This is an archive of past discussions with User:Larry laptop. 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.
Interesting that you have virtually just appeared and you are deleting already on contentious entries. Might you be somebody's sock-puppet? 81.131.13.5716:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Rt Hon.
'I see a number of articles about former MPs (british) and they are still referred to in the article as "The right honourable". Does the title carry on when they finish?'
If you're seeing articles beginning with the style they should be removed as it's against the manual of style. However generally a mention somewhere in the article is ok. And yes to the questionAlci1209:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC).
Deletation of details on Stuart Millson article
Yes, they carry on with that appellation until they die. Re your removal of Stuart Millson's marriage (other biographies have marriage details) I suspect the detail was because of the line-up of other traditional Tory right-wingers who were there. 81.131.13.5716:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I've been here for a year - if you want to put in a complaint that I'm a sock-puppet, do so - piss in the pot or get off it. your idea of why I edited that page is wrong - I ended up at that article because...
>>>> I saw the Michael Smith article on the delete page - vote for it to be deleted (I follow politics quite closely and he IS a nobody). I then followed that to a number of other pages, one of which was Stuart Millson's - Marriage details might be included - but the details of nobody wedding guests? you have are having a laff aren't you?
I have a huge amount of junk in there (very useful junk however), let me see if I can find it. (Give me a few minutes) Prodegotalk21:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I added what I think should do it for you. Do a hard refresh of your your monobook.js, and if it doesn't work, let me know. I have to go, but I will be back in a half-hour or so, and then I can help you out. Prodegotalk21:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
OK I have it working. Hard refresh your monobook again. Then edit any article. Click AfD to nominate it for deletion. Two pages should pop-up. In one you would supply your reason then save, and just save the other two. However in this case don't save since you aren't really nominating the article for deletion. I also gave you a tab for marking copyright violations, and a AfD voter, to put in the format to vote in an AfD. Prodegotalk22:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that user is not approved for VandalProof, and he/she doesn't have 2500 edits either. I am inclined to say the whole userbox bar was copied from someone else's userpage. I am sure he/she would appreciate some assistance in setting up his/her userpage, why don't you offer to help? Prodegotalk21:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok, when you do use IE, do you type in your password manually each time to log in? or do you have "Remember me" on. Prodegotalk22:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
No, that is odd though (That you are having a problem with that on). When you log into VandalProof, what message do you see? Prodegotalk22:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Fender Telecaster
I attempted to correct the Telecaster page (to the effect that Syd Barrett played an Esquire not a Telecaster), but your VandalProof software reverted it. If you check www.sydbarrett.net, or indeed any Pink Floyd fansite, you can find evidence it was an Esquire. IS there any way that this could be changed, without VP stopping it?
Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. . Also please don't vandalize my page and ask me before vandalizing. I put back the vandalproof icon and removed it myself. take care Abdelkweli20:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
hey we were having a discussion and you erased it before we were done talking. take care, sorry about that. Abdelkweli15:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh, that is truly hilarious. If you look at the edit history, he actually did put it back and then delete it himself. Now if only he'll delete the barnstars from people who never gave them, the wikiprojects he hasn't worked on, and the claims to have updated articles he's never touched... Fan1967 21:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC) (This is regarding our friend, not the prod). Fan196722:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi Charles--I noticed your note on that anon's talk: "Hi - once a PROD is in place - do not remove it as you keep trying to do with the donationcoder article - all that will happen is that admin action will occur. The way to ensure the article remains is to a)develop it and b) discuss it with the other editors on the talk page." This is exactly wrong, unfortunately. The whole idea of PROD is that it's for uncontested deletions only. The correct way to contest a PROD is to remove it, unlike AfD or speedy deletion tags. Removing it is perfectly OK, and anyone can do it for any reason on any page, and once an article is de-prodded, it can't be re-prodded except in cases of clear vandalism. Take a look at WP:PROD--the concept seems to baffle some people at first, but it makes sense. Hope this is useful. · rodii ·22:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi Charles, thanks for your contribution. Just to say that Jack has completely the wrong end of the stick, I do not at all want to include people on the basis of everyone of their gt x 5 grandparents. It's just that Jack has tied himself to a rule that only if a person is referred to specifically as Irish American on any old list on the net they can be included, but if an American is shown to have an Irish parent in a reliable source such as a book and there are names, dates and places mentioned, but they are not specifically referred to anywhere as Irish American they cannot be included according to Jack. Arniep22:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
To Arniep - How do you know that the person considers themselves Irish-American? Why are you foistering that label on that when no one else has, Arnie? What if the person considers themselves Italian on the basis of their mother, and does not consider themselves Irish? Also, when you restored names to the Irish list this morning, the majority were people like Marlon Brando or Vince Vaughn, people with distant Irish roots who have never been called Irish Americans by anybody. Mad Jack22:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Jack, I never mentioned anything about identification, and reference works also just say "an American who traces their ancestry to Ireland". Arniep23:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
How many times do I gotta tell ya? You know I'm not gonna stop. The policy explicitly forbids us using sources about the term Irish-American when it comes to labelling people as Irish-Americans. At that point, we used sources about the people, not sources about Irish-Americans (unless of course a source about Irish-Americans explicitly notes one of the people you wish to list as one). And yes, personal identification, as well as cultural affiliation, is definitely a factor. There is no question about that. Mad Jack23:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Great job clearing up the confusion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phyllis Jackson. You'll never get those hours back, but instead of eating your feet - please enjoy this fruity alcoholic beverage with the intention of erasing all memories of fossil toes and buggy PDF search features.
