertinence as that of the rest of the community by blocking any representation of this information. It is a piece of well known trivia relevant to and recurrent in British culture, perhaps not others. That should not be a reason to discount it as I would hope that the aim of Wikipedia is to represent information in as broad a context as possible. Frankly, you are not combatting vandalism as much as you are discouraging me from ever contributing to Wikipedia, so thanks. Royshearer (talk) 23:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The kind of information you are referring to is a bit more pertinent in the St. John's Wood article than it is in the Mackerel article, but not much. I've already tagged it as trivial, but I'll let someone else do the deletion. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 02:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. Surely this information is entirely irrelevant to the St. John's Wood article, but utterly relevant to the St. John's Wood tube station article, for the reasons I have outlined in the discussion on that page. It may be 'trivia' but it is by no means trivial culturally. How can I get a third or tenth opinion on this? Royshearer (talk) 23:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out that there was a separate article on the tube station. The {{trivia}} tag was there long before I saw the contents of the article. Maybe the right place for a discussion would be Talk:St. John's Wood tube station --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 00:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

True details on Christina

You can't just block something without reading the details. What gives you the right to remove true information if you don't have an appropiate reason to do so. This is not vanadalism. By using huggle, you are abusing the rights to change the details to your desire. What proof do you have that Christina McKinney is 39 and what evidence do you have to support your claims that this is false information?124.188.180.129 (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

True? I don't know, but the information is already found elsewhere in the article, so no need to repeat it. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 03:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for that comment I made earlier. I didn't wanted to offend you, it's just that I thought my point that I added in the article was removed as though nobody cared. I didn't see that but of information repeated earlier. 124.188.180.129 (talk) 03:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

sry

UR RESPONSE TIME IS AMAZING WHEN U DELETED MY BS REMARKS. DO U PRESS REFRESH ON EVERY PAGE ALL DAY? I AM IN AWE.

ALSO CAN I BE ADMIN? I PRESS REFRESH ALOT. 67.84.179.182 (talk) 21:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Huggle Wars

Hi there. Are you aware of this essay ? Sometimes huggle reverts and warns inappropriately, this happened here, and you warned user:Gail. Make sure to check all your reverts, of course it may mean that you should slow down your editing rate. Thanks for your efforts, Cenarium ^Talk 16:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this, I also hope that a new version will fix the problem. Happy editing, Cenarium ^Talk 18:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

S&M for deletion

As mentioned, it is a relatively new drinking game. Its not a figment of my imagination. Its origin is Murdoch Uni, Australia. It has seen some growth amongst the local population. Helpig (talk) 19:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

This is not enough to change my mind. Just because something exists is not grounds for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 19:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Tony Dadson

Hi there. Not sure if you're watching this article or not, but it's been unblanked by the author, who has also taken out the AfD and CSD tags. I'll put them back in, but thought i'd let you know just in case. Ged UK (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

YOU SUCK DICKS