User talk:Daedalus969
Welcome to my talk page! I will reply on your talk page unless you prefer otherwise as usually noted on your talk page. If you are an anonymous editor, I will reply here.
|
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
tb
Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at roux's talk page. |
You can remove this notice at any time by removing this template. |
Thanks for dealing with the vandalism at Troy Davis case
Just wanted to say thanks. Have a great Christmas. Josh Atkins (talk - contribs) has smiled at you!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks
Thanks, but I meant a place were you can discuss a topic (not as a forum) request articles be written on a topic... Like a section on different topics. Mecha13 (talk) 21:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
How is this G6? It does not need "to be deleted to merge histories, reverse a redirect, or perform other non-controversial technical tasks". — neuro(talk) 22:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thus, the change back to the norm may confuse. A redirect may be helpful for those looking for where the page they knew to be there has moved. — neuro(talk) 22:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Hi. Just saying thanks for your messages at User talk:Tarysky. Not that it's anything you'll probably want to waste time on, but a perusal through this user's Talk Page history will reveal some serious problems way before tonight's exchange. Anyway, again, thanks. - eo (talk) 07:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
DY71 recent hand-puppet.
He makes is so obvious - just waited out the autoconfirmed thing then back to his old haunts - Peripitus (Talk) 08:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Personal attacks
I would ask that you would understand that my edits were not personal attacks. I was calling the his edits stupid because he removes information that he knows is correct. Also, I don't care who owns my talk page, but I would ask Users like yourself to respect it. If you talk a look at User:Ericorbit's talk page or its history, you will see that he says "stay off my page". You must give him this rule Wikipedia:Ownership of articles instead me. I'm trying to correct someone who is wrong. The last I checked, that wasn't considered a personal attack! Tarysky (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
"I am not..."
"I am not a conspiarcy theorist. I am a scientist and freedom fighter." [sic] [1] -- That's one of the most gorgeous quotables I've seen in years. Btw I looked at the ranges -- it's Telstra in Australia, the largest provider there, and while we could take parts of them down briefly, it would be a little like using Tsar Bomba to stop the neighbor's dog from barking. Probably just removing his rants from everywhere except his own talk page would be my suggestion (that's why I haven't blocked his one open IP). Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 16:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 5 | 31 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello Daedalus. I've updated Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations#71.246.98.72 with a suggestion to open a full SPI case. Take a look and see what you think. EdJohnston (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello Daedalus. Please don't concern yourself with the behavior of this blocked editor. It is traditional to grant some leeway to people who are blocked. If he removes your messages, just ignore it. If the edit summaries are not right, everyone can still see from the history what truly happened. It would be better if you would let it alone for now. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Roberto Reyes Barreiro
While there isn't much on Google pertaining to him, he is a figure both pre- and post- Mexican Revolution. Mexico has gone through quite a bit of trouble to exclude him from their history because of his socialist (i.e., communist) leanings and teachings. He was the leader of an uprising that has merit in today's environment - the Renter's Revolt of Veracruz. Then (as now), the economy of Mexico was getting worse, and people were without jobs -- all at a time when there wasn't unemployment insurance or welfare or any other social subsidy to help the average person.
Reyes Barreiro was a true hero than as he would be now, and an inspiration to those who knew of him. WHile I understand WPs policy toward "people of merit", certainly Reyes Barreiro is a person of merit in that he is inspirational and a figure of leadership in a time of upheaval.