Kuru gave you a margarita, and I can't really top that, but here are some extra limes to enjoy with it. Thanks for your good work on that AfD. - Tapir Terrific00:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Barnstar of Diligence
Awarded for going that extra mile in the verification of the notabilty of the Phyllis Jackson articleMammal411:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Thought you deserved this for your patient work last night (although I see someone has beaten me to it! take care Mammal411:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
New Doctor Who companion
I don't know if you are aware of this, but the link you posted to the BBC press release about the new Doctor Who companion has been embargoed until Wednesday 5 July. It's not actually against the law or anything, but couldn't you have waited until the embargo was over before posting it. Embargoes are added to press releases for a reason, and there's no reason to break them. Whoever gave you the information really should not have, and they should have their press access removed.
The reason things are put on the internet is so press companies, like newspapers and the like, can publish the news in the next day's newspapers. It's not an invitation to republish it anywhere. I'm not going to even try and explain the damage it causes by publishing embargoes press releases before the embargo is over, but suffice to say it doesn't help anyone in the long term, it just makes it more likely that such information will be witheld for longer in the future.
for a friend and a soccer fan
Hey there,
How are you? Happy 4th of July buddy. Anyway what have you been up to? Now please don't forget to check out this marvellous Soccer award!!!
It was a pleasure talking to you mate,
Take care my old and good friend, Abdelkweli16:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Image Concerns
To answer your question, while the pictures did look a little shady to me, in pretty much every AfD so far, someone has brought it up so I never bothered to voice any concerns. With Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celtic Toe Ring, therer were some graphics that Matticus78 believed may have been copyright violations. Britton LaRoche went on to make graphics that stated slander and libel[1] against Matticus78.
Matticus78 apologized both on Britton LaRoche talk page [2] and publicly on the AfD page just to make the whole thing end and further asked that the graphic be removed as they were basically attacks. Britton LaRoche continued to refuse to remove the graphics and instead went further and asked another editor to have Matticus78 blocked for questioning the validity of the graphics [3].
So basically, it was a can of worms I didn't feel like touching. While I agree that they do look like filtered photoshops...I wouldn't have the faintest clue how to prove it. IrishGuytalk16:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
These were created with out a refrence... so they don't really count. But, you have more than enough reasons to delete them, I'll happily add them to the bonfire of my contributions. --BrittonLaRoche01:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Ahh, and yes.. Don't forget to press the delete button! Last one to vote it out is a rotten egg... oops a good egg, and you don't belong here --BrittonLaRoche01:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Remember if you lack tallent you can always delete contributions that show it
well we hope so - don't be suprised if she pops up again in future under a different name with a different IP...I think its unlikley that she was a newbie to this as she seemed to have quite in depth knowledge of how wikipedia works - it took me quite a while to get that far...see you around ;) Mammal409:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually, Charlesknight, if you have any interest, I nominated the article on Kate Robson-Brown for deletion - I couldn't find anything that would make her pass WP:PROF or any other test of notability. You're probably mightily sick of researching for Britton-related articles, but I thought in your work on the other AfD debates, you might have some insight. On the other hand, even with Britton blocked, I'd understand if you don't want to touch another one of these AfDs with a 10-foot pole. See you around! —Tapir Terrific02:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
imposter
hey i just signed on. I also just read what this guy did. First I honestly and wrongly thought it could have been you who asked a friend. Then I did my very little investigation, via pages, logs and talks, I must say it seems like it was the action of an isolated person. Thank you for defending me and blocking this sn. Is there anyway to IP check this guy to see if he's related to any IP adress or any other user? Anyway take care and I thought I would never say that again to you but again, thank you. Abdelkweli19:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for reinstating that vote - my nom had been edited and another vote had been removed. It's good to see that you've talked to the user (Hunter91) who did this, but I'll just warn you that he may end up ignoring you, as he did to me (he deleted my advice to him from the talk page and then edited my nom). I've asked for an admin's opinion at WP:AN/I but I doubt that'll stop Hunter91 - we'll see thanks Martinp2322:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Re: "on that note" from Hunter's talk page...I did actually find some evidence of puppetry after looking into it as fully as I should have the first time. This is the problem with editing while being on hold; when nameless phone rep comes on the line you tend to forget where you are/were. Anyway, socks or not it isn't going to stay. Please help in trying to de-escalate the situation by not provoking him any further. Tellling him he looks foolish isn't going to help anything, especially when it is in fact I that looked foolish after a full accounting. Just remember to be civil and everything will work out. Wikipedia policy of de-escalating conflict is wrapped up in Wikipedia:Don't feed the trolls. Note that I am by no means saying that I think Hunter is one, just that it is a good thing to read regarding conflict on Wikipedia. —WAvegetarian•(talk)21:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Posted thorough explanations on my talkpage. see 7 Response to AN/I
8 Full explanation of the conflict in late june
9 Alex's Explanation, Apology after reviewing
10 Main Issues. Thanks for your time.--Bonafide.hustla09:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, sorry I was harsh in my revert of your edit to the Golf article. Everything seems to be great now! Cheers, Rahzel15:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Binary explosive
My source is BBC news 24. They said 2 seperate liquids, inert until mixed, but whne mixed become an explosive. That is a a binary explosive.Dolive2111:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
My talk page
Don't worry about it. If I saw that on someone else's talk page I'd remove it too. I'm keeping it because I find attempted gay bashing funny. -- Steel19:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
Seb Brook
Hi Charles - you keep removing my site from the fan sites section of the Doctor Who Wikipedia page! Doctor WHo Online is one of the biggest and most popular sites - why does its entry keep getting removed?
Leah Remini
It's best to try to make what you feel is NPOV POV rather than just removing it. It's information that should stay in that section. You didn't even bother to mention your reasoning for removing it on the discussion page first so I could go back and edit it after a discussion. :/ You just sort of removed it. Tonetare19:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Charlesknight, first of all, what in the world kind of example was that? Your example made you sound good because it was rude as I don't know what. The point of giving an example or an analogy of something one has said, is to make it similar to mine. I never said anything negative about Leah Remini which makes it completely dissimilar therefore you still cannot criticize what I've said. If I wrote down negative opinions like yours, I'd understand why you were making these objections. Is that how beautiful mansion comes across in your head? "she's a slut". If you have positive opinions about someone, you may feel free to put it in. Haven't you ever heard the expression 'if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." It's ok to give opinions about someone as long as their polite. How else would we describe characters on shows as there is plenty of character description. Well, I am giving character description of Leah in real life. And you can't pull this on me. Tonetare00:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
your edit summaries and edits to my Coral Smith page were out of nothing but little petty revenge because I reverted your edits to Leah Remini. You would have no reason to go visit a page that you didn't watch the show of. You must have intentionally went through my history to see if there was something you could change. I'm not an idiot. Then you made those little rude comments on the edit summary pages. No one else has ever complained about that page accept you. Everyone else made good friendly contributions and then you forced your opinion in there. You didn't even watch the show as you said yourself. And I told Tyrenius on you. He probably didn't want to help because he noticed you had vandal proof. I was like 'wat the heck' at first because he didn't even give you any warning or anything for your ridiculous and rude edit summaries like he is always doing. then I realized you had the vandalproof. Even if he didn't like your contributions to the page like me, he could have nipped the way you speak in the bud. That's the only reason if anything, anybody would take your side in this matter and refrain from talking to you about your behavior and edits. This happened directly after the Leah Remini issue in which you gave me a foul-mouthed bad example of something I said. That was also unacceptable as now that raunchy language is stuck on my page and I'm not allowed to erase it. I am christian and do not speak and behave in such a colorful, rude manner as you do. Tonetare03:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I didn't even know Charlesknight had Vandalproof or whatever he has and it would make no difference. He is simply trying to improve the article, and he is right that it needs a lot of work. I haven't seen any personal attacks in the edit summaries. If there are any, please supply the diffs, as I have previously requested. He has warned you for a personal attack, however, and shown the text. Tyrenius08:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Good grief. and why on earth would you write that on someone elses talk page Tyrenius? Oh nevermind. I am dropping out of this program. Charlesknight, as I told Tyrenius, I had no problems with your edits at first. You're right about the whole strong language thing as I did add it to the page. I was offended by your edit summaries. You knew you were going into MY history from Leah Remini and you added words like "gushing junk" and much much more. I was just going to go ahead and thank you for helping out my page as I told Tyenius when I first saw the changes. After I looked at your edit summaries, I was disgusted and offended though. Just that type of conduct makes me want to leave wikipedia as so many people around here are disrespectful and then when I tell an adminn they act oblivious to it. Anyway, erase my page please. I'm retiring and using it elsewhere. Tonetare14:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I saw the comment you made about not being a softy softy because it didn't get through to someone else. Since you like to give examples of things, how about I give you one. A friend took my pencil when I was being nice to him. So the nice way didn't work. How about I start being a jerk to everyone including you and the rest of mankind. Tonetare14:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
nothing I said was understood, huh? How I just typed the words I had a problem with your edit summaries and rudeness. I give up Tonetare14:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
you don't have to post anything on my talk page anymore as you and I don't seem to get along. I often find my self frustrated dealing with you. So I don't get anymore irate that I already am about this and since I am trying to keep civil with you, lets just let admin's handle this. Tonetare17:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry should of replied her earlier today.. you mentioned something about a mentor, i'd be pretty interested.. it could help me alot before and help me not make silly mistakes. Also thanks for the kind comments :)! MatthewFenton (talk • contribs)21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Well WP:MENTCOM seems to be for cases stemming for ArbCom etc, i think the best approach for me would be to think things thru better and if in doubt ask for guidence from a more experianced user:) MatthewFenton (talk • contribs)21:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Welcome!
