User talk:Spitfire/Archive 1

“ Civility, Maturity, Responsibility ”

RE: IM GAY

so i hear your a big faggot who likes big dicks in the butt

Response to your Question

BlackPearl14 would like to let you know that there is a new response to your last message on the Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl Talk Page under "Assuming Good Faith." Please read immediately. Thank you. (bot) BlackPearl14^{Pirate Lord-ess} 00:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Re

I've removed the entire debate and posted a note to cover your issue on "new users." Let me know if there's anything else that appears to be...wrong. BlackPearl14^{Pirate Lord-ess} 17:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Will do Theterribletwins1111 (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Your changes in Severus Snape

Regarding your recent edit [1] to Severus Snape, you changed:

Rowling likewise described the young Snape as insecure and vulnerable: "Given his time over again [Snape] would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.[...] [H]e was so blinded by his attraction to the dark side he thought [Lily] would find him impressive if he became a real Death Eater."

to

Rowling likewise described the young Snape as insecure and vulnerable: "Given his time over again Snape would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.[...] He was so blinded by his attraction to the dark side he thought Lily would find him impressive if he became a real Death Eater."

I've reverted the change. The use of single brackets in a quote from someone or some writing indicates modifications to the original text. Rowling did not actually say the name "Snape", but rather said "he", which in the context of the original citation made sense; however, it would be difficult to parse out of context. This is remedied by replacing the "he" with "Snape", but single brackets are used to indicate the modification. Likewise, "[...]" indicates omissions, and "[H]e" indicates that the "H" was not capital in the original (because we are picking up the sentence halfway through). "[Lily]" is in brackets because, again, Rowling did not say "Lily" but rather said "she", and this is modified to make it easier to read in the Snape page. By removing the brackets and modifying the text, you are essentially falsifying the quote. Please be careful when editing a direct quote, and be mindful of the usual style rules for quoting, which include the use of single brackets. Magidin (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

opps Sorry that was pretty careless of me, I thought some one was trying to put some links in it, sorry again Theterribletwins1111 (talk) 16:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem! Now you know. Magidin (talk) 16:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

"Nonsense" as a CSD

I have declined a couple of your speedies, as I do not believe that they constituted "nonsense", as you asserted (one was an A7 though and dealt with accordingly). Please read Wikipedia:Patent nonsense - if it doesn't meet the first two criteria it isn't nonsense in the Wikipedia sense and is not eligible for deletion under CSD G1. Any questions, please ask on my talk page. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC).

No worries, many of the articles you've tagged have been quite poor and deletable under another criterion, and you've also identified a lot of articles that have severe problems, which are now tagged and will be dealt with, so good work there! You may wish to consider installing Twinkle, as it has a pretty nifty function which gives you a button that tags articles with the speedy templates automatically, without you having to go in and manually add them. It's also got some other neat features - I use it myself and it really helps on new page patrol! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC).

Thanks but...

When my User Talk page was replaced with an offsensive message, you tagged it with {{db-attack}}. I do appreciate your efforts against vandalism, but I feel that in this case a revert would have been more effective. Regards, SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 13:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

what are you doing

what are you doing to my userpage?

• Sign your comments and stop those redirects or you will be blocked... Theterribletwins1111 (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I can redirect to my normally used user-accounts if I wish, moron. You're not an admin or anything. You havent made many contributions. Who are you to say anything? --!!Wawawiwa!! (talk) 11:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Related to the above, and per your thanks on my talk page - no worries mate, glad to be of service. I note that !!Wawawiwa!! is now indefinitely blocked. Cheers,  This flag once was red  11:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Zoe Stones

No problem. Done. _Gb^T/c 12:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion warnings

Hi - I notice that your recent edit to User talk:Laurarussell123 was to revert an edit that blanked the page. Please bear in mind that users are more than welcome to remove messages (including speedy deletion warnings) from their own user pages (see WP:TALK). I appreciate your willingness to positively contribute to Wikipedia, but reinstating these messages is not necessary. Booglamay (talk) - 12:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

And your recent addition of a warning template is both invalid and unnecessary - generally speaking, "content" or "templates" do not constitute user talk page information. Ideally, the user involved would archive their talk page, but deletion of content on the page is more than acceptable. Looking at the other messages on your page, it seems you might be a little overzealous with repremanding other editors. I suggest you take a calming period to review our policies and guidelines. Booglamay (talk) - 12:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I suppose that was rather justified! I hadn't noticed that, and for that I'll apologise. I'm aware that there are amounts of pressure across Wikipedia (specifically on new page patrol, so don't let anything put you off. You've obviously noticed the amount of crap that's put on here - some of it good faith (people genuinely believing there should be an article on something) and also a lot of defamatory content. THe same applies to recent changes. I really don't want to come across as "telling you off" - I'm not telling you off, and I don't have the authority to do so. I appreciate that all your contributions are made in good faith and for that I can do nothing but commend you - but not all editors are here to help the community and so that must be beared in mind. Keep up the good and positive work, and I'm sure I'll come across you again! Booglamay (talk) - 12:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Biting

Hello and thanks for helping with the new pages, but this was not vandlism. In fact it would qualify for CSD#A7 but at this point I found it more important to assure the new user that he didn't do anything wrong. Looking around and above, please tell your twin to slow down. --Tikiwont (talk) 12:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• By that do you mean him to tell me to slow down? - Kingpin13 (talk) 12:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

It may not be necessary to apologize yourself another time but do as you see fit. The rest was a lame pun on your user name in the sense that the part that is obviously listening and willing to learn somehow reigns in the side that appears somewhat zealous. Together you can achieve a lot here and elsewhere. But if you also have a Wiki or RL twin...--Tikiwont (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Re my talk page

Interesting series of edits going on there! The other editor seems to have been indefed, but if you need page protection in the future drop me another note (or ask at WP:RFPP). All the best, EyeSerene^talk 16:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: heh,

Which ones were you looking for? I can give you the code for them if you want. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:23, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, you can just put {{User:J.delanoy/coconut}} on your userpage. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Leonardo Dias

POr que vc apagou o que eu escrvi no artigo "Leonardo Dias"? Se vc não conhece fique na sua!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgegurgelpps (talk • contribs)

Waubonsie

Why Must You Delete My Message About Beating Waubonsie Tonight???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by PandasKicks (talk • contribs) 18:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

i dont believe it was rude.... just showin some school spirit! —Preceding unsigned comment added by PandasKicks (talk • contribs) 20:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

did i get my editing rights taken... im trying to write something on the new york yankees? dont worry, its fit for wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PandasKicks (talk • contribs) 18:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The postman always rings once

I used to have a message like that, but I got warned WP dislikes faux messages so close to real WP ones. Thanks, tho. TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 18:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Barnstars 'R' U

		The Hidden Page Barnstar
		I award you one for finding Trekphiler's page for people who always think that "new message" bar is real. Aren't you glad you checked your mail? TREKphiler hit me ♠ 01:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC) (A bit belated... I'm behind on my watchlist.)

Thanks but...

Thanks for doing that, but that page was intentionally created as we are testing a use of the anti-spam bots to detecting social security numbers. (The bots purposely don't check userspace edits as it causes too much load on the bots). —— nixeagle 16:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

No biggie, the test is already done. The page will not need to be re-created :). The problem we had was the bots that are doing this have to watch so many edits it overloads the connection, so we are limited to monitoring only mainspace, which is why I created that article to see if the change we made to monitor for social security numbers being added (always a bad thing) worked. —— nixeagle 16:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

It was not personal attack. He really is gay. If you meant it. Jarkko84 (talk) 19:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

http://www.glbtq.com/arts/butler_d.html Jarkko84 (talk) 19:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008

Hello. I noticed today that you were doing newpages patrolling but are not marking some of the pages you visit as patrolled. Though this is not mandatory in any way, and should not be done for all newpages, where appropriate it keeps your fellow patrollers from wasting time reviewing the same page multiple times. In any event, keep up the good work! Thanks. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

(continued here) Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Why did you post my speedy deletion request on my talk page -Atosecond (talk) 08:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I didn't create the page. I just tagged it for speedy deletion. A quick check of the page history would've revealed this. -Atosecond (talk) 02:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I can only find the deletion log and your tagging it as patrolled. Nothing else. But I know I didn't create it. I don't remember who did. I don't know if there is a way to see all the pages I've created but I know it won't be on there. -Atosecond (talk) 03:59, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I know this is a closed issue, but: Interestingly, I have seen this happen to me. I was scanning along with Huggle, found a truly ridiculous new page, went in, flagged it for speedy deletion... and then went to check the log to be sure the page was flagged... and my flag for speedy deletion showed as the creating edit. sinneed (talk) 18:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Criteria

Hi! I noticed that you have been doing some speedy deletion tagging. I just wanted to give you a heads up that category G1 does not include material that is not in English, such as 实验设计. In the future, a {{translate}} tag may be a better idea. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 13:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Alice Cullen (Twilight Character)

Hi, I had a try at fixing this, besties, --RedKiteUK (talk) 17:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

It looks like…

…you beat me to fixing “vandalismk”. :D I'm patrolling in between math problems right now, and thought I'd pop in and say hello, as I see that you are also patrolling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellito (talk • contribs)

Whoops, looks like I forgot to sign, doesn't it? Perhaps we're both sleepy, or preoccupied, or maybe we have feijoada for brains. Bellito, master of all things Mac-related (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, looks like an admin got that one now. Some of these are really stupid pages, but others are kind of funny. I liked the potato controversy one, did you see it? Bellito, master of all things Mac-related (talk) 19:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I do have to admit, that edit to “Binder”, replacing it with “hurray for the collapse of civilisation” is so random and funny, where do they come up with this stuff anyway? And thanks for reverting that, I'll add a box later. Bellito, master of all things Mac-related (talk) 19:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

It's great that the answer is so matter-of-fact and serious. Sort of like when people write pages that say "He is the coolest person in the world, hi gary" or whatever, and then along comes a template, stating that the article is about a non-notable person, as if that's just the most ordinary thing ever. You just have to love that. Bellito, master of all things Mac-related (talk) 19:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Right then, you have a nice day/night/sleep/wake or whatever it is, and hopefully you'll wake up to find your brains instead of feijoada. XD Bellito, master of all things Mac-related (talk) 19:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For the redirect. I realized as soon as I had done that! I was racing to get the info to where it needs to be! He, he! Thanks again and Happy editing. Andy (talk) 16:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I did it again! Sorry you have to redirect it! And a Happy New Year to you aswell. Andy (talk) 17:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Samuel Robbins

The post on the Samuel Robbins Talk Page is 24.36.182.58's only edit. It might be a humorous comment by an otherwise non-editing Wikipedia user who read "Victory" and wondered what was actually known about Robbins. Now that I think about it, I wouldn't object to keeping the article for that reason alone. Besides, imagine AfD-ing every article about some third-rate athlete or pop musician whose claim to fame is trivial next to having fought at Trafalgar.  TAKIN' NAMES ✰ 16:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Blanked pages

Hello, Spitfire. You have new messages at Darth Panda's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Matthew Hayden

He clearly is one of the greatest Openers of all-time. His 2nd on the all-time list for runs scored as an opener and is the only left-handed opener to score more then 20 Test centuries (only 3 in the past have done so in total). He totally revolutionized the way Opening Batsman is looked in Test Cricket. Ask anyone who played with or against Hayden and they'd tell if that Hayden is one of the best openers of all-time, if not the best. They are more relieable sources then bitter old men from past generations or people who generally dislike Hayden because of his sledging tactics and arrogance. --Aussieicon91 (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Aussieicon91

Ricky Ponting has claimed numerous times that Hayden is the greatest opening batsman ever. He said that at the AB medal & at Hayden's retirement press conference. Steve Waugh aswell and several other players who have played with and against him have said it a number of different tributes to Hayden. --Aussieicon91 (talk) 12:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, it'd be best to put that Hayden is statistically one of the greatest openers to have ever played the game. Which is true. There is no doubt that many would consider Hayden one of the greatest openers ever though. --Aussieicon91 (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Aussieicon91

Undertaker

I just spotted a discussion saying that the were going out, on the talk page. It's probably wrong though. Sorry. RedRooster96 19:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Drat

thanks. i wonder why it's doing that. Dlohcierekim 22:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Forgot to "susbt" Dlohcierekim 22:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) Toxic Zombie

Yes, I noticed just as I did it, but huggle crashed (hate when that happens) ... I was trying to undo that reversion manually when you reverted. Proofreader77 (talk) 06:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Mistaken vandalism Entry

hehe no worries mate. batobatobato (talk) 07:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: プリズ・トランスレート

Well of course I remember you. =P I transliterated the section header into Japanese, put that into a translator and see what happens. Google gave me "I speak Japanese. Please Write a question to the Japanese." Apparently "Write" has become a proper noun. The problem with the way Japanese grammar works is that translators can't always figure out what you mean in certain constructions. Japanese is subject-object-verb, so the phrase 日本語に質問 (literally "Japanese in question", many particles like に here work backwards) gets parsed before きない下さい (literally "ask please", here meaning "please ask"). The translator doesn't go back and fix its mistake in saying "at the Japanese", leading to awkwardness.

…yeah, I tend to be long-winded about things that interest me. I could probably write more if I want to, but I don't want your head to explode– merely to overfill it with things that you probably don't really need to know. ベリット ^話せます 15:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You should have surgery done in Brazil, then the surgeons can eat your brains. ベリット ^話せます 18:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Haunting Ground

Were there a reliable source, I would have added it. However, the cited source says nothing about it being a sequel, and the source in the edit summary isn't reliable. —C.Fred (talk) 05:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

And what is a reliable source? People have provided source after source, but people like you will not accept any of them.PrincessMint (talk) 06:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

A reply

Appearances can be deceiving. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 07:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I had a feeling it was SyberiaWinx, but I was baiting a response to see if she responded in exactly the same way as always. She did. Since we have an editor editing the same articles with the same tone with a female Japanese-pop-culture name, poof. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 07:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Old Catholic Church

Your recent revert was undone because it was originally done by the Bot which assumed that the URL link ending in tripod.com was on the blacklist. It isn't.

tripod.com hosts many web pages: some of them are on the steamier side of life; some of them are actual churches that really exist. But tripod.com also allows people to use a domain name that they select so that tripod.com does not show up in the URL. So a "porn" site can easily hide its identity by using the URL extension ".org", and some of them do. It would be helpful if after several "undo" a real live person actually review the link to make sure it is inappropriate instead of making the assumption based upon a URL extension. I realize that there are millions of additions done everyday and that it is impossible to give each one the attention that it deserves. This alone can be aggravating; couple that with your sarcasm and it creates a very unwelcoming experience to the user of Wikipedia. I also realize that a volunteer is a volunteer.

The link you edited out was no different than the links that you left. Besides the URL, care to share your logic for your assumption that the unoffensive edit was "vandalism". The link made was appropriate to the article and the other links that you allowed. Be happy ....Allen90164 (talk) 19:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Echinocactus polycephalus

(pssst) That cactus is called that. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 05:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Proofreader77

Edits in Animal Sexuality

Mr. Spitfire: I was not engaging in any vandalism. I was editing an article on Human Sexuality and specifically Homosexuality. I updated cross links to the related Animal Sexuality pages in the "Related Links" section. I checked the Animal Sexuality articles to determine that the information and related links existed there. I was eliminating duplication and attempting to maintain the integrity of the Human Sexuality article on Homosexuality. Explain one criteria from Vandalism showing how that would be vandalism. Also, further, if three people do six edits on one article and one person does three edits--why is one set of actions inherently treated differently than the others? My contributions were vandalized in the first place--before I even concluded my work on the article in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbfitz0529 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

First, the article in question specifically describes itself (in three places at the start) to be an article on "Human Sexuality". It is also self-defined as such through-out the article by referring to "people" and "persons".

Second, the section on "Homosexuality in Animals" within that article violates the Neutrality Guideline. It is making an invalid argument for homosexuality in humans by citing and including information on Homosexuality in Animals. That is implicitly in violation of maintaining neutrality in the Homosexuality article.

Third, as I already mentioned, there are cross-links and sufficient mention of the Homosexuality in Animals information--such that any interested reader can access the information--why duplicate it in a different article?

Fourth, the treatment of Homosexuality in Animals in a "Related" article is not done in a manner that is even doing justice to the related topic--much better to cross-link and develop the separate topic. Imagine if this type of inclusion began to be done in every Wikipedia article? There would be a loss of clarity, neutrality, coherence, and encyclopedic structure across the board, no? Granted, this is a controversial topic--but this is not way to a resolution ESPECIALLY if there was a hint at an edit war or any sort of conflict. Is this a fair treatment of an editor? I cannot imagine this being how all articles and all edits of this type would be handled in other types of articles. If information was being totally lost from Wikipedia, I could understand--but the related articles and links cover this--in a more appropriate and logical place. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbfitz0529 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Are you a mod?

Hello, are you a mod? either that or you have superhuman speed or bot ALOT. Btw, it wasn't an "attack" it was a joke... —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Crapper (talk • contribs) 08:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry (2)

I rolled back your report at WP:AIV, trying to browse on an iPhone. Sorry about that. Kevin (talk) 09:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Someone else re-reported and the user blocked. Kevin (talk) 09:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all. Didn't even notice as I was using Huggle. Good luck with the iPhone, cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 09:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

It really sucks for Wikipedia. I have to remember never to log in. Kevin (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Motto of the Day Free Ice Cream Day!

By Imperial Decree of His Divine Majesty, our Most Sublime Padishah God-Emperor, Car'a'carn, Editor-in-Chief, etc. (may he live for ever) of the Dominion of the Motto of the Day, every Thursday is Free Ice Cream Day throughout the the Realm. Therefore, our glorious ruler (may he live for ever) has caused to be delivered to you by the Ministry of Frozen or Otherwise Cold Desert Treats this ice cream treat (which may include gelato, depending on one's interpretation of the picture). Let it be eaten without delay, lest the heat of the servers melt it. Let it not drip onto the Article Namespace, lest you suffer the Death of a Thousand Edits for allowing unencyclopedic melted desert treat to get into the wiki. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

mistaken attack

i didn't attack crazyfrengi. how did i attack??? username: crazyfrengi password: stupid. thats his account cridentials, i'm not calling him stupid. if anything it was a brute force attack xD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.174.129.62 (talk) 16:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

how would it be vandilizing? i was adding onto the jizz in my pants song. that's not really vandilizing. i think it's comedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.230.120.198 (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks (2)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! Oli ^OR Pyfan! 08:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• And again... Oli ^OR Pyfan! 08:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Gaga LoveGame

Hey Spitfire, thanks for your message. I knnow GagaLoveGame has a right to his user pages. But he is new and i had a feeling that he wanted to archive his pages instead of deleting. Previously he thought that deleting them will archive them automatically. I pointed it out to him and showed him how to archive them. Anyways i hope he didnot have any warning template because you are not supposed to delete them. Cheers --Legolas ^(talktome) 10:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Okie dokie --Legolas ^(talktome) 10:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

>:-(  ;-)

Thanks for trying to make me break Special:Block with all your AIV reports >:-(

Seriously, though, you are doing an excellent job. Keep up the good work :-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh ^^, thanks. :) Spitfire^Tally-ho! 19:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

re the reverting of vandalism on my userpage. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't make sense

Sorry, but I didn't understand anything regarding what you posted on my user-talk. Please make sense, because I didn't wrote such things about Omar al-Bashir.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.16.180.148 (talk) 22:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks (3)

Appreciate your catching tis bit of vandalism diff. A I can only suppose, looking at the edit istory of this particular IP all the way back to its first edit in July of 2008 diff, that he will be back and do more of the same. I hate to suggest this of any anonymous IP, specially since many are shared... but because this one does nothing but vandalize. When such activity continues after the 31 hour block, might stronger action be indicated? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:44, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you Spitfire for catching the unwelcomed edit to my user page and reverting it.Shinerunner (talk) 12:13, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Anon edits

The anon's edits was that the actress in question was awarded an Adult Video Award for best ass-to-mouth. That, in my opinion is extremely degrading. That is not "mild". That is what his "commentary" meant. Violations of biographies of living people are taken seriously and I have on occasion handed out level 4 warnings without any confrontation. I've dealt with vandalism for years and this is the first time someone has actually defended it. I will not remove that warning. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 18:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

That's AVN as in AVN Awards. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 19:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Levels of vandalism are a matter of opinion. I stand by my level 4 warning because of BLP although others my disagree. Although I found it personally insulting that an anon would call my warning "rude" and interpret policy instead acknowledging first his act of vandadalism I will keep a cooler head in the future. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 19:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

re

Sorry (with a capital s), will do in future. Thanks for letting me know - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Just dropping in to say hi, the "tally ho!" bit in your signature made me smile

-- Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign!)} 21:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

A good deed returned

No problem. However, you might be interested in the addition I made to my userpage after you, and others, kindly removed some vandalism from it. If you are not offended by the phrase it loses its ability to hurt you if used pejoratively (and you don't even have to be gay). It won't stop the really stupid vandals - which is a point worth raising of itself. Cheers, old bean - take the old kite up for a spin, what? LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:18, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

Quote: "I spend next to all my time on wikipedia scaning the Recent Changes and New Pages for Vandalism."

Fine, but since you don't appear to read articles, but just seem to use a search tool to look through them for what appears to be "offensive" to you, and then use some automated tool to post TRULY OFFENSIVE messages on other editor's talk pages, I'm afraid I have to classify you as a vandal yourself.

Sadly, (from reading this page - a practice you might consider taking up yourself) other contributors seem to be taking you seriously. I just hope that my long-term faith in Wikipedia will be repaid, and that eventually contributors of your ilk will be identified and blocked.

I don't appreciate spending 2 hours hunting down, identifying and reversing vandalism, only to be told within seconds by some ARSEHOLE that my remarks on the vandal's talk page (suggesting clues as to the vandal's identity) offend him/her.

Of course, Spitfire will delete these remarks. --Nyelvmark (talk) 01:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but not before I can respond; You are a prat. Everyone else, in your own words, takes Spitfire's work seriously. You don't. Consider ye, in the Bowels of Christ I beseech thee, that you might be wrong? Of course you can't, can you? LessHeard vanU (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, it's possible that I'm wrong. I spent only two hours of my time checking that Babbage's Difference Engine was built by by the London Science Museum (as originally written) and not by the science museum of a very small place in India. I spent no time at all verifying the other modification, since it was obviously vandalism. I simply restored the information supplied by a previous contributor - this might be wrong, but that's a matter for future editors.

If you would really like to contribute to Wikipedia, I'd suggest that you limit your comments to actual encyclopedia articles, and stop trying to moderate the behaviour of people on "talk" pages. Who knows? You might actually KNOW something that is useful to us prats (people whose understanding is limited, a group of which I can't deny membership).

--Nyelvmark (talk) 02:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you may well be right about Babbage's calculating machine - but utterly wrong in demanding that Spitfire should stop combating vandalism in their preferred manner because they make the occasional mistake. Should you desire to have your endeavours defaced by a bored malcontent who wishes the world to know that "Dave is teh gay, lol!", then you are certainly proceeding in the right direction. If, however, you wish to contribute to the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit you will have to suffer in the knowledge that mistakes are made by other dedicated contributors and that, when faced with such errors, the appropriate response is to quietly correct the content (which was never lost, it remaining in the edit history) and move along to then next item that requires improvement. Any continuing misunderstandings may be addressed in a civil and collegial manner, which I suggest may surprise you in its effectiveness, on the basis of attempting to resolve rather than inflame the situation. If your understanding is as limited as the majority, to which I also belong, it appears to be in the area of interacting with those in this community whose talents direct them in other methods of contributing to the project - I have written enough content to know that my skills are limited to copy editing, and I am content to realise that my username shall never have a little star (or even a GA icon) above it - and that it is the disparate abilities of the community that results in the encyclopedia and not the efforts of one faction. I will end this by apologising for calling you a prat, both for the term itself and the notion it carries - I was wrong to say it. LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks LessHeard vanU for discussing this on my behalf, basically all I can add is: Nyelvmark, you should note that calling people idiots and aresholes (here) are both considered personal attacks, the first offence mentioned is the only thing I warned you for. I stand by that warning and I'm sure that nearly everyone would agree with me that calling the anon an idiot was a personal attack. Is there anything else I have done you have a problem with? If not I hope this matter is now resolved for you? Also regarding your comments on your own talkpage, no, I don't think that vandals are idiots, nor should they be treated as such. Cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 11:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

174.34.161.0/24

For your information, I range blocked these harassment IPs, which should get them all. If any more spring up, let me know. Thanks for your diligent reverts. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks (4)

Thanks for the reversion on my talk page. Those anon IPs have been giving me a lot of trouble today. =( Antivenin 12:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank You (2)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page! SheepNotGoats (Talk) 18:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The work of deleting IP vandalism on chem element pages

Since you're involved, I wonder if you'd like to comment on this discussion on semi-protection for element articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elements Thanks! SBHarris 00:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your RfA

Dear Spitfire,

Thank you for your sentiment regarding my recent failed RfA. Be assured that I'll be working on improving my skills on Wikipedia during the coming months, and when the time is right, I'll apply again. When I do, I hope I can count on another "support" !vote from you! Thanks, Matt (talk) 07:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Dado (band)

Hi! I appreciate your prompt reaction, and understand that it seemed to be a vandalism to create a page about an obscure band. But now the article seems OK, I've added some sources. I can haz cheezb Is it legit to remove {{db-content}} now? Abdullais4u (talk) 09:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Your comments are helpful and I'll try to make sure that the article will meet the requirements. Abdullais4u (talk) 09:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Mozart family grand tour

Hi - I saw your recent edits there on "skilful". As far as I know this is a mainstream spelling in BrE among others, and therefore not really subject to needing to be corrected anyway - I think it's more than just a variant. (I'm thinking of the wp rule about "don't keep changing color to colour and boot to trunk or we will come round and beat you up" or whatever it's called!) I'd have thought that that trumped or almost-trumped the fact that it was a quote anyway ... or am I missing the point? I do see, of course, that you self-reverted (ouch) so I am merely waffling on about the matter of principle, if there is one. :) Cheers! DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 12:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the nice message - I am now officially Rolling Around On the Floor, Laughing. :) best wishes, DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 13:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Concerning Alastair Galbraith (musician)

Done; we aim to please. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 12:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for my vandalism

[2] ;) PeterSymonds (talk) 08:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Frequently used idea and approved areas

The Frequently used idea are needs updating seriously and now the future of the approved area is questioned. Please see the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Nominations#Help with FUI and Approved area discussion. Simply south (talk) 20:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Tolstoi article

