User talk:Thingg/archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions on my talk page and I request that you do not alter it. If you need to contact me, please do so on my current talk page. Thank you.

Archives

December 2, 2007–February 29, 2008 March 1, 2008–April 30, 2008 May 1, 2008–June 30, 2008 July 1, 2008–August 31, 2008 September 1, 2008–October 31, 2008 November 1, 2008–December 31, 2008 January 1, 2009–May 31, 2009 June 1, 2009–December 31, 2012

---

I like an explanation of why this post was deleted. Everything in this post was factual. There were no marketing or promotional elements to it. I did not write "This service is great, buy it!". It is important not to hastily judge a post as spam simply because it is for a commercially available product. The service exists, it is noteworthy, and there are no blatant sales pitches in it.

Disappointed in the draconian editing practices here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChinaDollz (talk • contribs) 19:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

u cant argue with that...it is true...that it is portrayed by the simpsons...so y fix it???

email me back...quinnfox@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.16.22.22 (talk) 22:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was original tagger of that article, which I tagged as A7. After some discussion with the author and with Balloonman, I figured that this article probably meets at least the standards of passing A7, if not notability itself. As you were the original deleter of that article, I figure it is best to go to you for an undeletion request. Sincerely, NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 21:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was just looking at the new PlayStation Netowork logo which has been placed on the PlayStation Network and PlayStation 3 articles and I was sure that there was something in the MOS about the use of images which include the product/company name in the way that this one does. I thought I remembered reading that if the text is not part of the logo it's self and an alternative without text is available, then that one should be used. But I can't find this now. I noticed that you had reverted to the older version (which has since been reverted again) and wondered if this was the reason or whether I've just made this up in my head!? :) ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:25, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Special Barnstar
		It was your message that finally convinced me to start using Huggle! As a result, Wikipedia has a far more active vandal fighter in me. To thank you, I award you this special barnstar! John Sloan (view / chat) 16:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you changing the date on my Wikipedia bio? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.253.155.193 (talk) 22:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a reliable source for the correct date, there would be no question. WP:AUTO is probably also worth reading; it's generally frowned upon to edit a biographical article about yourself.  Frank  |  talk  23:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert to McGeddons last version? The parrallels section is useless to the Horus article in that it teaches nothing about Horus as a god, and is instead interested in teaching the Christ Myth theory. There is a whole Wikipedia article on the Christ Myth theory, which this is better suited to.

The Horus article shoudl be about Horus.

Worse, the information is from unreliable sources and has no credibility whatsoever.

The text of the section isn't even supported by the text above about Horus.

It sonly added to lend credibility to Christ Myth media resources liek Zeitgiest or Religulous, and serves no useful pourpose here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.24.236.20 (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for link updating, I am not always great about that kind of thing (not that I do much page moving) so thanks for saving me the trouble familytree101 (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• thanks for that! Will try to keep an eye on those article links! familytree101 (talk) 00:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you reverted my edit on Vitamin D, but didn't give an edit summary - what exactly was the problem with it? --144.53.226.17 (talk) 00:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I got reverted for an identical edit over on Hypervitaminosis D by a different editor, also by accident, so I was getting a little puzzled. Now I look at the diff, I can see why it happened - seems to be showing my edit as a much larger change than it actually was. --144.53.226.17 (talk) 00:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I get that you think my link on the Maui page for Mauionline.com is an ad, in a way you are right. All links are ads, Paradise Television Network has been around for over 23 years. We are without question a resource for Maui tourism. If your going to delete this content you need to remove all of the following

1. The Maui News ~ daily newspaper
2. Maui Time Weekly ~ Island-Wide Independent Weekly
3. Maui Free Press Haleakala Times Online (no print edition)
4. Maui Weekly ~ the South Maui newspaper
5. Lahaina News ~ the West Maui newspaper
6. Maui Surf Forecast - Daily forecast and surf discussion
7. Maui Weather Today - Glenn James's daily Weather Narrative

These are all for profit businesses that I personally now the operators of. Please look this over, thanks Mauionline (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the cheapo here. Why did you revert my edit on Lego Stunt Rally? It was a perfectly good edit. There was no need to revert it and it constructively built on the article.

--The cheapo (talk) 03:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

okay, i don't see how it's not notable- the character is one of the main characters of the show, and the show is far more notable and popular than other shows that have pages for their main characters, such as 6teen. Jeremie Belpois (talk) 03:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thingg, would you warn this user against vandalism? Special:Contributions/66.9.56.114

All three of his edits were fake. I've not issued a warning in the past, and I'm not sure I am authorized to do so. Must look that up... -- RayBirks (talk) 04:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy drive-by. Warning issued and taken care of.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 04:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to push anything, I just came across these things in a reuters article and thought they were relevant:

"Ban Ki Moon condemned the attack, saying it was "totally unacceptable".^[1]

 +  
 + The attack has been likened to the 2006 Qana airstrike in which 28 unarmed Lebanese were killed.[2] "

Just wondering if there's a particular reason.

CheersJandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the explanation. I won't re-add the thing about Qana but I have put Ban Ki Moon's reaction back in. Jandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 17:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thingg,
I noticed some edits to Star Trek that appeared to be vandalism by IP: 80.195.238.187 recently. I tried to do the undo thing, and tagged as attempt to revert vandalism. Did I do it properly? I noticed when checking back, there seemed to be a bunch of back and forth edits, and it looked like you were taking care of business. I hope my attempt did interfere with your work. Ched (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My page, Manitowoc Cranes, was deleted. Could you please send me the info that was there. I really would like to try and create a new page after some more research, etc. Kkoeppen (talk) 21:12, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring that for me. Let's just hope next time goes a bit better. Kkoeppen (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quite the double-act we had going there! I'm off for a WikiSmokeBreak or something, but I trust you to hold the fort... Happy reverting! haz (talk) 21:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

how was my last edit vandalism, how should it have been edited? i was referring to the in-universe manual of style article... surely you can see the redundancies and irrelvancy of the subject matter while considering the need for real world perspective —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deboinhidef (talk • contribs) 23:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The last edit DID appear to be good faith. You might wish to reconsider the last warning you issued. Your call. --NrDg 04:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well the reason I did it was b/c Anome deleted these two wikipedia pages that are redirected from my homepage that someone from the administration of Wikipedia helped me do. I worked really hard on them, and can you please ask him to re post them back up, because I'm extremely frustrated!

Holidayroad8 (talk) 23:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've already threatened to contact one of the administrators on him for doing that. He hasn't responded back. I really need those pages though and I'm extremely upset that I worked for almost a year on those and have them deleted like that, without them being a problem to everyone else, but one little person goes on there and deletes it like a jerk. I don't know what else to do.

Holidayroad92 (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've temporarily restored User:Holidayroad92/RealityTV, per their request. I'll re-delete it in a few days, as per the original WP:AN/I discussion, but this should give the user in question time enough to save its contents elsewhere. To User:Holidayroad92/Holidayroad8: please read WP:NOT. -- The Anome (talk) 18:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thank you so much for all your help in reverting vandalism on Go Man Go while it was on the main page. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thingg. I saw you reverted edits made by an IP on this page on 7 Jan. A week ago or so I cleaned it up, templated it and posted soft (eg. 1st) warnings to the 2 IP's who were persistently re-inserting their personal tl;dr versions of some alleged mayoral misbehaviours (even though they'd been at it for quite some time, it had slipped under the radar). I was particularly concerned by the WP:BLP issues. As you noticed, IP 204 is now back at it - another warning would be order but as its a shared educational IP I'm not sure how to proceed on this one (and neither am I an admin). Anyway, just thought I'd give some background re. the history of reverts and all. Ta. Plutonium27 (talk) 15:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your good advice, Thingg, I'll keep an eye out (cleared out Watchlist couple days back cos it got Grawped) and take it from there. Ta 2. Plutonium27 (talk) 17:54, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you thihng or watev spelling --Bandita Chinchilla (talk) 20:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thingg, that was just what I needed (how to move an article). Thanks for your help and of course all your contributions. Wow! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanbluegrass (talk • contribs) 20:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You've recently made contributions to the Marc Bureau article. Would you like to add your opinion on the article name itself on the talkpage? Thanks. LarRan (talk) 23:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my edit on Artemis (Software) which now makes the article read as if it were written as a press release by the Owners of the company. It's Saturday night. Have you nothing more interesting to do? Or are you a Versata shareholder?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.97.190 (talk) 01:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

could you be so kind to restore the article? I checked the Wikipedia rules and failed to see what opposed its inclusion. Also I provided additional sources for the relevance of it you just seemed to ignore (you did not comment on it). Here are some more references on this, one from the art department of the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation, the other from a radion station:

http://www.kunstradio.at/INFO/collab.html http://www.fro.at/ars04/participants.html

Both confirm many facts stated in the article.

Also I don't understand why you have entries like these from the same area of interest but oppose to include the Firstfloor Electronix group:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Sch%C3%B6ning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Walter_Peters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USCO

Thanks for your time. Wburma (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found your name at Category:Wikipedia_administrators_who_will_provide_copies_of_deleted_articles. Could you please userfy the old version of Cylon Resurrection ship (before it was recreated as a redirect) for me? I'd like to try to incorporate this information into List_of_miscellaneous_ships_in_Battlestar_Galactica_(2004), provided, of course, that there's significant (and referenced) material for me to salvage. At a minimum, I could work from the established language and find references to back up the claims provided. Thanks in advance! -- smurdah^{[citation needed]} 02:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! :) Your help is greatly appreciated. -- smurdah^{[citation needed]} 02:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Xenocidic#Userbox question. Enjoy! –xeno (talk) 23:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted this edit and warned the user for vandalism. Can you explain how that edit was vandalism? -- IRP ☎ 00:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