Welcome!
Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.
Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange04:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll ask you nicely and keep my civility, why have you taken it upon yourself to revert the page again? I was the one who wanted to go the talk page and talk things out in the first place. That was a big part of why I was arguing yet you kept defending your position with threats instead of realizing this was a good idea. Apparently I was right, because now you're agreeing with me that you need to go the talk page before you make such controversial edits as it is respectful and how to reach the right answers on information. That is why I'm just losing it here with this situation with you. It's what's making wikipedia a negative environment. Tonetare18:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Way forward
I've protected the page at the current version, which solves the immediate problem. The way forward can only be achieved with a long, patient process if it is to be positive. It won't be any reflection on you if you choose to bow out at this stage, and I'm sure this would be widely understood. If you do hang in for a while, certainly getting more editors involved could take the pressure off. I suggest a very careful measured approach.
An idea of this is on Talk:Michael Ignatieff, though that's far more complex and is reaching an advanced stage (I hope). The principal is the same, namely that small units are taken in isolation and examined. Thus I suggest a starting point could be asking Tonetare to select one statement which he wants to put in the article (either from a previous edit or a new idea). This statement is put on the discussion page as a === sub heading (which enables it to be edited in isolation of course). Then it is carefully evaluated to see what the underlying idea is, whether this can be verified, and, if so, then is it phrased in the best way or is there another way of saying the same thing. Perhaps Tonetare could come up with three different ways, even imagining what someone else would write and writing in their voice — someone like a college lecturer maybe.
There's no point trying to try to get consensus over an article, before you can get consensus over a sentence. It doesn't matter if the whole page is taken up with discussing this one sentence. The first one will be the hardest and slowest. If things get stuck, then create another === heading with another idea and work on that, and so on. Eventually the first one will come to be seen in a different light. A neutral position and questioning will enable Tonetare to explain fully what he wants to say and encourage a greater range of approaches, some of which you will obviously feel more suited, so that is where something viable starts to be forged.
I suggest also archiving the current talk page to start with a clean slate, and leaving a prominent notice on the talk page to warn stray visitors to take especial care if participating (which of course they are welcome to do). You can use/adapt my notices if you want, or I'll happily post something suitable. In fact, it would be a good idea all round if all the talk to date was archived. Get back to me any time if you want.
Hello Charlesknight. How can I talk to you please?
Sorry and Thanks
Okay, I really value Wikipedia and I am glad you are vigilant. I was just showing a friend who didn't know how Wikipedia worked how powerful it was. So I was being silly, and quick, to show him how a change is made. But of course I realize that being silly with the site runs counter to its value to all users, myself included. So I won't do it again. Many thanks to you and all higher-level editors for providing tremendous value to all of us.
Your recent edit to Arab (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot409:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Always nice to talk to fellow 'pedians in real time; I'm not that much of an IRCer so i talk to people i mainly know on 'pedia via messenger :) thanks/MatthewFenton (talk • contribs)16:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Matt Casamassina
We seem to have reverted at the same time, only I went further back. I checked the Zoey 101 article, and there didn't appear to be any mention of an actress on the show (much less "the star") with the name of Zoey. So I took that out. (I mention this just in case you though I was reverting your edits.) ...discospinstertalk18:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Yea, everythings fine; Just got into a heated debate about editing someone elses user page (I was just updating redirects 1 or 2 where DoubleRedirects). Then Andromeda went and said "I try to get through his thick skull" - which i percieved as slightly mean :-( - I believe im not thick, at least i hope im not. thanks/MatthewFenton (talk • contribs)17:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Got It! The rest isn't a lift. I didn't realize how close it was until I read it myself. I just knew that it was indeed the source. (71.128.6.36)
Reversing edit on Ebert and Roeper page.
