User talk:Ginsengbomb

You have new messages (last change).

Vandalism Claim

I do not agree that my edits were vandalism. I found proof that the results of the election were around 70%. --Nielad (talk) 03:59, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Please cite your proof, that ought to be funny. And how about changing a "78" rpm to the fictional "87" rpm single? Bearing in mind that there is no such thing as an 87 rpm single. Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Bibliography Jacklyn Sonnier Hirshberg, Swamp Dog: A True Story, Acadian House Publishing, 2000 --Nielad (talk) 04:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't follow. Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

It's a citation--Nielad (talk) 04:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Is it actually intended to convince me of the existence of a one-of-a-kind 87 rpm single that would, by the way, be unplayable on just about any record player in existence? Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Key phrase: just about. The book also details how they created such a rare record player.--Nielad (talk) 04:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm still far more interested in your citation for the election statistics, although discussing this creation of "such a rare record player" is indeed amusing nonsense! Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the revision on the Anchored Cross (band) page. The comment that the other user posted was a little... Creepy.

"Confederate States of America" and "White supremacy" articles

You were quite right that the "White supremacy" article had no mention of the CSA; I added some relevant material to "White supremacy" (although that whole article probably still needs a good bit of work). -- 206.221.235.188 (talk) 06:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank's for backing me up on that vandal, I was answering another IP user's questions. :) Burner0718 ^JibbaJabba! 07:25, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I am Not a Vandal

ClueBot already flagged my edit and I explained the intent through the fashion as instructed. If further flagging can be refrained for a moment, I can add illustrating context.12.64.30.29 (talk) 04:36, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. In short, completely agree with you here. I've removed my flag on your talk page. Carry on! Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

venus terraforming / effected/affected

It's "effected," not "affected." The sentence discusses how cooling could be -effected- (ie how it could be accomplished, achieved, etc.), not -affected- (how it would be impacted by something else, etc.). Make sense? The whole affected/effected thing is one of my five favorite frequently misspelled/misused words in the language, hehe. Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

effect is a noun. affect is a verb. this supposed to be a verb form. you are wrong. also, effected is not a word. affected covers both of your definitions. 68.106.25.58 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.106.25.58 (talk) 06:53, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Erm. Perhaps before dropping such definitive statements as "you are wrong," you should double-check what you're talking about :). Not trying to be gruff but I tend to react negatively when someone says "you are wrong" when I am in fact quite right.

From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/effect

–verb (used with object)

10. to produce as an effect; bring about; accomplish; make happen: The new machines finally effected the transition to computerized accounting last spring. Ginsengbomb (talk) 16:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage (my first time!). I'm just curious: given that the user had not edited any other pages, how did you find it? Were you patrolling recent changes without restricting to articles? Or did it have something to do with checking on new accounts? For the record, I asked OverlordQ the same question. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 02:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah! No problem at all. Congrats on your first time getting your user page vandalized -- usually a sign you're doing something right, hehe. Very simply how I nabbed it. I use a rollbacking app called WP:HUGGLE. It tracks the recent changes RSS feed and, among a number of other things, highlights contributions by users with 1 or more recent vandalism warnings on your talk page. OverlordQ had already given the user in question 2 or 3 warnings so when the user vandalized your page his edit showed up highlighted as suspect. Clicking on the edit made it pretty apparent. Hope that explains it! Ginsengbomb (talk) 02:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, of course, I've heard a little about how Huggle works. I don't normally do recent changes patrol cos my connection's too slow, but when I have done it, I've restricted it to articlespace edits. But I guess with Huggle's features there's no need to do that. Cool, thanks for the explanation. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 03:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Please help!

Actually I have a user acc. here (Alisha208). The problem is that my acc. got logged out when I was editing that page. I just wanted to know whether you can get that page back, which I edited. I will give a valid reason for that then.203.92.55.173 (talk) 07:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It's back! Go right ahead. Sorry for any confusion! Ginsengbomb (talk) 07:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank You!!203.92.55.173 (talk) 07:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the revert on my user page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Floquenbeam has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

My pleasure, and thanks for the cookie! Ginsengbomb (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

I've noticed your swift anti-vandalism edits all over recent changes. Just dropping a note to say nice work. By the way, have you considered talk page archiving? Cheers, BlazerKnight (talk) 04:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I've been on a bit of a cleanup tear tonight, hehe. Huggle is certainly a wonderful thing! Regardless, thanks for the good wishes. My talk page and user page are both very, very overdue for an overhaul (neither have been meaningfully reworked in over 2 years!), and archiving is something I will definitely have to do, as this page has gotten extremely unwieldy :). Anyway, thanks for stopping in and saying 'ello! Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:37, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

