User talk:Xcentaur/Archive 7

“ There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda - Anon ”

Images

hmmm... m planning to work on the images section now.. cleanup and all, its got a BIG backlog, and even if i was superfast, i cant clear the entire thing because of copyright issues and stuff... anyways, how was CET? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberoidx (talk • contribs)

Physics ruined me... chem was good, maths got a bit screwy... howd yours go? xC | ☎ 05:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

lol, ditto I just wish i'm in IIT now... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberoidx (talk • contribs)

LOL, sure you're gettin in? I'm clearing maths for sure, chem probably too... but physics is the bane of my existence... physics has been khafaa with me for way too long .... :P xC | ☎ 05:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Remember that user who's page i had ripped ? She's come back again and changed my pages, calling adding credits to herself a minor fix. I had already given her credits on the template using the noinclude tag, but she prefers to tell everyone that i have ripped the page, when i asked her to stop doing it, she added a section to her userpage called People who have copied my theme and added my name to it. Dont know if that is considered as an attack. I managed to save entire convo (which is humourous at times, see Real96 Archives and comment here, i'll check back :) CyberoidX 14:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Look, you're wasting time. You are here to improve an encyclopedia. This is not a social networking site. Your reputation as an editor will not be established by having a snazzy userpage and zilch to show for productive edits.

Clearly this isnt an editor who lets little scratches go. If its so much of an issue, just empty out your page, put an under construction sign and redesign. Be original, be creative, be individualistic. Let this nonsense over two bits of Wiki Code go.

Spend your time on editing mainspace, not userspace, bro. Its not worth the trouble. Cheers! xC | ☎ 16:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

its all fixed now, it was just the fact that someone comes to my page and credits herself happily, and repeatedly which made me hyper, anyways, we managed to come to a solution, or so i think :) CyberoidX 05:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Good for you. Tell me, which pages are you working on now? Or are you working on the image backlog? xC | ☎ 09:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcoming Newbies, vandal warnings, Checking Newbie edits, Speedy'ing useless New pages, and converting bar graphs to svg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberoidx (talk • contribs)

hi

editor was referring to a faulty tag on his talk page, which I removed and dropped a note explaining that

hi, i got a message from you. thanks for doing the needful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ab 18 (talk • contribs)

Anytime. Happy editing! xC | ☎ 14:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

I wanted to say thanks for the kind words about the essay on my user page. It's good to know that someone else feels the way I do about this place -- enormous, sprawling, and often dysfunctional, and yet overall, it's working. Keep fighting the good fight! — Catherine\^talk 19:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Isn't pay important? I have a reference for Rani's salary for one movie but shshsh wouldn't let me put it in. I just have it put like in Julia Roberts page. There's no comparison or approximation. There's nothing written about highest-paid or compared to any other actress. It's just a number. There's nothing wrong with that, right? But shshsh just thinks it's wrong for no apparent reason, please talk to him. It just says she was paid this amount of money for one particular movie. There's nothing wrong with that. Thanks. -shez_15

There is a problem, actually. Firstly, these apparent facts aren't confirmed by the actress' manager or the actress herself, and are mainly hearsay or well-educated guesses. Neither is appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Secondly, there is no requirement to list how much she got for doing a particular movie. Thirdly, the Julia Roberts article has rubbish about friendships in the lead para, and is wholly unsourced. The article isn't at all a template for anything we should work towards. Only FA level articles should be considered guidance on what to have and what not to have in a respectable filmbio.

Regards,xC | ☎ 07:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of tags

REGARDING INTENTIONAL REMOVAL OF TAG, IT HAS NOT DONE INTENTIONALLY. SORRY FOR THAT.