..For intervening in State terrorism and State-sponsored terrorism. There are many Single purpose account trolls with Pakistani nationalist persuation who have vanalized these articles against consensus using Unreliable Sources, primarily as a propaganda-retaliation for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. I'm surprised nobody is monitoring these artiles for trolling.72.179.48.138 (talk) 04:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand completely. Perhaps some established editors should watchlist this article to prevent such things from happening again. Doesn't wikipedia have an oprganized peer-review process?72.179.48.138 (talk) 05:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Elicidd (contribs) is back to his edits of State-sponsored terrorism and State Terrorism.72.179.48.138 (talk) 04:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Elicidd is back with a sock puppet, User:GeorgeNotBunglecontribs. Same pattern of edit-warring over State terrorism and State-sponsored terrorism.72.179.45.108 (talk) 05:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're not a familiar face or a participant of the discussions on the 2008–2009_Israel–Gaza_conflict. The addition of the photo was a result of lengthy discussions with the compromise that pictures of victims are okay as long as they were not graphic. I ask that you revert your edit, and use the talk page to make your case. Thanks --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 05:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting, there wasn't a consensus yet, but the photo did meet the conditions set forth by the people who originally opposed the photos of victims, and I rather appreciate that people first discuss what they think shouldn't be there before reverting someone's work. --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think there is any good reason for reverting that edit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.254.92.240 (talk) 05:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spiffing.87.254.92.240 (talk) 06:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been helping fight vandalism inflicted by various IP sockpuppets of the blocked User:Korlzor. You may be interested in a sockpuppetry case I have opened here. Best regards. Tennis expert (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood my posting of 'The Pac-Man Dossier' on the Pac-Man page. The Dossier is referenced (#22) for part of the document, but is pointing in the wrong place in References. I simply wanted to include it as a 'Further Reading' option instead. I have no company nor do I have anything to "sell". I only want people to be able to get to information related to Pac-Man.

Sincerely,

Jamey Pittman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.126.239.201 (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for cleaning up my userpage. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 17:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed that you were the other editor who has reverted the above user's changes to Irene Melikoff. I've reverted them several times and tried several different tactics, discussion, warnings and compromise (going through the source they provided and reincluding the material after reverting), to try and get them to understand that these changes should be discussed, particularly the ones that needlessly remove the stub and completely violate WP:DATE. It's not exactly vandalism, but it is very disruptive editing so I would be uncomfortable with doing a block myself given my involvement... but, by the same token, no amount of compromise or request for discussion seems to be sufficient for this individual to let go of their own version of the page. Any suggestions? Cheers, CP 19:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

r u okay? haven't heard from u in a while... u okay?MidKnightHunter (talk) 21:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, My name is Ian, I am part of Lowkey's management. His mother was born in Baghdad of Iraqi orgin. Please do not edit his page, when i make this correction. Many Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.221.65 (talk) 19:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ta for reverting the vandalism. Tresiden (talk) 19:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is a blatant copyvio. the author has reverted me twice, I don't want it to escalate into an edit war. Can you please delete it? --DFS454 (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you please explain why you deleted external link to www.recessionwatch.net from "global financial crisis of 2008" please?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.50.127.29 (talk) 22:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On January 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anangula Island, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 07:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-- Ejosse1 (talk) 13:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you've seen {{uw-3rr}} before, so I won't post it here. I will say that if you find yourself in a position where you feel it is necessary to revert an editor more than once or twice, you should try consulting our dispute resolution guidelines and enlisting the help of other editors - and if that fails, contact admins via WP:AIV or WP:ANI. Regardless of your motivation, edit-warring is very disruptive and it does nothing to solve the problem. Regards, SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 17:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thingg, since you seem to be aware of the issue alreay, User:167.206.55.215 has just vandlised the Basque people page. Akerbeltz (talk) 17:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

from RENEE SAMUELS to THINGG

you took out my page but you have no idea what importance or significance i may have, do you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.202.31.94 (talk) 19:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thingg,

I created an article on Scalable Network Technologies yesterday and you deleted it. How frustrating. I tried to use an encyclopedic tone and included details similar to the ones on OPNET's page, which is a similar company to SNT. I could use some help from you in revising the page.

What I can do to get it to stick? Your feedback was that a) I'm not defining what SNT does that is noteworthy and/or b) I'm making false claims.

I put a lot of facts up there. If you could give me some feedback as to how I can meet the standards of wikipedia, I'd appreciate it.

Best Regards,

LBrown338 LBrown338 (talk) 19:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This chap has changed the DOB on Jim Davidson (comedian) twice recently with no apparent source (and I'm sure I saw him on the telly before 1989 anyway). Thought you might wish, if not like, to know. Britmax (talk) 17:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thingg. Thanks for blocking Manishwriter.  :) Can you point me to documentation (or the right page) for getting Admin attention for a user that's rapidly escalating up the user-warn levels? I.e., once a user has passed four warnings over a short period of time, where do I go to request an Admin intervene? —  X  S  G  17:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Question answered! Thank you very much for your help! —  X  S  G  18:18, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Please see my comments on the Talk:Ecourier. We worked together to re-write this article a few months ago.Travisb4279 (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment. Some of these are on my watchlist. I don't agree with the reverts, since BCDB is about as reliable as IMDB, and we don't remove external links to that one. Yngvarr (t) (c) 16:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've put an anon block on that user, since it's not only vandalism, and they have been blocked before.jimfbleak (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The Vitus Barbaro hoaxer is back, using the 63.xx variable IP. Take a look at the edit history of Vision Industries Edward321 (talk) 06:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the hoaxer's been rangeblocked for another month [1]. Edward321 (talk) 00:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I placed several ref's on the art. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cloud8a (talk • contribs) 16:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi excuse me but how i can prevent the non ethical and bad manipulation of the page "Luri language" that some users in Persian redirect it to "lori dialects" page that anger luri people.--Kurdevar (talk) 17:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Many thanks for implementing my request for semi-protection on the article. But... having discussed this with another editor, we feel that the edits from other IPs have been valuable enough to warrant allowing their being able to contribute to the article, and that the vandalism edits will be manageable if we keep a closer eye on it. With that in mind, I was wondering if you would now be willing to unprotect it? Sorry to mess you around like this. I should have taken a closer look at the history for the ratio of good edits to bad; I'll certainly do so from now on. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 22:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm somewhat new here on Wikipedia. Looking for someone to adopt me to help with some of the more advanced editing features, policies, and markup language. You can take a look at my user page or the articles I've worked on to get an idea of where I am now. Hope to hear from you soon! GLaDOS (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as how we just changed our portal name, would you mind switching the logo name from Xbox 360 Portal to Xbox Portal. Thanks. BW21.--BlackWatch21 20:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please contact me about the mascot for Salesian High School? This is fun going back and forth with the undo button but it is time to talk about it. My phone number and email are below

Janet

Janet Wilks jwilks@salesian.com 510-234-4433 ex 1204 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.3.155.150 (talk) 19:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A vandal moved the page into a disparaging title, and I can't move it back because the original page still technically exists. What should I do? Wandering Courier (talk) 03:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon, my edits were hilarious! You couldn't just let that Woll Smoth picture slide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrStrangelove95 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I see from your note that this article does not meet the guidelines. I tried to delete the article but was unable. Please delete it for me. I will study Wikipedia rules and regs to see if this information might fit in somewhere. Board of Editors (talk) 03:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey wise guy, on this same page source 65, among others, is a YOUTUBE link! Mines had a NASA Signature at the start of the film. Why don't you go bother the other entries with a youtube source.Sfvace (talk) 04:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm a new user seeking to be adopted. I need help with editing articles, which articles to correctly edit, and how to improve articles. Thanks! Papercutbiology 13:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Papercutbiology (talk • contribs)

I have read through all the required material, and its saying vandalising the page I am trying to edit. I work for Piedmont Virginia Community College, and I am trying toupdate the page with our current information, and it keeps getting denied and even said I was vandalising. Have no idea why becasue all that has been put on there is current information.

please help me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.106.166.60 (talk) 16:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am new to the ways of editing and reporting things on Wikipedia. We are having an issue with a particular person from IP address 72.213.190.7 on the Cascia Hall Preparatory School article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascia_Hall_Preparatory_School

What this person keeps editing on this article is terrible and accusatory toward this educational and religious institution. I noticed on other pages that there were headings on them which stated others cannot edit the article. Would that be possible for our situation? The way the page looks currently, after I edited it, is what the school marketing department wrote and is what we would like to remain on the Cascia Hall Wikipedia page.

I noticed that a couple of Wikipedia administrators, yourself and someone that goes by the username of Edgehead5150, keep changing the school's posting and reverting back to previously edited material, which has inaccurate information also. We would like for it to stay as is, and we would really like to block the person with the IP address: 72.213.190.7, for a period of time, from being able to edit on wikipedia due to vandalism. I have sent them a warning requesting that they do not post such things. They put the comments right back up, but thanks to "Cluebot", the slanderous material was deleted.

Thank you for your help! mnorvell —Preceding unsigned comment added by MNorvell (talk • contribs) 18:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fam. it wsant vandlizm it was chekin da speelin. dat is al it was fam. (Nayfam (talk) 17:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Why is it that many articles on Wikipedia are slanted towards socialist or so-called "progressive" views yet when I attempt to balance an article with the other side of the story my edits are constantly reverted? Is Wikipedia really that slanted to the left? Or is it just the agenda of certain administrators and "Vandal-stoppers" shining through? As a point of fact I rarely delete others contributions, even if I disagree strongly with the author. The fact is also that ACORN is a partisan organization which commits vote fraud for them and right now the democrats are trying to give them over $2 billion in their economic stimulus to reward their efforts. Please tell me what is false or misleading about my edit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.118.52 (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was confused by this edit. As I read your previous edit, it read smoothly. but if, by chance you really do mean to include the words "prepare to stand by", then I think that there still remains a conjugation error. Unschool 20:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - i see that you have removed some references I included in the Veganism entry on hemp oil. I'm quite new to Wikipedia so would appreciate it if you could let me know why it was taken down- I thought they were quite relevant. Many thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.127.222 (talk) 14:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I am currently trying to get Actano Rplan restored (http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=ACTANO_RPlan_%28deleted_23_Jun_2008_at_06:29%29). I am new to wikipedia, other then using it as a reference. I have been researching why it was deleted and I still wasn't real clear I know it had something to do with notability. I would appreciate if you could restore the page. Additionally, I would appreciate any guidance you can give to have the page better conform to the guidelines. Thanks alot Jasonfilmfan (talk) 20:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the copyedit and advice, I really appreciate it :D  GARDEN  20:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I heard/saw Kevin was in And the Wiener is.... My memory might be a bit hazy but that's what I think. I've only been watching reruns on TBS. That's my guess. Dropping you from somewhere, 66.231.12.116 (talk) 16:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Hey Thingg - just a note: You may want to check your HG bot. You reverted vandalism to Meat Loaf and your bot reverted your edit back to the vandalized version.