See User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo for quick, automated page archiving. The bot makes its rounds daily and trims old threads. Very convenient. :) BlazerKnight (talk) 04:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! I will check that out! Thanks! Ginsengbomb (talk) 04:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question about editing

If the Phillies take a 3-0 series lead would I be jumping the gun in editing their page and calling them the 2009 world series champions. The only way they would lose is if they have a huge collapse like yankees in 04 or like the kings of queens and collapses themselves, the NY Mets. I just dont wanna get in trouble for jumping the gun, if not I can wait till the Phillies are officially WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS or as our buddy Utley says WORLD F*ckin' CHAMPIONS! DaBiGg3TiTaLiaNo (talk) 21:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you would be jumping the gun. Ginsengbomb (talk) 21:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Discuss "Diary of a Wimpy Kid"

Please, Ginsengbomb, can we talk about the edits we've been fighting about?

98.144.24.74 (talk) 00:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course! Here's what's happening. You're removing content that doesn't seem blatantly invalid without an edit summary to explain. That's generally not okay. I will say this, too -- you vandalized my User page. I am always going to assume good faith per WP:AGF, but when I see an anonymous IP contributor removing content without any explanation who then goes on to vandalize my userpage, I am suspicious. That said, I am happy to hear your explanation! Ginsengbomb (talk) 00:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Listen, I'm sorry about the user page, but i was mad. I let my anger get the better of me. Anyway, I was removing that content because it wan't related to Diary of a Wimpy Kid, the FIRST book.

Mikeycc (talk) 00:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Understood. I've reread your edit and, as far as I'm concerned, go ahead and do the edit. Seems fine to me. Please, though, do be cautious about letting your anger get the best of you. Much more importantly, seeing as you appear to be someone who is trying to contribute positively, always include an edit summary when you are removing content. This is critical. Ideally, all content changes should have an edit summary, but it is if anything most important to do so when -removing- content. Removing a decent amount of content without an edit summary is very easily viewed with suspicion, whether that suspicion is warranted or not. Obviously, I erred in reverting your contributions, but if you put yourself in my shoes you'd have done the same thing: I see an anonymous IP address removing apparently fine content from an article without any explanation. So I revert that. Make sense? Just be careful and always include an edit summary, it's the best bet you have. You definitely seem like a good contributor. :) Ginsengbomb (talk) 00:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Once again, I'm very sorry about that. Thank you.

Mikeycc (talk) 00:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely no problem. Glad to see you've registered with a username. Keep up the good work, and I apologize as well for having misconstrued your well-intentioned edits as vandalism. Thanks! Ginsengbomb (talk) 00:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Redneck as ethnic slur

Hey, I see you added a reference List of ethnic slurs in regards to "redneck". As I noted on Talk:Redneck, I have strong doubts that this is supportable. If you have any further thoughts on the matter, could you comment? Thanks! --CAVincent (talk) 05:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

princess diana roller coaster

I am sorry to hear that you couldn't find proof of this beautiful memorial that does exists. The one and only beautiful Diana, Princess of Whales has her own roller coaster at Canada's Wonderland. Face it, there's nothing we can do about her death.

I am sorry to hear that -you- couldn't find proof, because until you do, your contribution will not be included in Wikipedia. Ginsengbomb (talk) 08:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, until Six Flags acquires the rights to Princess Diana's life and releases an official statement concerning this thoughtful memorial you just have to go up to Wonderland and experience the roller coaster for yourself. I promise you will enjoy it, it's an experience like none other, I will even pay your ticket and hold your hand on the ride (incase it gets emotional for you.)

I guess we'll just have to wait for Six Flags to release an official statement then. This matter is concluded. Ginsengbomb (talk) 09:00, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

You're ruining the fun for everyone! What a shame, Princess Diana would have been proud of her coaster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.212.65.231 (talk) 09:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting that edit. You were really quick on the draw. You had reverted before I could even check my talk page. 152.16.59.102 (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure :). Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for restoring my talk page! --NellieBly (talk) 06:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure, and right back at you of course! *high-five* Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem :). Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Isabelle Fuhrman

You tagged Isabelle Fuhrman as {{db-g7}}, which I think may have been a mistake, since many editors have contributed to the article. I removed the tag. -- Eastmain (talk) 08:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Yikes. Yeah, definitely a mistake. I don't recall tagging that page, so I probably thought Huggle was pointed at a different article when I plastered that tag on the top. Thanks for catching that, and apologies for the screwup. Ginsengbomb (talk) 17:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)