User talk:Selmo/Archive 1

Hello Selmo/Archive 1, and a belated Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some good places to get you started!

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• Template messages
• Sandbox

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes (~~~) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, please either visit the help desk, or leave a new message on my talk page at any time. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!

FireFox 19:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I had to revert your edits because something went wrong with them. -- Usgnus 23:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Just a friendly note to tell you that it's a Wikipedia convention to link years:

Good: 2006 Bad: 2006Selmo 18:16, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

But only the first appearance, i think. --84.122.134.181 18:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your update is informative, I would see no problem in changing it all to much. The fact that Earl made a few insignificant changes for the sake of safety does not excuse his ignoring of air bags, as early as 1956, and the marketing of autos that he knew were killing thousands of people yearly under the premis that "safety does not sell". The article would be better served if we included the negative aspects of Earls career at G.M. The listing of one writers credits in order to appear to make him appear more authorative in explaining what is nothing more than his oppinion is foolish. Its a clear fact that G.M. was discriminatory in it hiring practices, who were these women and when did this occur? One of the major problems John Delorean had with G.M. was that he attempted to recruit talented Black students to the G.M. Engineering institute. Under pressure, G.M allowed classes that were fifty per cent minorities, the other half being white Anglo Saxon Protestants who were freinds of relatives of executives. Lets give Earl an award for nepotism When Earl was confronted with safety (as his despotic personality forbade him for being confronted on any subject) he would blow his top, no one would suggest his cars were unsafe, this would have a negative effect on sales. Information on this Wikipedia is to be informative, not to omit facts on the basis that they are not "politically correct". randazzo56

I did not write that. My anti-vandalism tool has misdestected the last edit as vandalism, so I reverted it. Selmo

I am very flattered, but I am going to have to decline the nomination. Thank you! --Usgnus 23:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

no prob. Selmo 23:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hold on. I disagree with the naming convention. Besides, in at least one case, Waterfront Station, it's not clear that it's a TransLink station. --Usgnus 01:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

On second thought, as long as we're consistent and handle the special cases, it's okay with me. --Usgnus 01:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why did you put a Vancouver stub on TELUS World of Science? "Vancouver" is not a blanket term for "Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver". --Arch26 01:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

I thought it was only in Vancouver. -- [[User:Selmo]] 21:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

it is useless to argue with an expert dont you know.Courtney Akins 23:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Selmo/Archive 1, thank you for applying for VandalProof. I am happy to announce that you are now authorized for use, so if you haven't already, simply download VandalProof from our main page and install it, and you're all set!

Please join the VandalProof user category by adding either: {{User:Vishwin60/Userbox/VandalProof}} (which will add this user box) or [[Category:Wikipedians using VandalProof]] to your user page.

If you have any queries, please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! - Glen 23:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I noticed this comment of yours and I don't see anything that was clearly a personal attack there. Since I can't tell what it was, it might have inadvertantly been me, so I'm requesting you specifically point out the attack, if that comment was directed at me. Feel free to email me if you prefer discretion in the matter. BigNate37_(T) 03:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Please do not accuse me of a personal attack without being specific. That is utterly unacceptable. I responded to a non-sequitur, quoting the author, as is not only useful -- for reference -- but necessary.AOluwatoyin 19:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

• I also disagree with your stance on AOluwatoyin's comments. I do not see the most recent comments as being a personal attack. He did not call LGagnon "ethnocentric" , he stated ethnocentric, Eurocentric, Anglo-American analytic perspective cannot be a sorting criterion for philosophy versus non-philosophy - this is a comment on the content not the editor. He advised LGagnon, in response to LGagnon's arguments that it is non-sequitur to argue "that there was no standard for who belongs on the list" from simply failing to specify criteria for membership. Unspecified or non-specified does not mean that there is none to specify, only that none has been specified. - not a personal attack but responding to arguments put forward.--Arktos ^talk 21:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

• As you and I are the only two contributers to the page I am happy to delete it, but I would just like to confirm :-)--Arktos ^talk 22:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply
  • Deleted :-) Regards Arktos ^talk 22:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

You said "Nothing you say will change my mind" in defending your unsubstantiated accusations against me. If anything is indicative of unspeakable bigotry it would be language such as that. How can reason even begin to prevail, how can resolution even begin to get off the ground if one party, yourself in this case, states, flat-out, ab initio, that "NOTHING" the other party could say could make a difference.

I am asking, therefore, for immediate admin. intervention in blocking you immediately.AOluwatoyin 19:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wondering why you made this reversion? --Nscheffey^(T/C) 20:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

It appeared to be POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Selmo (talk • contribs)

Why would a legitimate list of awards be POV? --Nscheffey^(T/C) 21:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply