User talk:Dreaded Walrus

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes

		The Minor Barnstar
		Please don't ever be afraid of tidying up the project again! For this edit, and being a great contributor, I, AGK, award you, Dreaded Walrus, the minor barnstar. Happy editing! Anthøny 23:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I know that some pages (such as archived AfD pages) generally shouldn't be edited, and as I don't tend to follow Arbitrations, I wasn't sure if this was also true with closed arbitration cases. Thanks for letting me know, and of course for the barnstar. :) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 23:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the welcome. :) bou·le·var·dier (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know

Mark Dice seems to have a problem with the Afganistan war so doesn't that disqualify him from the catigory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.4.221 (talk) 23:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with Dice, but going off what it says in the article (under #9/11 campaign controversy), it talks about him sending DVDs to Iraq. It's a little bit borderline, actually, come to think of it... if you were to remove the category again, linking to here in your edit summary, I wouldn't revert you again. :) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 23:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks oh and you might want to talk to User talk:Kelly‎ about how she drives away people who wanted to help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.4.221 (talk) 23:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, I have quite a bit of respect for Kelly. Obviously I'm not familiar with this particular case, so I can't really comment on it, but I'm not going to exactly have a go at someone who I respect. :P

Regardless, if you need help with anything (that doesn't involve me being incivil), do feel free to ask, here on this talk page. :)

Oh, and, for what it's worth, I've had a look at the edits to the Medea Benjamin article, and I don't think that her edits (or yours) qualify as vandalism, so classifying them as such doesn't really help things... Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 00:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If that category is borderline, then so is "anti-pornography activists", so I'm removing that as well. --Pwnage8 (talk) 02:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with you on that one too. The article doesn't mention his stance on pornography, so no objections from me. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 02:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WRB - WP:BLANKING

The problem with allowing such blanking is that it then takes my comments out of context. Hence, the user is not only altering their comments but, mine as well. William R. Buckley (talk) 19:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sega Mega Drive Handheld

(Replying to your edit summary query here) I see a couple of reviews in a quick Google search, I haven't checked to see if they pass WP:RS or not. However, the article desperately needs revising to comply with WP:SPAM, and reference to at least one review would be good. I've tagged it with {{ad}} and notified the author; if no one cleans it up in a few days I might {{db-spam}} or {{prod}} it unless you beat me to it. Anomie ⚔ 16:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's been three days since you tagged the article, and there's been no attempt to address the concerns, so I've prodded it and notified the author (I feel there's no rush to delete it, so there's no harm in prodding rather than dbing it). Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 23:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, no rush. Anomie ⚔ 11:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]