Best regards! --Manway (talk) 17:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thingg

As I understand it, you have deleted the entry I made: Dorset Bach Cantata Club on the grounds of blatant copyright infringement.

I really don't understand. All the facts in question (I'm pretty certain) are true, and from first hand experience. I do not believe any person would consider that they had been demeaned in any way.

If it is the case, could you please explain what the infringement is?

RussellXPD (talk) 08:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Russell Telfer RussellXPD (talk) 08:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't finished my edit, I had saved it so as to prevent it being lost because my internet crashes. The edit I was going to make was a common sense one. Much happens in sport and consequently it is inocorrect to refer to the last 26 years as the modern era. On the article in question, a huge transition took place in 1995, making the sport professional. Having two distinct sporting set-ups in the history of the game means it makes no sense to have an encylopedia entry that merges the two together under the same generic banner. The area of the article I was editing is poorly written, lacks citations and accuracy. If you want to make the changes, go ahead. I had no idea a New Yorker could be an expert on Welsh Rugby. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.127.53 (talk) 16:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thingg, I am not a wiki member but I was curious... How did you end up fixing the Wheel and Axel page so fast? You completely took away my good deed for the day feeling. Well I guess you edit this 'suff all the time. Thanks!

131.231.185.42 (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Me[reply]

Hey, I'm not if I've got this right, but it looks like I actually revised YOUR post for Worst Week? Meaning you're the original poster?

Either way...I made the edit because Worst Week has not been canceled. The first season was only ordered for 13 episodes, and they pushed it to 15. The season is simply over. Rather than airing re-runs, they're giving Rules of Engagement new episodes. Basically, Worst Week and Rules of Engagement are splitting the season's time slot.

The source sited for said information (that the show was cancelled) is simply a link to the new schedule. Just because the season is over, and another show is airing in its time slot, doesn't mean the show has been canceled. There's no reason to bum out fans of the show over something that's not even true.

Until an official announcement has been made, this information (of cancellation) should be removed. Especially considering the source does nothing to confirm it has indeed been canceled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dredg XI (talk • contribs) 17:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more quick qustion Thingg. Do you get some type of alarm that I made an edit? And if you did how come you didn't catch the other guy's edit? Just out of curiousity and no offence. Just trying to understand how the wiki community works! I'm and engineer that uses wiki at work that's why I am so curious! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.231.185.42 (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please check Second Amendment discussion page to confirm accusation of bias in the author of deleted material. He received $400,000 from gun control advocacy group prior to writting a book in favor of gun control. That is the book currently cited in the article. Check links provided in the discussion page for Confirmation. Also notice long wait from time of accusation to time material was removed supporting good faith efforts to satisfy objection to the removal. Also notice all objections were in bad faith, one from a user who later hacked aother bias issue to hide additional ties from this author to that gun control advocacy group and the other objection being plainy bogus.

Also check the other minor edit backup link to confirm case was not Second Amendment. By stating that the objection on Second Amendment grounds was "resrved" and therefore not "made" the judge states that he is not dealng with it.

Upon confirmation please revert your reversions.141.154.110.173 (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re your edit to Submarine, I wonder what your source is for saying 18th? Most other sources seem to say 17th. David Biddulph (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thingg, your reversion of my edit may have jumped the gun. That article has debated multiple times the relevance of the Hill lawsuit and its worthiness of inclusion in the main article. The consensus amongst the editors so far has been to wait until the court makes a decision and then re-evaluate. What you have re-inserted into the aritcle is a one-sided presentation of that suit and, indeed, the suit may not be relevant enough to include in the article in the first place (something being discussed on the discussion page). There was a new contributor to the article today who essentially re-inserted the disputed text. I moved that text back to the discussion page and encouraged that user review the existing debate on the discussion page. I've also started a new discussion of the topic on that page. By reverting my edit, I think you may have trumped the existing consensus amongst the editors of that article (i.e. you have re-inserted controversial text that the editors have chosen to leave on the discussion page until the court has rendered its decision). I ask you to undo your revert if you think it's appropriate. Thanks.Nowthenews (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your reply but I don't feel comfortable undoing your reversion of my edit. I would like to ask you to undo your program's reversion. The original sequence here was: (1) Reboot reinserted a controversial topic that has been discussed on the discussion page (and the consensus is to leave it out of the main article for now), (2) I moved the text to the discussion page, (3) your program reverted my edit and thereby reinserted the controversial text back into the main article. I understand you don't want to get involved but if your program has already gotten involved, I think the only way to get uninvolved is for you to undo your program's last move. I would do it but I have already been chastised by your program once. Thanks.Nowthenews (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be a pain in the tuckus but the reversion I'm talking about is here [2]. It looks like it was made by you. It has left the current version of the article with the disputed text.Nowthenews (talk) 20:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Tinted Windows page - the band is a high-profile new act of A-class musicians, so I don't see any reasons for the article being non-important. It's probably a lot more important than yet another alias, because it was published in Billboard, and the first show is schelduled in march, so requests to Tinted Windows will increase over the time new information appear. I don't see any reasons why people should be redirected to Window film, then click "other uses" to get to Tinted Windows (band) instead of just getting to the band directly, because Window film page can obviously cope without yet another alias. I can create other uses link to Window film on the band's page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hajal (talk • contribs) 20:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is going on with this whole situation i am using huggles and it keeps picking up on it.This is kind of weird..Hopefully we can resolve this soon.

Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me Guestbook Sandbox} 21:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your participation in the People to People Student Ambassador Program article, but don't understand why you deleted User:Nowthenews comments from the talk page. I restored them. If there is a reason I'm unware of (I'm assuming good faith despite the young account with very spartan contributions outside the immediate topic, so it is possible you know something I don't), then please let me know. Reboot (talk) 21:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

they are reverting edits to People_to_People_Student_Ambassador_Program from an IP address owned by them:

whois 66.162.130.202

... rwhois V-1.5:003AB6:00 rwhois.twtelecom.net (rwhois_ngd v0.9.0 by James Sella) network:Class-Name:network network:ID:433b67a4-ca6e-11db-a90f-0015c5e45005 network:Auth-Area:66.162.0.0/16 network:Network-Name:Ambassador-Programs-Inc-66-162-130-200 network:IP-Network:66.162.130.200/29 network:Organization;I:891cda86-20e1-11dc-9f8b-0015c5e45005 network:Org-Name:Ambassador Programs Inc network:Street-Address:2001 S Flint Rd network:City:Spokane network:State:WA network:Postal-Code:99224 network:Country-Code:us network:Phone:none network:Admin-Contact;I:none network:Tech-Contact;I:none network:Abuse-Contact;I:abuse@twtelecom.net network:Updated:20070917020949000

I asked them to stop due to their COI.

Reboot (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm getting kind of suspicious after this as the editors whom seem to have the biggest problems with the mention of that content all have newer accounts with most of their edits to that page. It may become necessary to semi-protect the page and let it sort itself out. Will advise. Thanks again. Reboot (talk) 23:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Ahhhh! You almost always beat me to undoing!!Abce2 (talk) 00:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Abce2[reply]

Hi. Why did you revert 75.154.99.248 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? He has three vandalism warnings but I don't see any vandalism.  Doulos Christos ♥ talk  03:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still hoping for a reply.

Wikipedia says, in respect of copyright:

" ... if the contributor was in fact the author of the text, then even if it is published elsewhere under different terms, they have the right to post it here under the GFDL – the text may still be unsuitable for Wikipedia for another reason, but it is not a copyright violation. Text that can be found elsewhere on the Web that was in fact copied from Wikipedia in the first place is also not a copyright violation – at least not on Wikipedia's part. In both of these cases, it is a good idea to make a note of the situation on the discussion page."

I still don't know why I have been done for copyright violation bearing in mind my only sources were Wikipedia itself and my own web writings - and neither were copied directly.

RussellXPD RussellXPD (talk) 15:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art is coming to Pittsburgh this Sunday, 1-2 PM. See details.--Pharos (talk) 21:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I previously turned down a speedy deletion of Lini Simmons, but the tag was reapplied (with the edit comment of "then why does db-hoax exist?" and you just deleted it a few minutes ago. It may have been a hoax, but it was not clearly one, and so it shouldn't have been deleted under G3. Please note Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Non-criteria and Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 31#G3 and hoaxes, is it always "vandalism"?

This isn't really to get on your case, but I wanted to explain the situation to the tagger who reverted me when I turned down the speedy, and since you deleted the article, it will probably reinforce that editor's feeling that I was wrong. Dekimasuよ! 04:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I placed a prod on the article. Dekimasuよ! 05:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, message received, Thingg

I need to find out more about how Wikipedia works first.

RussellXPD RussellXPD (talk) 14:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why: Becuse i am working on a novel and i need to copy and paste this part to my other computer it is a viatal part of my novel so please, i beg you. may you un delete the article.

I typed up the peice on a diffrent computer in collage (which i don't go to anymore) and i put it on here three so i could transfer (i must of forgott about it) it over. So once agian my you un delete my article i would be very greatful.

              Thank you. - Kie250.

Kie250 (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

how was what i added vandalism?????

it was a statment to say, they have branches outside brasil....

are you on a power trip?

How can someone get away with so much vandalism for so long with such light warnings? I'm not mad at you or anything, just puzzled. This vandal got away with a serious amount vandalism before I gave out their first block! I found him/her vandalizing NASCAR drivers pages by changing their birth year. Royalbroil 18:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guessed it might be an automation issue. Is there a place to report examples like this so that programs can be improved? I ask assume that the programmers actually would like to study examples like this. This vandal made a particularly bold vandalism when the changed NASCAR driver Joey Logano from a well-known 18 years old to 41 years old! Royalbroil 23:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thingg,

