User talk:Lerdthenerd/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Lerdthenerd. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Gridlock talk page.
You posted quite a big spoiler on Talk:Gridlock (Doctor Who) and it's quite pointless to do so. If someone truly cares for the Face's prophecy, they'll read the article. Wikipedia is not a discussion forum about Doctor Who. --Quadratus 19:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- sorry feel free to delete it--Lerdthenerd 19:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- I won't delete it, but I've censored it, to prevent people from accidentily reading it. --Quadratus 19:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: Offer of help on Skunk Fu
Thanks for the offer, Lerdthenerd! That would be fantastic. I am just trying to sort out a few things with regard to Skunk Fu, such as the fact that I have the Voice artist list, but no idea who played what, since it doesn't show this in the credits; I also need assistance trying to grab any relevant information about the production companies, since they will be linked from the infobox eventually...Companies include: Hoek, line and thinker (Holland), The Irish Film Board/Bord scannan na hEireann, Super RTL (Luxemburg) and others which I will hunt down. Any help you can give me on this will be much appreciated. Thanks again, Thor Malmjursson 12:26, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
no problem :) i'm willing to help with the episodes, also do you know any good skunk fu websites we could use as sources to cite from? as that would help us complete the article.--Lerdthenerd 12:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I follow: it was uncategorised, my bot tagged it, someone then categorised it. What 'wrong page' was tagged? Alai 00:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
the article has a bug at the moment, your edit doesn't appear in the correct history instead it's in the bug version, i've just looked on the correct history page and it says the last user to edit was Iceflow(Thor)--Lerdthenerd 20:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Talk pages of redirects
Here's a friendly bit of advice, based on your comment in Talk:Universe of the Metroid series. When an article is redirected to another, the original article page, its history, and its talk page are all still accessible. As an example, consider the trouble you had with Mother Brain (Metroid). Clicking that link will redirect you to Universe of the Metroid series#Mother Brain, but at the top of that page is a line that says Redirected from Mother Brain (Metroid). Clicking that link will take you here, where you can access the talk page (usually) and article history. Sometimes the talk page is also redirected, but if it actually has discussion, it probably won't be. Hope that helps. --Herald Alberich 16:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thanks, shall i'll try and put the sites i've found on the new article's talk page?--Lerdthenerd 13:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Motherbrain.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Motherbrain.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Motherbrain.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Motherbrain.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Author blanking pages
Hi. :) I just wanted to let you know that when an article creator blanks a page nominated for speedy deletion, that is usually interpreted as his or her agreeing that the article should be deleted. In such a case, it is usual to tag it with {{db-author}}. (For context, this is in reference to your restoration of material at the now-deleted Casey Fearfield, the edit summary of which suggested you may not be aware that this is common.) In most cases, of course, what we see is author's removing the speedy notice and leaving the article, in which case restoring the previous contents is precisely the thing to do, generally with a {{uw-speedy1}} left on the author's talk page. Thanks for helping keep an eye on article quality. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks i thought he was ignoring the warning, glad he realised the article was full of personal remarks and decided to delete it.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 19:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Re:
yes I believe so, since most of those warnings are current (aren't they?), he is well within his rights to delete my chat with him, but that practically voids any cooperation that I was having with him. that's his lose tho.--KerotanLeave Me a Message Have a nice day :) 14:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Originally quite a few months ago, it was wring to remove warnings whatever, then there was a change that if someone removed warnings it meant they had done the job, which I never really liked because it made persistent offenders hard to catch, and now just form a synthesis between the two, if the warnings are no longer relevant, let it go, but if the chances are high that the person will get warned again in the very near furture i would personally keep them there.--KerotanLeave Me a Message Have a nice day :) 14:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Blanking
Whilst I agree with the principle you expressed in your edit summary here, the page being blanked was pure spam. Your reversion thus inadvertently replaced it. gb (t, c) 10:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- No worries! gb (t, c) 15:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Edit to user page
That was actually supposed to be there as part of an answer to a question, though one of the posted questions was retorical and not supposed to be answered. However, the numbers were supposed to be there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.199.195.83 (talk) 14:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
talk page edited
That was supposed to be there. Please let me handle it next time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.199.195.83 (talk) 15:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Reintroduction of non-free content
Hi,
Is there any particular reason why you're reverting me? (I ask because you've not provided an edit summary.) You may not know but policy prohibits decorative non-free content. (WP:NFCC) Matthew (talk) 20:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
i'm afraid your wrong stop deleting it--Lerdthenerd (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Inappropriate use of the rollback button
Hi. In regards to this edit on Partners in Crime (Doctor Who), please remember that the rollback button should only be used to revert simple and indisputable vandalism, not as a convenience in edit wars. Inappropriate use of the button may result in that privilege being removed by an administrator. Thank you. --B (talk) 22:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, when I left this message, I was going through the AN3 report and didn't know that it had already been removed. If, after a reasonable period of time (like a month), you would like to have rollback restored, come to me and provided that there is no recent edit warring in your history, I will restore it. --B (talk) 22:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Your rollback request
Hi! I regret that I must inform you that your request for the rollback permission has been denied. You can discover why by checking the archives at Wikipedia:Requests for rollback/Denied/May 2008#Lerdthenerd. RFRBot (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Forest of the Dead edits
I would ask that you confine descriptive comments regarding your opinion of my edits to the discussion page only. Mischaracterizing my edits based on your opinions is considered uncivil and personal attacks. Thank you for your consideration. Arcayne (cast a spell) 14:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- using all caps (LIKE THIS!!!) is also uncivil as it looks like you are shouting, i mearly said your edits are being quite disruptive two people have argued against the removal of the wedding dress and you are twisting the no original research policy with your own opinion.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 14:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, i don't watchlist your page, and just no saw this comment. I am sorry you saw my contributions to make the article better as disruptive. I would ask that you try to offer a bit more good faith. I disagree with you and wth others. That doesn't make me disruptive, and that doesn't make a correct interpretation of policy original research - any more than your insistence on including a non-notable reference to the wedding dress would make you a fannish zealot. Be nice. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 09:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm trying to be nice, you're the one who is calling me a fannish zealot, if the dress can't go into the continuaty section, then it should go in production because it's obvious they have used the same prop, this is compromise me, U-mos and the others have came to in order to stop this argument getting out of hand like the NFCC policy argument we had with matthew and fasach nua and because your argument against synthesis does have some reasoning behind it, (you're right about some things, but i feel you are following the policy too strictly like a wiki lawyer). Personally my reasons for it going into the continuaty is that the dress is part of Donna's character, she is a bride waiting marry, but unusual circumstances and The Doctor stop her from getting married twice, also throughout series 4 every character introduced to The Doctor and Donna under their false alias, assumes they are a couple which they quickly deny, finally Donna is forced to forget about the Doctor and her adventures with hime because the Doctor's brain with in her would overwhelm and kill her, this both is joyful allowing donna to finally marry someone but is also upsetting because she enjoyed her adventures with the Doctor, although i doubt people will agree with me but i don't care, I'd rather not argue for a trivial point if the majority of editors are against me and have policy to back their view up, this is the case with you i'm afraid you can't win against a majority of views unless you can convince enough editors that your argument is right without ruining the spirit of wikipedia and its policies, and try to stop name calling, I don't like being called a fannish zealot.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Edit war
I don't think Regent is to blame there... take a look at User talk:83.241.234.4 and the ANI for some more context. Page blanking and saying "it should be deleted" 25+ times is not the least bit acceptable, and Regent is within guidelines to roll that back. Shadowjams (talk) 08:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I know but he is not stopping, try to get them both to atleast discuss why the article should not be deleted, as etrigan has nominated it for deletion any way for WP:MASK, i'll support Regency on this if he discusses.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 08:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand your pragmatism, but I don't think the IP has anything to discuss, the extreme edit RVing is evidence of that (and keep in mind that at least half of those are straight page blanking, the other half are the less obvious double cited paragraph removal). That IP also has a history of sock puppetry and a 1 year block. Something that's hard to achieve. In my rather long tenure doing vandalism patrol, I'm not sure I've ever seen a dispute with a belligerent so obviously at fault go without a block for this long. Maybe it's the moon, but I can't believe this went on this long. This is not an edit dispute. This is clear vandalism prevention without backup by admins. Weird. Shadowjams (talk) 08:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I know but he is not stopping, try to get them both to atleast discuss why the article should not be deleted, as etrigan has nominated it for deletion any way for WP:MASK, i'll support Regency on this if he discusses.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 08:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- thank goodness he is banned now, probably won't stop him from doing it again if he comes back, but we will wait and see.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 08:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Editing of The Tourettes Guy
Why do you keep removing the 'real or fake' section? I have stated on the talk page for that article that the information in that section is not 'unsourced', there are several websites, which may I add I have tried posting links to, that point towards Danny faking it. His telephone number and address have also been found and his real name appears to be Anthony L. Six. Wikipedia has blocked the links to this information.
If you're going to remove that part of the article, why not remove the part about his death rumors too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 30casesofpickles (talk • contribs) 16:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
sorry but you were reverted by another user before me, i thought they were doing the right thing, lets discuss this on the articles talk page--Lerdthenerd (talk) 16:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Edward321 (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
no problem :) --Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Removed rollback rights
I have removed your rollback rights for repeatedly reverting a vandalism fix on David Tennant. If you can establish a good track record going forward, you can request the rollback bit again later. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- My apologies, I misread the diffs -- all but the last revert were valid. I'll restore that promptly.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- its ok, there was alot of vandalism on that day its an easy mistake to make--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
"a" versus "an"
"Undid revision 369539793 by Minaker (talk) an before a vowel not a" -- Lerdthenerd
"The choice of "a" or "an" is determined by phonetic rules rather than by spelling convention. "An" is employed in speech to remove the awkward glottal stop (momentary silent pause) that is otherwise required between "a" and a following word. . . Further, some words starting with vowels may have a preceding a because they are pronounced as if beginning with an initial consonant. "Ewe" and "user" have a preceding a because they are pronounced with an initial y consonant sound. " -- Wikipedia
"When u makes the same sound as the y in you, or o makes the same sound as w in won, then 'a' is used." -- Perdue O.W.L.
"Use 'an' in place of 'a' when it precedes a vowel sound, not just a vowel." -- "The English Language: A User's Guide" by Jack Lynch
"Common sense and research should be employed before hastily undoing someone else's edit." -- Minaker (talk) 20:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I guess that was way too harsh. Your edit was in good faith, so I apologize for the snarky comment I made above. Minaker (talk) 21:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
its alright, and i've learnt something new about a and an --Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:07, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
The "a and an" article isn't gone, it's just that my link doesn't work anymore. The "discriminating between a and an" article is no longer a separate page, it's been merged at some point to the general topic; just type in "a and an" in the search and scroll down to see the appropriate section. Minaker (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- ok thanks--Lerdthenerd (talk) 15:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
In regards to this, once the final warning is placed, you should just keep reverting until they are blocked. -Reconsider! 07:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice but to be honest they were really being annoying, I should have reported them earlier--Lerdthenerd (talk) 07:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
There will be Na'vi people in the Dinosaur sequel. I'm not a lying. It's the damn truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.195.126 (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
No there won't be stop adding nonsense to the article--Lerdthenerd (talk) 15:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Revert once more I beat you!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.195.126 (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
no threatening, ive reported you now--Lerdthenerd (talk) 15:58, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
AIV
In response, to your edit summary question at AIV, I removed that report because the IP had already been blocked by another administrator. Normally, the reports are automatically removed by a bot once they are blocked, but it didn't happen in this case because the report wasn't formatted quite correctly, so the bot didn't recognize it. Cheers, -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Merge discussion for Foot odor
I have proposed that Smelly socks be merged to Foot odor. Since you contributed to the recent AfD on Smelly socks, you might be interested in participating in the discussion to merge at Talk:Foot odor#Merger proposal. SnottyWong prattle 05:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Rukidi III
I would assume the (admittedly COI) removals are correct - it seems unlikely, for example, that a woman married a man in 1992 on his date of death to bear children born 50 years previously. Ironholds (talk) 13:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- I agree it was the edit summaries i was concerned with--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- COI is not in itself a reason to revert somebody. I'm pretty sure that information needs to be removed, but I'm perfectly happy to not let his edits stand given that he's blanking large chunks in an unneeded fashion. Ironholds (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- alright we'll keep an eye on him then--Lerdthenerd (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- COI is not in itself a reason to revert somebody. I'm pretty sure that information needs to be removed, but I'm perfectly happy to not let his edits stand given that he's blanking large chunks in an unneeded fashion. Ironholds (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Dazer Laser
The words "Dazer Laser" are trademark property of Laser Energetics. Hence it does not refer to your classification of the Dazzler weapon systems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johannesdisilenti (talk • contribs) 17:34, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Your article says The Dazer Laser is an advanced non-lethal dazzler meaning the Dazer lazer is simply a name for a none lethal Dazzler, plus there is an entry about LE's Dazzler/Dazer lazer in the Dazzler article, I shall however leave the article alone for the time being--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
1944 Cheshunt B 24 Bomber crash
Thank you for your contribution in adding a speedy delete tag to the article Cheshunt B 24 Bomber crash 1944 However this article is not a dupilcate, it is work in progress, a duplicate error was mde with the date and this was picked up by someone else, all you have done is wasted time in getting the article started.
Please do not be discouraged but it may be worth checking in future with the history of the article and having a quick word with whoever started the article.
Please note this is Work in Progress so will take a few days to complete. Pandaplodder (talk) 11:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- alright but when you contest your article being deleted don't remove the speedy deletion tag as this looks like you're ignoring it, instead use {{hangon}} then write your reason in the talkpage, also a friendly word of advice try to avoid using all caps LIKE THIS in your edit summaries it looks like you're shouting--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:09, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes apologies for that Pandaplodder (talk) 11:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks for the heads up; I've blocked his obvious block-evading IP. Please let me (or any other admin) know if he comes back again, I get the feeling he probably will. ~ mazca talk 21:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
The Sontaran Experiment
Before you reverse my edit with a snippy comment and ban me, perhaps you should read the discussion I have started on the article's discussion page. 71.146.16.112 (talk) 18:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
DC Universe Online
What copyright infringment is on the page to stop to me from reverting?
the text was copied directly from the source, which is illegal under copyright law and against wikipedia's rules, please do not restore the article until the matter is settled, its simple enough write the article in your own words using the sources to back up statements not as a copy and paste job. By the way sign your posts next time Redranger--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Lerd, the {{copyvio}} template is for use when all of the revisions have copyright trouble. For a single paragraph, you should edit out the paragraph, not blank the whole article. See Wikipedia:CP#Instructions for details. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Sarek, I reverted back to the copyvio tag because Rockfang put it up, seems an IP called 203.39 put the offending content in was reverted by a user then put it back in, Rockfang resolved the issue by blanking it, an IP reverted him and then I put it back. I'll do the right thing and remove the paragraph, thanks anyway.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Attila
the copyright problem has been solved. so what is the new problem?--Finn Diesel (talk) 12:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Finn come to the talk page of Atilla, copyright wasn't the problem I recall, it was using images on Attila that were subjective paintings, you know we cant have pictures on people who have died long ago especially in the infobox section--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
how and why? look at Alexander_the_Great's article. the same issue everywhere. is there any other issue that i should know?--Finn Diesel (talk) 12:26, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Alexander the Great, wasn't painted by a Biased artist, it is a painting of him fighting in a battle, an event that happened--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:29, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
how can you call artists as "biased"? then all artists would become "biased" acc. to your new theory.--Finn Diesel (talk) 13:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Look you were explained why in the previous discussions before your ban, use the articles talk page to furthe discussion not mine--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Reversions
You know when you revert vandalism with Twinkle, could you leave warnings because I had to leave a warning to a user because of it. Sorry if I'm not clear but I'm not sure how to put it. Thanks --Látches Lets talk! 10:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
sorry i don't use twinkle so i can't help you, try reading up on twinkle or go and find a user who uses twinkle, sorry that hasn't helped you--Lerdthenerd (talk) 10:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
When an article is deleted all the edits in the article's history are hidden from public view, and so they don't appear on your contributions list. They are still visible to administrators (I have a "Deleted user contributions" page that still shows that edit) and they are also included in your edit count in Special:Preferences. Hut 8.5 10:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- thanks Hut--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Dry Bones (enemy)
You tagged Dry Bones (enemy) for speedy deletion as a repost of an article that was previously deleted via a deletion discussion. However, I can find no trace of such a deletion discussion, so I have declined the speedy deletion. It may well be that the article should be deleted, but you need to be careful to use the right criteria. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
should i AFD it instead so the author can discuss it? I think this article needs deleting because dry bones already has an entry in list of mario characters.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think any of the speedy deletion criteria applies. You could try a PROD. If (as is likely) the author of the article contests the PROD then AfD is still available. Obviously taking it directly to AfD might be quicker, but if the PROD does work it's less trouble, so you might like to try that first. Alternatively instead of trying to get the article deleted you could just redirect it to List of Mario series characters. Unfortunately such redirects are often reverted to the original article, but it may work. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, if you do end up taking it to AfD, let me know, and I'll contribute to the discussion. JamesBWatson (talk)
I PRODded it JamesB, thanks for the help--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this article, per WP:CONTESTED, once a prod tag is removed from an article, even if by the article creator and even if in bad faith, it should not be replaced and an AfD opened instead. Notwithstanding that, I have redirected the article to Recurring enemies in the Mario series, with no prejudice towards opening an AfD if the redirect gets reverted. Cheers! —KuyaBriBriTalk 18:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks I'll take note in the future--Lerdthenerd (talk) 13:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
RealBigSwede question
Ok I like to know why are you against my article.. If I can get writers to indorse my work would that make a different? as I said People do ask the question and as an encyclopidia we should have the answer in here. You said you did not like the name of the article I said I was open to your surgestion. and Yes I'm new to this but I will fight for something I think it is right and I will draw in more people that are intrested in this. Plus I like your "nice" way to talk to me not just running me over, Thanks. ---- RealBigSwede (talk) 11:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
I have nothing against your article read up on policies but don't stop editting just be careful in the future, thanks for considering me as polite --Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! I don't understand " don't stop editting just be careful in the future". can you please explain that for me.-- RealBigSwede (talk) 11:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- basicily im not discouraging you from editting but giving you sound advice to becareful next time you create an article--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- did you see what happen on the page? Someone have posted about my articles. I'm floored.. Ok back to my questions What do I missing in my article? It must be something I have to do to make it axepted? I'm sorry for being suck a thick head guy!-- RealBigSwede 11:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- where have they posted that, i cant help you if you don't tell me where--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- at the article discusion section. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_do_you_call_a_male/female_Dragon%3F -- RealBigSwede (talk) 12:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
(<-indent) err i can't see anything new since i last posted there, i don't know what your talking about sorry--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- In the discussion tabs; copy: I like this article alot! Been looking for the answer to that question for a long time! Love it!ODragoness (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC) --- RealBigSwede (talk) 12:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- see someone likes your article! as for your question i've already answered, unfortunately you can't stop the article getting deleted if consensus decides it needs to be deleted, don't get discouraged find something else to do on wikipedia--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- what can I do to change the consensus mind. If I get writer that write books that would indorse this article would that help?--RealBigSwede (talk) 12:46, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- possible yes, if you think that will work go for it--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Altered speedy deletion rationale: User:Harishmehtabob
Hello Lerdthenerd. I am just letting you know that I deleted User:Harishmehtabob, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Kimchi.sg (talk) 11:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- thanks!--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Altered speedy deletion rationale: User:Crosstalkteam
Hello Lerdthenerd. I am just letting you know that I deleted User:Crosstalkteam, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Kimchi.sg (talk) 11:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- thanks again--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Abyssinian Sand Terrier
I've declined the speedy tag you placed on Abyssinian Sand Terrier. The reason I declined it is because the artocle isn't about an individual animal, it's about a kind (such as species, breed, etc) of animal. Please note that CSD A7 is very specific about what's included. For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
"head desk" thanks for the advice, I've got to get my head head round these speedy tags!--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
old post article
I wondert if it is possably to get a copy of my old articke "what do you call a female/male dragon". I setting up an Wiki page about this and other info about dragons. I have suport of other writers.N o I'm not going to drag it up here again.
Thanks RealBigSwede (talk) 00:36, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
- sorry i can't get that for you, the content of deleted articles is hidden from normal editors like me, you'll have to see an admin--Lerdthenerd (talk) 07:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Speedy declined: Agne Sæther
Hi,
Just to let you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Agne Sæther, as he is a member of a notable band with it's own article. Not sure why you had it down as a red-linked article, as that article (CC Cowboys) has been around since 2005, and it is linked in the text. Stephen! Coming... 09:27, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
*head desk*, someone must have written the template out wrong, it appeared red in the template--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Fascism
Every Ukrainian root in history of Russian Empire is continuisly erased by some ritard antiukrainian users on this Wikipedia, isn't it fascism? Father of Dostoyevsky wasnt German, thats for sure ... Best regards! --SeikoEn (talk) 13:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thanks for the message, but please don't call people who disagree with you retards, its offensive, if you want to put it back to your version gain consensus first don't edit war.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 15:38, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Kutno Town Hall
Hello Lerdthenerd, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Kutno Town Hall to a proposed deletion tag. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Wifione ....... Leave a message 15:18, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- thanks!--Lerdthenerd (talk) 15:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Background of two Russian artist is Ukrainian
- Dostoyevsky
- Tchaikovsky
- Few users with antiukrainian sentiment on this Wikipedia are writeing fulish things about Ukrainians and I can't believe there is no one to stop this propaganda?! I believe in objectiv thinking but some of the users are working to rewrite facts about Ukrainians and Ukraine. Sorry for bodering ... --SeikoEn (talk) 13:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
again please don't be rude about users who oppose you on articles, gain consensus!--Lerdthenerd (talk) 17:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Please Remove the Associated Content
I am trying to remove the false content associated with my username, Meleniumshane90. An email was already directed to Wikipedia regarding the matter. If you are able to change the username and remove the associated content, that would certainly save time and headache. The slanderous content has somehow made its way to Facebook - which came up on my search today, which prompted the email to Wikipedia and the content corrections.
When this has been read, please remove it so it is not indexed by search engines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.180.252.43 (talk) 09:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Regards,
Meleniumshane90
ok, the content shall be removed *disappears into genie lamp*--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
- Aren't you a moderator? I mean, yes - I get the humor, but is it going to be handled?
- By the way are you that IP that was removing the sock puppet tags on IP user pages? I can't help with that theyve been banned as sock puppets if this is the sock puppet master you have been banned, stop violating your ban, naughty sock!--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
No... I never "sock puppeted". I am removing content from Wikipedia associated with my name. Especially the slanderous content that is now showing up in search engines and now on Facebook (somehow). If you aren't able to assist in the removal of the tags - then fine, delete the post in this section (Please Remove the Associated Content).
- Meleniumshane90
please use tildes '~' to sign please, and ive checked over the user pages you've blanked, they are sockpuppets of meleniumshane90 if you didn't want that user name in the firstplace thats not wikipedias problem, now stop violating your ban, sock puppertry is a serious issue here--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC) I've contacted an admin to deal with you--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Usernames
Hi Lerdthenerd, just thought I'd drop you a note to check if you know about WP:UAA where editors with usernames that don't comply with the username policy can be reported to be blocked. You seem to patrol the COI filter and many of the usernames are in violation, for example User:Carmarthenrfc is clearly a promotional/misleading name and can be blocked. If you use WP:TWINKLE it's really simple to report people - select the ARV tab and then change the reason for reporting from "vandalism" to "username". Thanks for helping to stop spammers. Smartse (talk) 12:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
- thanks i may give twinkle a twirl--Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
User:Aaminah.Hamid
I've declined the speedy tag you placed on User:Aaminah.Hamid. The reason I declined it is because the page is in the user space, while CSD A7 only applies to the article namepsace, not in the user namespace. For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
- thanks for note! :D --Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello Lerdthenerd. When you nominate an article for speedy deletion, please don't forget to notify the article creator. You can find the preloaded notice at the bottom of the speedy template: {{subst:nn-warn|Dalia Behbehani|header=1}} ~~~~. Thank you.--Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 09:57, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thanks :D --Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:57, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Leighton Park
Okay so admittedly my initial edit may not have been constructive, but did you even review my subsequent ones? I updated the factual information about the school and plans for the future, so I'm curious as to your need to revert my changes. Thanks PanAtSea (talk) 10:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
- ok try to use edit summaries from now on, so people don't accidently revert you--Lerdthenerd (talk) 10:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Altered speedy deletion rationale: Svn4u
Hello Lerdthenerd. I am just letting you know that I deleted Svn4u, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Kimchi.sg (talk) 11:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion tagging
You tagged AIRY Internet Media Player for speedy deletion. I agree with your tagging, and have deleted the article. However, there are two points that i thought it would be helpful to mention. Firstly, you tagged with {{Speedy deletion}}, but it would have been more helpful to have used {{db-promo}} or {{db-spam}}. There are several reasons why using the standard db- templates is better. For example, doing so automatically gives the reason for tagging in lists seen by administrators. This means it is more likely that a speedy deletion will actually take place. Secondly, you should normally notify the author of any article you tag for deletion. The quickest way to do this is to copy and paste the warning message given near the bottom of the speedy deletion notice on the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks James--Lerdthenerd (talk) 11:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
... for your support in the fake sockpuppet accusation case. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- not a problem, just being friendly :D --Lerdthenerd (talk) 12:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)