The Ebert and Roeper page. The movie critic played by Roger Abbott on Royal Canadian Air Farce is called Gilbert Smythe Bite-Me. He is a particular fixture on the New Year's specials for RCAF, makes comments after the Oscars, and in the past always made jokes about the Women's Television Network. In fact, the correct listing is on the Air Farce entry on wikipedia, http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Royal_Canadian_Air_Farce. http://www.airfarce.com/info/biorog.html also shows the correct character and spelling.
thank you for contributing to the BGS talk-war we've been having. Its good to have another person who thinks Paaerduag should go away. He's from Canada, with no information about the school other than what he reads on the internet. --Kiran90 11:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your note! It was very kind of you. However, now I have returned to school, the work is piling up and my teachers are going crazy about my university application, so Jake may have to wait a little bit... Dev92010:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm an author of a blog based in Rankin Inlet, which I linked to on the external links of said page but has since been deleted by you. I can see why anyone would think adding it is "link spam" or "unnecessary" but the point of the blog is to educate people about Rankin and/or moving to Rankin. Almost everybody who moves to Rankin checks out the Wikipedia page for it at one point or another and I wanted it there to help those people. Our blog is a very helpful resource for people. I'm not trying to get my site count up, I'm trying to help people here.
Biography Newsletter September 2006
The September 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange00:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
badly written, rude edit summaries
Oh well, your behavior hasn't improved. Your edit summaries with other users haven't improved. Get some manners. Your edit summaries are so unpleasant. I can't stand the way you sit there and just disrespect people. For instance, except that the overall effect of "the truth" is bigger than a couple of numbers that don't add up. I mean, there is counciling for ways to communicate with people and help them with their manners. I mean, you say '1. it's not this 2. it's not this removed for some german thing. You don't allow the other person who went to all that trouble to make those edits to have his or her say by going to the discussion page. You say your arguments, sounds good to you, then you remove it. You do not deserve any barnstar that the user has given you up above. Just because you're friendly with someone gives you no right to have a barnstar. TareTone05:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
"Just because you're friendly with someone" I would not consider workng together on Jake Gyllenhaal constituted friendly. Charlesknight earned that barnstar - don't let you own frustation blind you to his work. Dev92006:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
TareTone, back off from Charlesknight. His edit summaries are reasonable explanations. Get on with editing. Your behaviour is not helpful to wiki and is going to get you into trouble again at this rate. Tyrenius07:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Tyrenius, I responded to your bad administration on your page where it belongs, not on another user's page. You're a terrible administrator. Mamma, I don't know you so I will ignore you. Dev, you're right. I apologize. TareTone16:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Charlesknight, I stand by what I said. The german thing where you give your reasons and then say removed is unnacceptable. I may not have anything to do with it but I know how it feels to be disrespected by you so I have sympathy with the user's you're treating in that manner. Talk things out with people. There's no excuse for that TareTone16:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
My actions were entirely acceptable -
You seem to misunderstand what "talking things out" in a wikipedia context means. Within certain content, it is entirely appropriate (and actually preferable) to remove without debate. The link in question was a) in German (and therefore in accordance with Wiki:EL should not be used unless it adds some vital to the article or the information is not available in english) and b) a commercial link (and therefore in accordance with wiki:EL should not be used unless it is required by the article). In such a circumstance, there is no need for a debate, the link is removed. This is an entirely normal part of the wikipedia process - if we debated every piece of linkspam that was added, the project would crawl to a stop. I acted in accordance with Wikipedia:external links - if you feel this is not the case, you are quite well to make a case for the inclusion of the link on the relevant talk-page for Golf. Either that or get an admin to look at my remove of the link and see what they say.
lol, I deserve that Charlesknight. I deserve that. No, it wasn't respectful of me. But that user has a bit of a stick up his arse. lol :) TareTone20:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Your recent edit to Mobile phone (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot17:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Whatever fits, but preferrablyVSSE (though V.S.S.E. is OK too). Uniformly, it should be VSSE IMO. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 22:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Stop making edit summaries that are erroneous as "of" can also mean the penis is doing the penetrating. Once again, there's an issue with you and your edit summaries. I left "by" in there because Powers and I determined it was the correct word because we did something called T-a-l-k-i-n-g i-t o-v-e-r. Also, I agree with what Tyrenius said on my page when he says you did me an injustice. Stop doing that immediately and work on your behavior TareTone02:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps Charlesknight was not aware of your discussion. Don't assume he was. Let him know about it first of all before you berate him. Hey folks, how about trying to be friendly to each other. You're not such bad people really. Tyrenius04:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