Thanks for restoring the article on Mo-Do some time ago. Could you please also restore the talk page? Thanks again, Korg (talk) 19:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Korg (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can you figure out how to properly right-justify the image at User talk:Xeno/header. just like old times. =) no rush. cheers, –xeno (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ah, you rock. =) –xeno (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Thingg, belated post holiday thanks for your support in my RFA which was successful. I really appreciate your succinct but generous support and will try to live up to it. The full nonpersonalised Oscar acceptance speech version of my Thankspam is here, its best appreciated by reading out loud in the style of Ms Winslet :-) WereSpielChequers 23:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the article about Sara Stites is relevant and should remain in Wikipedia. I have not finished adding all references or publications, but she is a prominent Miami artist nonetheless. Another artist entry you could compare Sara Stites' entry to is COOPER. Sara Stites has been profiled by many of the same sites that appear under "External links" in COOPER's Wikipedia entry and has also a long list of exhibitions (as noted here). A quick Google search for "Sara Stites" artist will reveal that she is relatively notable. Please reconsider the deletion of Sara Stites' entry, or explain why you think it she is not a notable person.
Thank you for understanding.
Alorkoi (talk) 04:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reconsidering. May I ask why you decided to become a Wikipedia admin? Alorkoi (talk) 04:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a website to the infobox? I am using the artist infobox template, so apparently website is not a recognized attribute. Here is the edit page. Thanks for your help. Alorkoi (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please restore Sitebrand? This article did not meet A7 because at the time of the deletion, it had one reliable source. There are more sources on Google, so I think that this company passes WP:CORP. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone makes mistakes. Thanks for restoring the page! Cunard (talk) 01:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you deleted the Kendall Davis page.Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.25.243.137 (talk) 16:50, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have just learned that you have deleted a page I created 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_Axis' with the following -
03:58, 27 February 2009 Thingg (talk | contribs) deleted "Nerve Axis" ‎ (Speedy deleted per CSD A7, was an article about a club that didn't assert the importance or significance of the subject. (TW))

I have read the CSD #A7 for speedy deletion and can contest that this page is significant for the following reasons

Most renowned, most awarded Amiga software group in the Uk, who achieved a new standard in short film demonstration technology. Never before had a Uk group beaten off European competition (Twice!) with such a consummate landslide victory in Helsinki, Finland.
I have checked for other Amiga software groups (example - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Lotus) on Wiki and find their pages are still intact, as are the demo party pages. So could you please further an explanation as to why this particular group has been removed?

--DarrellAdley (talk) 01:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are, I could use some help. My second day here (WP) I got blocked for an edit war, and although that's over I'm still having trouble dealing with that page. I could use some guidance. Thanks. --Lhakthong (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thingg,

I found you via your Wikipedia profile. I need to interview a Computer Systems Analyst for a book project. The book series is called "Finding New Career" and this is for Volume 5: IT Careers. It does not matter if you haven't changed careers as readers will be much more focused on the answers to q's 3 & 4 than q's 1 & 2. (& Q's 1 & 2 can be modified to fit your experience.) The volume is designed to help people who are moving into the IT world and the interviews provide a useful first-person account from the trenches, so to speak. There are only 4 questions, and the interview is limited to 450 words, so it shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to tap out answers.

1) What were you doing before you decided to change careers? 2) Why did you change your career? 3) How did you make the transition? 4) What are the keys to success in your new career?

I don't yet know if you have the time or inclination to answer, but thank you just for reading this far!

Amanda Kirk rowena28@earthlink.net

keeps cropping up on my watchlist and being speedily deleted - should it be salted perhaps? pablo_hablo. 08:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- I put a speedy on Brendan Waller and you have deleted the talk page but the article remains. Is there a problem with a speedy on the article? Cheers,  florrie  12:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thingg,

I have been trying to set up a wikipedia page for The Lustkillers, but it keeps getting deleted. I do think that it is relevant because there are so many members of this band that have been in prominent other bands... like the Lords of the New Church, Urge Overkill and Deadbolt (all of which also have wikipedia pages).

Can you please tell me specifically what I need to include so that I can make this page? I have been trying to follow the guidelines and set it up like other band pages I've seen (history, members, discography). This is all a little confusing to me.

Thanks for your help! Jocelyn Tsai

Serialkitten (talk) 18:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to query which part of the content of deleted page OPEN CHANNEL was not appropriate. The following page for another institution is similar in content http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Film_Television_and_Radio_School - and OPEN CHANNEL is a not-for-profit organisation, not a company. Thank you. film_report@yahoo.com.au Open channel09 (talk) 20:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maykovich (talk · contribs) Needs to be blocked he has created that page and contiunes to remove the tag and is sock puppeting with about 5 other accounts and IPs. [3] Kyle1278 (talk) 03:57, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just noticed that you deleted my page on the Political Database of the Americas. I'm part of the PDBA staff and this was my first Wikipedia page. Can we put this back up with the materials donated since I own the web site? Also, I would have appreciated the opportunity to copy the source code before this site was deleted. Please contact me at mikeinboulder@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdc53 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt Me please I am new to wikipedia & very much interested in field of electronics and technology. I have chosen you because your interests seems to be same as mine .. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pannitan (talk • contribs) 18:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Thingg,

Still hoping to have The LustKillers page undeleted here at wikipedia under the fact The Lords of the New Church have a wiki page. The LustKillers singer Adam Becvare replaced the late punk icon Stiv Bators in Lords of the New Church.

