User talk:Wuhwuzdat

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

As it has become painfully obvious, my contributions are no longer welcome or needed here. In light of this situation, I am leaving this screwed up bureaucracy for the conceivable future. Good luck, my friends and keep fighting the good fight. ILLEGITIMUS NON CARBORUNDUM WuhWuzDat

PAGE RULES:

1) A new topic requires a new section.

2) New sections go at the bottom of this page.

3) New sections require titles.

4) New replies go underneath the post they are in reply to.

5) Sign your posts by typing ~~~~. (Sinebot doesn't work here)
- (please sign at the END of your posts, not at the beginning!)

6) Posts must be coherent and civil.

I reserve the right to delete, without response, any and every posting from people unwilling or unable to obey these simple requests._{Per this guideline.}

If your post is in reference to an article, it would be greatly appreciated if you would provide a link to the article in question.

If you are here to tell me you changed or declined a speedy delete tag that you disagreed with, feel free to NOT leave me a note.

I respect your opinion, experience, and judgment on this matter.

I also irrevocably agreed to release my contributions under the GFDL, and that includes the speedy delete tags!

If you still feel that leaving a comment on one of these matter is truly necessary, I ask that you check the edit history of the article in question, and view the version of the page as it existed AT THE TIME I TAGGED IT, before leaving your comment. _{(Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and I am not a psychic, and can not and will not be held responsible for actions that occurred after the fact).}

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by .

Birthdate template

Just curious, what's wrong with this edit (or the previous one, rather). Don't we use the template anymore? --Conti|✉ 11:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to undo if the edit is valid, as my issue is with the persistent (14 month spree) Banned sockmaster who made the edits. WuhWuzDat 11:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the clarification. --Conti|✉ 11:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Transit Authority

I see that after reverting an edit and asking for talk, no response. If you weren't sincere about it, I'm going to reinstate it. --Busjack (talk) 14:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You and User:Lost on belmont, being the 2 parties in the edit war, should be the ones having the discussion. I was simply VERY disappointed in the so called "solution" you came up with, deleting material due to an alleged "Impossibility" to keep updated, when others were at least attempting to try. WuhWuzDat 14:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In that there is no verifiable way to do so (either in this instance or the people who were trying to track how many buses were left after each scrapping), I don't think it adds to the article, which is what I said on the talk page. If you have some way of doing it in a verifiable manner that doesn't spread misinformation, please inform us how to do so, instead of just reverting with a threat. Busjack (talk) 16:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]