First of all, Charlesknight being aware of our discussion or not is completely beside the point. Tyrenius, you didn't even read what I said carefully. I said Charlesknight edits out the 'of' I added onto the sexual intercourse page. He says the word is wrong in his edit summary. Geeze, how old are you? anyone could look at that and figure out it could be used the way I used it. Powers and I both acknowledged that. 'of' is perfectly correct. But he put in his edit summary that it was wrong so I said, he really needs to talk things over with people more because he makes silly errors in his edit summaries and with his corrections such as this one. I brought up the fact that me and Powers discussed the word in detail as an example to him that there is a such thing as talking it over. So, I really don't know what you mean Tyrenius. If as you said, Charlesknight has to see our discussion as an example that people do talk things out before making decisions, that would make him slow. Being that you didn't make sense Tyrenius, that's the only way it could have made sense in the way I just wrote it. Anyway, Tyrenius, this really is the last straw with us. I can't take the making up, fighting thing. I may just get a new account to avoid the two of you. Anyways enough about you. I've really had it. Anyway, Charlesknight, I really hope your behavior improves on Wikipedia. You've been a total displeasure to deal with. TareTone05:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
No, I don't mean he has to see the talk as an example that people discuss things. I mean he has to see the talk to realise you had gone over this specific usage of "of" or "by". Look, wiki pages are open property and anyone can join in conversations. They're not private things. They're about getting the best result for the encyclopedia. Just calm down a bit, and go with it. Tyrenius06:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Tyrenius, you may talk to me, but I'm afraid I will not respond anymore. Charlesknight, I want you to go over this and study the following. I highlighted some of the things I want you to focus on : Look, wiki pages are open property and ((((((anyone can join in conversations.)))))) (((((((They're not private things.)))))) (((((((((They're about getting the best result for the encyclopedia.)))))) This can really help your poor edit summaries and bad behavior. TareTone07:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
If you need an explaination of why "she's a tough woman who can talk the talk and walk the walk" does not belong in an encyclopedia, no amount of conversation is going to help. --Charlesknight07:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
That's pretty funny. I copy and pasted that from what Tyrenius said. And I put the part that I wanted you to look at in paranthesis anyway. I didn't even have that part of what he said in paranthesis. You should have caught that. The two of you can't even gang up on me correctly. gee whiz. TareTone08:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Go ahead, say somethign that makes up for it now. lol One of you! I wonder what Tyrenius will say. This should be great TareTone08:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid my first question has to be to ask "what is copy and paste?" I don't actually understand your last statement. It is slightly incoherent. --Charlesknight08:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid my first question has to be to ask "what is copy and paste?" I don't actually understand your last statement. It is slightly incoherent. Woooooooooooooooow! That deserves to be written again. I love it, I love it, I love it. Exactly why you shouldn't go around trying to correct me because in the end you sound like you just did when you made that comment. TareTone11:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
TareTone, your conduct here is amounting to deliberate provocation and harassment of Charlesknight. Cool it, back off, get on with something else and leave him alone or you'll get blocked again. Tyrenius14:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Copy and paste : Tyrenius, you may talk to me, but I'm afraid I will not respond anymore. Charlesknight, I want you to go over this and study the following. I highlighted some of the things I want you to focus on : Look, wiki pages are open property and ((((((anyone can join in conversations.)))))) (((((((They're not private things.)))))) (((((((((They're about getting the best result for the encyclopedia.)))))) This can really help your poor edit summaries and bad behavior. TareTone07:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Arbitration
This has gone to far. Taretone, you and Tryenius....I think it is time someone request arbitration. As you are an involbed party; you'll have to comment on this case. Sugarpinet20:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to be comment. Your putting a comment up on AN/I or the Arbitration page? I'm going to add a request for arbitration but Taretone needs to be unblocked so he can praticipate. Sugarpinet20:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Damn! The old man looks good for his age! Well, hell, if that's canon fodder (so to speak!) put that right in with the citation. Good catch! -- Tenebrae20:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Apparently, Sugarpine from looking at the history had various colors, I have aqua and green for obvious reasons. Aquafish? Get it? Sugarpine had 6 zillion, I only have 3. ForestH2 had none, and it looks like Forest and Sugarpine started this. Aquafishtalk00:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Megatron
Could I ask what exactly it is you meant on the Megatron Discussion page earlier? I was going to just treat it as vandalism, but a look at your page indicates you're pretty anti-vandal. If it was some sort of genuine comment I apologise but that really did look bad...SMegatron13:38, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Cool. As to your question, Im pretty certain Ive seen the kiss players mentioned in other Transformer articles, although I can't remember exactly where. Although I know nothing about the Transformers manga, if theres more info we could put it in.SMegatron14:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
WikiTimeScale
I understand the delete proposal for the article WikiTimeScale. But what I do not understand is, why you also delete all external links to WikiTimeScale in other articles. The use for this external links is that other people can watch this article on a timeline and see how it is related to other events in history. This is what is the sense of external links, to give someone more information on this article. Stop deleting those external links as if you where some kind of revenger!
Echalone20:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
To be honest, the link you deleted again had nothing to do with my website at all. It was about a hole other story. I only used the same domain (with a different subdomain) because I didn't want to pay for another domain. The link you erased is the link to an encryption tool, only designed to encrypt the Code the article was about. Still, I followed your instructions and didn't restore it, but added a comment to its discussion page for someone else to add it if he/she think its worthy enough.