Thank YOU! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.0.163 (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Admin-

Please take a look at the edits made by this user:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Changaslew

That jerk needs to go! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.234.13 (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the Healthgrades page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.230.134.9 (talk) 05:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you're name on the Pittsburgh Meetup page. Fell free to drop me a note if anything gets going on that. I'd love to meet a couple of you young fellas. Take care. — Ched :  Yes?   : ©  12:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Thingg. I was just reading through your userpage .. love humor .. anyway: Looks like a long drive for you to do a Pgh meetup. Be nice if someone did get one going though. NY would be longer than I'd go for one, but if you're ever in town - let me know. Best laugh in a while: I saw that one Admin (sub)-page of Kmweber ... I LOST it!!! I swear, if the day ever comes that I'm in RfA, I'll claim the rite to IAR and put that expand tag above the support section. Absolutely priceless!!! — Ched :  Yes?   : ©  15:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I'm a student of Management from Anna University in India. I got transfered from the other place to Chennai, where the University Learning Centre is Academy of Innovative Concepts. I had to google out several times before I confirm that this is gonna help out. I felt that a few words about in wikipedia gives more sense as information neutrality can be obtained only by these citations. This is very much like "Durham University Department of Computer Science". I hope now you understand better things and support my initiative.

219.64.116.178 (talk) 19:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC) Venkat[reply]

Hi, I noticed you just deleted the page I was creating about a student group at Dartmouth. I was amazed at how quickly the page was critiqued, I really didn't even have enough time to get up the information that would suggest that the group is "notable" by wikipedia's standards, namely that we've received media attention from the New York Times, ABC news, the Huffington Post and others. Besides that, the group is recognized and supported by Dartmouth and the Thayer School of Engineering as a legitimate educational body. I'll be finishing the article with this information (in an unbiased as possible manner) and reposting it. I'd appreciate your input on it, since I think you'll find that the organization is certainly as significant as a lot of other trivial things on wikipedia.

Thanks, and no hard feelings.

-Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelwood10 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Thingg. Nice work blocking those bad account names. You missed one, though ;) ~ Troy (talk) 02:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...and I missed another. Could you handle those? Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 02:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I'm pretty sure they were globally blocked, but I reblocked them to be sure. Thanks for letting me know about them. :) Thingg^⊕⊗ 02:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I've checked one of them and a steward must've dealt with it because the account was "locked and hidden". I will assume that the other 6 accounts that I found in the farm were dealt with the same way. Cheers! ~ Troy (talk) 02:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thingg,

it's been a while since I checked my Wikipedia page. However, I have found that you reverted my edit on the article of "Brief Candles", the book by Aldous Huxley. Please excuse the polemic, but obviously you haven't read Macbeth in school, otherwise you'd know that I was perfectly right in correcting the quote of Shakespeare, which was - and is - still wrong. While I am new to Wikipedia, please forgive that I didn't enter a summary of the changes, yet you should maybe have put a little more thought into it, before reverting my edit. It doesn't necessarily raise one's own motivation for providing decent edits.

Cheers 137.226.215.93 (talk) 20:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

my mistake. i tryied to remake it. im trying to follow the rules here carfeully.

-Grunty14

Hey, Thingg! Remember me? I was wondering if you have the time to do a little admin coaching?--It's me...Sallicio!^{${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$} 00:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thingg. The image File:Battlechart.gif is property of IGN Entertainment, Inc., as evidenced by the "IGNguides.com" watermark down the right side of the image. The image was taken from this page on IGN's website by a user named Permethius. He even went as far as to claim he created it himself. That's why I marked it for deletion. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 05:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It got deleted, that's the important thing. Cheers. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 23:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thingg, you have every right to be mad at me for what I did to you and the other wikipedia users. because it was so wrong. BUT if you had have taken the time you would have seen that most of the articles were true and not made up stories.I hope we can patch things up.

Sincerly,

Casesamong! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.25.243.137 (talk) 18:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hofstra logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kalel2007 (talk) 19:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you just deleted File:FrancisKeough.jpg and File:Emre Belozoglu.jpg which I had tagged with CSD F9 but I just realized that F9 is not for images where the uploader asserts they are public domain. Could you double check they aren't and if they are restore them? I tagged them after finding them listed at PUF and doing a Google Images search for them. Am I correct in that images under such claim of PD (that can not be found on a page where they are clearly listed to be under copyright) should always be taken to PUF instead of F9ed? (Which could explain why they were there in the first place). Should I also leave PUF-listed-images alone unless I happen to come over a page where it explicitly say it's copyrighted even when they're not asserted to be PD? Sorry for possibly messing up -.- Cheers, --aktsu ^(t / c) 14:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would "obviously not the case" in those instances be the "©BBCMMIX" and "©2009 Archdiocese of Baltimore" notice on the two URLs I provided? I'm asking because it's not really a stretch to think that image of Keough is PD but that the webmaster is slapping copyright notices on every page. Do we assume it isn't really PD as claimed in such cases (PD-self-tag on image, copyright claim on website) unless there's a credible assertion in the image description that it is actually PD? In other words, it's OK to F9 because someone claims copyright while there's no credible evidence to the contrary? I'm just making sure because "obviously not the case" could also mean "unless the image has a huge Image copyrighted to ... disclaimer directly under it"... --aktsu ^(t / c) 15:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...for reverting vandalism on my user page! :) --Susan118 (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I found vandalism that I thought was hilarious and I just had to show another editor. I warn you in advance, it may be offensive.

[4] --The Legendary Sky Attacker 07:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CPS 2000.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:CPS 2000.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:CPS 2000.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 10:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]