I'm just barely figuring out how to use this talk feature- have no idea if I'm doing it correctly. I did contact the publisher of the article and have it in writing from them that they agree it should not be there (the spoiler tells what happens in the epilogue - which no original reader of War and Peace would have known and which spoils all the romances of Natasha) and they promised to change it. The site in question is a site for teachers - it has a policy of no spoilers, itself (or so I was told). But, it's been more than a month and they haven't changed it. I have gotten complaints from the students themselves (lots of them, very disappointed to know before opening the first page that Natasha will marry Pierre), and from many other teachers. I teach in a liberal arts program that prepares teachers for teaching and my academic specialty is teaching reading. Reading skills are at an all time low in the United States, but many high school students are able to read War and Peace and really get into it - enough to make the effort to retain the plot and so forth. So the linked site promised to make the change, has a "teacher's lounge" area where such discussions take place and then did not make the change at all. I consider the continued presence of the link as the first link on the War and Peace page to be in very poor form. I'm continuing to work on the article itself, but will never send any of my students to it nor will any of the teachers I have in my classes. I am receipt of several emails from people teaching Russian literature (a far more advanced crowd) at universities much more prestigious than mine (I teach at a state school in California) and it was one of them who first brought the spoiler to my attention. They both got to the site from Wikipedia and have subsequently banned their students from using Wikipedia at all (like that will work), but that's the attitude such things create in people. So, I've put a lot of thought into the issue and some activism. I think the link should at least be made the last one on the page. It is also rife with errors that they won't fix (chapters are interpolated in "Book One" (Really Volume One according to Tolstoi), there are dozens of typos and missing words (not the fault of the Maudes, but of whoever put the text up). Its search engine is very poor, etc. Anyway, thanks for listening. I've now spent quite a bit of time over the past year trying to get them to fix it, I hold out no hope that they will. If people want to read a version that has the end of a battle occuring before the start of it, which happens later (due to their interpolation) I suppose most people will just think Tolstoi is being advant garde. So the link both contains spoilers AND an inaccurate text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Levalley (talk • contribs) 18:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I did as you suggested and put my concerns (part of them) on the Discussion Page. The link in question not only contains spoilers, but opinion and analysis not from any juried publication - as its opening paragraph. It also contains typos and ellipses and is, in short, not a good source of getting "War and Peace" downloaded to read. I await further discussion about it there. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Levalley (talk • contribs) 22:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Cool, now we're even. Have a good day. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

I appreciate your reverting that guy on my talk page just now. He seems to have a history of cotentious editing. Owe ya one.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Patronising

I'm sorry, but with childish language like this I think being patronised is the least of his problems. I do though take your point concerning warning templates. Tumblin Tom (talk) 23:51, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Lupin's

It's just that I was using recent IP edits and I misunderstood. Sorry. --Marshall T. Williams (talk) 01:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I will remove the warning. It won't have an effect, though, really. Even though you see it gone, the warning still remains. It's impossible to undo something like this. --Marshall T. Williams (talk) 01:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Ohhh

Haha hi! Nice to see you again! It's been a long time. How are things with you? The Joker's Woman^{[BlackPearl14•contribs!]} 01:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Cool, recent changes patrol! I wish I had enough time haha :) Thanks, and I'll see you around. The Joker's Woman^{[BlackPearl14•contribs!]} 21:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Talk page

Thanks for the revert. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 11:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

new article: Hanger Prosthetics and Orthotics

Hi. You answered a user question for me earlier this month so I decided to contact you for further discussion. Can you review the Hanger Prosthetics & Orthotics page for me and give me your opinion of its validity as an encyclopedia article? I have made numerous changes, as has OrangeMike, and the article has been shortened considerably. I want to now add photos but don't want to spend hours doing that until I feel more assured that the page will not be deleted. Also, I want to add an "info box" as I see on so many other Wikipedia pages. Can you direct me to the templates for a company info box? I am still working on finding a better "reliable second party source" to establish Hanger's notability. The company has had significant national media coverage for their work with amputees, most recently with wounded American service members returning from Iraq. I read that this sort of coverage can establish a company's notability, but I have concerns that it will be construed as "promoting or advertising." Your advice/guidance/input/interest is appreciated.

Thanks, --WBancroft (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The multiple Lords of the Penguins

Heh. Blanking it all just seemed like the easy way out. It's looking like it's a disruptive sock account anyway. Inferno, Lord of the Losers had already been blocked. Inferno,Lord of Penguins 2, Inferno,Lord of Penguins 3 and Inferno Lord of Penguins 2.2 are now listed at UAA. --Onorem♠Dil 12:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate your encouraging message. My edit count is going drop in the next few days as I get used to new tools...LOL. Cheers. Tiderolls 18:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

93.97.167.197

Really funny!!! Maen. K. A. (talk) 20:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)