It's more of a sneaking suspicion than anything. Tonetare and TareTone both edited mostly TV articles, as did ForestH2 (different subsets of shows, but that's entirely possible). Also, ForestH2 has a tendency to create user pages right away. Tonetare created his user page on his 4th edit, and TareTone did on his 1st edit. This edit summary by Tonetare (on his second edit ever) suggests at least some prior knowledge of Wikipedia ("wikipages" isn't a word I'd expect out of a new user). Finally, the interaction with ForestH2's other socks.
It's obvious that ForestH2 enjoys this greatly- in fact, I'm sure he'll read this comment. See his reply after I created that page. He wants arbitration (unnecessary, of course), so that he can get his name on the RFAr page for a while, and possibly so he can get written up in the Wikipedia Signpost. Ral315 (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Greetings. I read your comment on the second AfD for Leonard H. Tower Jr. expressing a potential interest for the article, should there be sources showing notability. I have found and cited some sources which I believe you might find relevant; they are cited in the second AfD, in this comment by myself. Capi13:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Steve Willis/Phoenix FM
Its my local big shopping centre and all, I just forgot entirely that the station was based there! Saw it today when leaving HMV and the name clicked. Its literally a portakabin sheltered between the UCI cinema and a row of shops with a self-assembly tower with some very small transmission antennas on it...
Its eight miles away. I can't get it here. I have a quite impressive FM array here for getting radio from Northern Ireland. Says something doesn't it? --Kiand20:24, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Sandy Straus Puppet Show
By the way, I replied on my talk page on your comment you left there (just in case you didn't see it). Anyway, here's today's puppet show : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Straus Pavement Damage Estimate. This time, we have someone who managed to get his autobiography deleted, tried to file a complain on AN/I against the admins who had deleted it, and someone dug up his other contributions, oops, all to AfD now, he seems unhappy, and he's got friends ... EquendilTalk01:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
One step ahead of you
Just finished blocking him and reverting all his edits when I got your message. Your user page seems to be getting a lot of vandalism, I can semi-protect it for you if you want?--Konstable14:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
The peer review article made no consensus on the removal of easter eggs, and I personally oppose the removal of this list. It is not fancruft to list easter eggs - though I would have supported moving to them to a new page or seriously trimming down the section as I believe it was beginning to inflate to larger-than-acceptable proportions. for instance, listing easter eggs and only top-level descriptions of these easter eggs is similar to quotes in TV episode pages, track titles in music recording pages and stage names in video and computer game pages.
The only part about the easter eggs that I can see as being "fancrufty" would be the directions on how to obtain them, and personally I think a short one-sentence instruction is not going out of line, but even so I could understand you taking it upon yourself to compact the section, but not totally remove it. I plan on, at least partially, reverting the article change some time in the near future - I just wanted to tell you beforehand so there are no hard feelings or anything like that. I would be interested in discussing this section with you further on the BF2 talk page, and again I heavily disagree with the comments on the peer review article about the easter eggs lowering the quality of the page to be unworthy of FA status (even though I still think these comments gave little reasoning as to why this was the case, and was only a single sentiment echoed by a few others, still without giving any explanation). Thank you. 69.124.143.23000:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for being a jerk. I'm clearly new to wikipedia. Educate me. Don't you think that instead of deleting the article, it just needs to be rewritten in a more passive way? ZIM really is legit, it's just that it's not big on the internet and the article posted seems like an advertisement. --User:zx2c4
DON
Don is a sound effect in japanese. Sometimes added to a scene for dramatic effect, to show that something astonishing or important has happened. In One Piece, Oda, the Manga-ka, uses this sound effect a lot (in pretty much every chapter). I was also somewhat referencing the character Tom, becasue he usualy says... It's easer to show you: [6][7]. I was using it in the same context as Tom, the closest thing in english would be... something to the effect of: "give two hundred percent". It translates about as well as "nakama", in other words, not very well. (Justyn09:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC))
Angela Singer article, up for deletion
Hi charlesknight. I aapreciate your comments on the Angela Singer article. There are lots of articles on her in the main North Island newspaper of New Zealand, The New Zealand Herald and the main South Island newspaper The Otago Daily Times, also in the national Sunday newspaper. Here are some, but as I say there are so many I don't have the details of all. I also found The Tate art magazine and House and Garden magazine:
Campbell, Megan. Viewers Challenged to think again. Otago Daily Times, Dunedin. 31 August 2006.
News story - Megget, Katrina. Exhibition influenced by research into bird flu. Otago Daily Times, Dunedin. 26 August 2006.
Dashfield, Prue. Animal Art, New Zealand House & Garden magazine. May 2004.
Article on artist in the main national newspaper - Herrick, Linda. Four Legs Good, The New Zealand Herald, Auckland. 1 September 2004.
http://login.nzherald.co.nz/?redir=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=392BEBDA-39E2-11DA-8E1B-A5B353C55561
McNamara, TJ. Carnivora. The New Zealand Herald, Auckland. 24 September 2003.
Smith, Charmain. Creations Pose Serious Questions. Otago Daily Times, Dunedin. 19 June 2003.
