User talk:ScottyBerg/Archives/2010/April
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:ScottyBerg. 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. |
Re: your message on my talk page
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tide rolls (talk • contribs) 22:57, 2010 April 5
Rollback
Hi. I've added the rollback flag for you. Please remember to use it only for clear cut vandalism. Take a look at WP:ROLLBACK and feel free to ask me if you need any help with the tool. Pedro : Chat 07:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Elizabeth Kolbert's New Yorker piece
Thanks for your comment on Jimbo's talk page pointing to Elizabeth Kolbert's article in this week's New Yorker, I've passed the reference on at Talk:Climatic Research Unit email controversy#You don't need a weatherman (fixed link) with pointers to a couple of related articles. The situation was also discussed at BNet, and commented on by Joe Romm in blog articles.[1][2] Hope you find these of interest, dave souza, talk 16:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll look in on it. ScottyBerg (talk) 01:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
According to [3], this is the singular. I removed it from that paged to here. Please revert back to my original version.174.3.123.220 (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
My first edit (the 'vandalism' edit) occurred due to the fact that I am on an instant messaging program and my window switched, thus editing the page to something far less contributive than what was originally intended. I did not want this to happen to the page; that was actually an accident :P.
My second edit, however, while constructive, was reverted by you. I don't understand why; was it in the wrong place? Please tell me as I'd like to be able to edit Wikipedia without having each of my edits reverted, even whilst they are constructive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.60.20 (talk) 03:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
(copied from Ecirial's talk page) Thanks for acting so quickly on that article. Apparently it was created in good faith but then changed into an attack article by a particular user. I didn't keep a record of the name of the user but it is apparent from the article history, which is now vanished. Do you think it would be advisable to leave a warning on the talk page of that user? ScottyBerg (talk) 16:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- I warned the user in question as he has been editing the article in question several times over the span of two weeks, which were incidentally his only contributions as well. The article was indeed made in good faith as the earlier versions were not that bad. However, there were some notability concerns as well, as the only source mentioned just used him as a 1 line example. Hopefully this solves the issue though. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 16:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- I certainly hope so! Thanks again. ScottyBerg (talk) 16:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Talk:DeSmogBlog/GA1
Talk:DeSmogBlog/GA1 is specifically for comments on the GA review. Guettarda (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)