User talk:Tiptoety

This is Tiptoety's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

vn-18

This user talk page has been vandalized 18 times.

Rex Goliath

Why does this article keep getting tagged as blatant advertising? I have read the guidelines and the links provided are verifiable secondary sources. I have no affiliation with Rex Goliath, I simply want to expand wikipedia's offerings of information about beverages.

wtf. Now its gone. Could i at least get my template back?

Thats fine, I'll send it back to the drawing board and try to gather more info. Thanks for your speedy response.

Great, if you have time I will run it by you for a quick review. Thanks again for your help.

Tourism In Quebec

Hi, I just started this page 5 minutes ago... Give me some time to put informations in it please. Bonjour_Quebec

Jean Lafitte

You auto-reverted a number edits to this article claiming I was committing vandalism. I believe my rewrites correct a number of grammar and other issues. Please compare with the version before the changes. Am I still a Wikipedia pariah, or can I get unwarned now?

Got a note from you

a cmpany keeps putting up there self promtoion on the page. i pulled it down. Passage events keeps promoting themselves —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.138.128.188 (talk) 04:00, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

ITV Play Westcountry

I deleted the article because it was completely made up. There is not one word of truth in it. It is, to be blunt, a fictional article. I have now replaced it with a redirect to ITV Play's entry, which will hopefully stop whichever troll started it from recreating it. RobinCarmody, 05:00 BST, August 21, 2007 —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 04:00, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

Deleting Content

I deleted the content and saved it by mistake. I have fully edited the content now for the article on Subramaniam Pillai. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdx-77 (talk • contribs) 22:07, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the contents on the LIU, CW Post site labeled "arguments" because 1. I have been to at least 50 wikipedia college and university sites which only state FACTS, not biased grudges/complaints/heresay, etc. Not a single one had an "arguments" section. If they are allowed, they should be placed on the discussion section. These items add no value to the Long Island University site, which is supposed to be informative, objective and based on fact. This is CLEARLY a person(s) personal grudge against the institution. 2. I have a grudge against NYIT and I (in the past, as I now adhere to wikipedia standards) used to add my "arguments" against the school on their wiki site and they were constantly taken down as they were based on my experiences and personal biases and NOT on solid FACT. If my "arguments" were not allowed, neither should the ones on the LIU, CW Post site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.35.249 (talk) 23:16, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tip

The author of the article I edited is a close friend of mine.... He is an outstanding writer in Spanish and Knowing the Ballet and him well I took on the edit.. This is the number 4 classical ballet in the world. Ms. Alonso is a personal friend of mine as well.. I am sorry about the summery.. I have no idea how to do that..... LOL Frankly, this is a one time deal for me in all probability.... If you could somehow fix it I would be grateful, as would my friend Migual Cabrera.

Cheers, Sr.Pastel de Manzana

The Feminine Mystique

Hello! You probably wouldn't remember it, but I was the person who removed the references to Daniel Horowitz in the article for The Feminine Mystique - a change that you reverted. I'm not sure if you read the talk page, but I explained my rationale there and asked for a similar explanation from those who would rather keep the paragraph. I see that you're taking a break from Wikipedia currently, but when you return, is it possible for you to explain your reasoning? I myself am relatively quite new to Wikipedia, so I may be completely off the mark; I only wish to understand why a seeming criticism of Betty Friedan herself has been included in the criticism section of one of her books. Chainedwind 16:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see - thank you very much. Chainedwind 00:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for reverting vandalism to my user talk page. I see that the editor also tagged another admin's page: probably a sock of someone whose been naughty before. Carlossuarez46 23:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your anti vandal efforts and beating me several times. Oxymoron⁸³ 23:39, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Tiptoety 23:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:70.255.139.2

You haven't got my point. This user has repeated similar abuses against one particular user on the same talk page. The IP also belongs to the same place in the USA. --Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 05:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me out. --Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 05:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/66.139.242.2. I guess I've done it the right way, plz. check anyway. I appreciate your time and patience. Thanking You, Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 08:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not me

You placed a not helpful edit warning on my talk page for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=The_Used%26curid%3D1045532&diff=next&oldid=156140862 As you can see, I didn't make the edit you're rightfully complaining about, I made the previous edit. The next user did the vandalism. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Even Homer nodded.--Wehwalt 00:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you did the same for me. Please be more careful! Metao 03:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, if you look at my change, the vandalism was already on the page. Given that the previous revision was a bot removing vandalism, I had assumed the page was clean, and as I only edited one section, I didnt see the vandalism to remove it. I didnt ADD the vandalism, I just didnt remove it (because I didnt know it was there). I know how it is to be trigger happy, though, so dont worry about it. Metao 03:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on talk page. Tiptoety 03:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thank you

You're welcome. I even reverted vandalism on your user page as well. NHRHS2010^Talk 02:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

No problem, always glad to help! Gscshoyru 02:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Number Twelve Looks Like You

You reverted two apparently good-faith edits edits to this page as vandalism. Maybe you've already realized this but if not, I don't know, you should be aware of it.--P4k 04:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user was removing content w/o explaining him/herself in the edit summary. Will respond also on your talk page Tiptoety 04:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any content that they removed.--P4k 04:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw the diffs. I can't see any content that was removed in that edit. They just rearranged things, and added a little bit of information. What information do you see here that isn't present here?--P4k 04:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A deserving Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your anti-vandal efforts Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 04:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Tiptoety 04:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Primacy of Simon Peter

My edits weren't vandalism. I see I mistyped "Herod Agrippa", sorry. Fixed that. 203.177.219.192 04:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on your talk page. Tiptoety 05:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser

Unfortunately, no action as yet. User:66.139.242.2 has been blocked but not due to the "Checkuser." A fool proof way of limiting the use of mutiple IPs has to be found out, especially since dynamic IPs are very easy to mask identity. Thanking You, Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 05:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The vandal User:35.11.50.138 is now in Utica, MI. Informing us his travel itenary.--Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 05:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sign

Yes, I thought the new bot would take care of the sign. Thanking You, Altruism^{T a l k - Contribs.} 04:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perverted Justice

The article is in bad taste and does not belong here. Take a hint. There is no proof that ever happened. Your edits are supporting the slander site corrupted-justice.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matcarpenter06 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on your talk page. Tiptoety 00:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Drake & Josh Episodes

I only removed info about the movie, which there were no sources for.--72.208.195.160 03:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007 and such

Nobody (not me at least) has accused you of being a vandal. It's just that you might have gotten too excited with the removing so-called vandalism (which was in fact unintentional) and you ought to have undid only one version (which I would have done anyway as I have noticed what I did), instead of the other 22 which did include positive contributions. _ZdS| talk 14:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]