National Sunday newspaper - Zega, Nigel. Feeling sheepish. Sunday Star-Times. 29 July 2001.
Cook, Marjorie. Ghost sheep come to Dunedin. Otago Daily Times, Dunedin. 24 July 2001.
Dingwall, Richard. Homage to the sheep holds mixed message on animal rights. Otago Daily Times, Dunedin. 2 August 2001.
Baker, Steve. Animal rights and wrongs (Haunted by the animal). Tate: The Art Magazine, London no. 26, Autumn 2001.
Clarke, Barry. Taking art straight from the Abbatoir. Sunday Star-Times. 7 May 200.
Cleave, Louisa. Art Exhibition Designed to Shock. The New Zealand Herald, Auckland. 24 May 1999.
I'm not sure what to post, what to do or frankly whether to bother. I thought I had included quite enough about this artist in the article I wrote. I used other artists articles as a guideline and included far more from better sources. Any help appreciated. Thank you Dmdesign12:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to remove your merger proposal
Greetings charlesknight. It has been some time since you suggested the merging of the Western Martial Arts article and the European Martial Arts article. I disagree with this proposal, and since no one has refuted my rational for their remaining seperate, I would apperciate your removing the proposal. Thank You Master at Arms
The Time Crisis 4 talk page
Just want to advise you that you should delete the irrelevant fanfic listed in this talk page (IP starting with 219) as he's been warned a lot of times, or at least mark it as being deleted. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 14:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me?
I don't even know how to become an admin, sorry. I am very confused by your comment. I don't even know what you mean by take another run at AFD. I also don't know the admin status here. I know what an admin is though. Aquafishtalk16:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Ron Wyatt
Hello,
I've edited the Ron Wyatt page before because I like reading about Noah's Ark and have some books on the subject (I've done a lot of edits to the Durupinar and David Fasold pages among other biblical and historical articles). I want to thank you for sticking it to the pro Ron Wyatt guys who constantly vandalize the page. I didn't know that there was a "Humanist Agenda" out there stomping all talk about Ron Wyatt. It boggles the mind that they don't understand that Wikipedia is a reference for everybody, not a soapbox. Even though I like to delve into what I call "speculative history," as a trained historian I realize that 9/10ths of it is bunk. Wyatt is the worst of the sort that give Christians of any stripe a bad name. So here's to hoping that you can block them, they really piss me off. But at least if they're so concerned with the Wyatt article, they'll leave others (Noah's Ark, Ark of the Covenant, David Fasold, Durupinar, Jabal al-Lawz, etc) alone.
Hiya, CK. I just wanted to cc you on a request I put in with admin Steel regarding that one editor who keeps inserting the uncited "genius-level intellect". Thanks for all your timely efforts with that person.
I'm asking now for help with some recalcitrant reverter who, despite at least two editors posting to him, cannot seem to udnerstand that he can't put his personal evaluation of something for which he can't find a citation.
At Daredevil (Marvel Comics), the Anon IP 82.108.12.52 at [8] continues to add a claim (the content doesn't matter, just the fact that it's uncited and unverifiable) that User:Charlesknight and I have repeatedly asked him to cite and verify.
He refuses to provide citation (frankly, since it doesn't exist; his claim is just his analysis/opinion), he doesn't respond, and he simply keeps reverting to this edit here.
He has been blocked in the past (by Admin Mgm, who reverted him here) and as you can see by his list of edits at "[1]" above that his "contributions" to Wikipedia have been primarily this single pet opinion of his, over and over.
I'm asking that he please be block for a sufficient length of time for the Wiki citation requirement to sink in. I'm placing this request now on his Talk page, for full disclosure. Thank you for any help. With respect, -- Tenebrae 15:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
It has came to my attention that this article has been badly vandalized by some sort of this "Fanfic" freak who does nothing but fanfic vandalisms. Should I nominate Time Crisis 4 for protection against vandalism? Please advise. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 22:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I would not recommend leaving a message as I'm done with wikipedia for the moment - I'm not sure if or when I will return. I've come to the conclusion that sites like wikitruth might have a point - not a healthy mental place to edit from. --Charlesknight08:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
HYPOCRITE !!!!
This is the guy who was hellbent on the deletion on the Steve Willis article. He was convinced Willis was non notable, where did it get him, what a waste of time Charlesknight, hope you are now doing something useful with your life
86.143.46.7810:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
the former user known as Charlesknight caused a lot of problems here at wikipedia judging from the number of people who vandalized his page and had a problem with him. He seemed to want to fight with people more than get along with people here at wikipedia. It seemed as if he was getting his way with a lot of people, because when he doesn't, he leaves and insults wikipedia because that is what he has done now. He has some vandalizing friends that keep erasing comments from this page as well. Hungrygirl13:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
He caused "problems" because he did a lot of anti-vandal work and that tends to irritate people. Irritate people who are vandals. Who then vandalize in retaliation. Soosed14:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
