Jump to content

User talk:The Illusive Man

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nikoma 93 (talk | contribs) at 22:28, 28 October 2012 (→Review of article about "Jozef Matejka",). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Questions? Concerns? Queries? Quandaries? List them with a date and signature below the line if you would please.

Undoing editing in One for the Money (film)

About your message on my talk page: There are 2 versions of telling the plot of the film: in one version, you retell the whole film and naturally reveal the end. But if you just give short info what the film is about, it's not good to reveal the ending 'cause when one starts to read short info, he'll not be happy to read the ending. In this case you give short info what the film is about and, without retelling the whole film, you wrote the ending of the film. Gevorg89 (talk) 17:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]

OK, I see your point after more carefully reviewing the text. Thank you for discussing this with me, I do not like undoing constructive non controversial edits from reputable editors. It makes me really uneasy to be put in that situation of not knowing if a revert is aiding or just maintaining the status quo of an article. Cheers! Lazh (ɮ) 23:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle

Per the comment on your user page, User:AzaToth, User:Aaron Schulz, and User:Ioeth and the main creators and developers of Twinkle, as says the second and third paragraph of WP:TWINKLE. Cheers! "Pepper" @ 23:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Lofça

I don't know if I understood your intent correctly, but I redirected Lofça to Lovech. ~FeedintmParley 23:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you, I went into it with the intent to make a disambiguation but ended up butchering a redirect. I'll be sure to read more into it before playing with one again. Thanks! An Illusive Man (talk) 23:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]
It's ok, no harm done. ~FeedintmParley 23:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

I wasn't so sure about this, a five days old account wanting to "abandon" Twinkle, I assume your account is an attempt at a clean start despite your username. You did not disclose your last account, but based on a review of your contributions so far, I have accepted your request for rollback. Remember that it can be removed at any time in case of abuse. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 08:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the level of trust you have put in me. I promise to never abuse this tool.An Illusive Man (talk) 12:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Hi there. You should change your signature to An Illusive Man (Contact) Your current signature will redirect every user to their own user or user talk page instead of your user page / talk page. Regards SoWhy 20:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I had no idea! Thank you, I will do that! An Illusive Man (Contact) 20:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Phenopicolinic Acid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inhibitor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casimir Effect: improvement

Dear Illusive,

I've added a brief paragraph explaining how the Casimir effect works, and also added a note and changed a title, from "Casimir's calculation", since this section differs significantly from Casimir's original approach. I tried following your suggestion to describe these changes after made, but I don't see my description anywhere.

David — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.60.141 (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]

I am very surprised and happy to see the level of quality you have added to The Casimir Effect article. I would like to apologize again about my previous reverting, but there is definitely a prejudice in my mind, no matter how many times I repeat my assume good faith mantra to myself, about non/un-constructive edits from IP accounts. In my time as an editor almost 10% of all edits made by IP identified users are hit and run vandals, and this was certainly a false positive. Might I encourage you to create an account? We need more editors like you, David, and registering really lends a given user much more credibility, not to mention a paper trail to be recognized for and proud of. Even if you don't want to keep editing, or if you just don't want to register, thanks for the help! You've been an asset. Cheers! An Illusive Man (Contact) 00:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Illusive, Thanks for the encouragement. Following your recommendation, I've created an account. I don't know if it's possible to sign my previous (basically two) changes. Am gradually learning how to edit without leaving an infinity of versions! David in Cincinnati (talk) 14:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What COI?

I have reverted your edit to Ground Zero. I can imagine you thought Ground Zero Official (talk · contribs) was the one with the COI. However, their edits removed an important part of the article and was in fact simple vandalism. Thank you for flagging up important issues such as COI, but you should first check the editor in question is actually making constructive edits. Astronaut (talk) 10:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]

OK, thanks. From the snapshot context I took before editing the page I did not even realize that the page was about something other than a musical aggregate. This will serve as an example for a long time for me to slow way down when reviewing edits for vandalism. Thank you for noticing and removing the offending content I completely missed. I have not edited Wikipedia for quite a while, I am currently working my way back into a routine and hopefully back into a more effective vandal sweeper. Thank you. An Illusive Man (Contact) 02:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Wow. I didn't even notice the thing about the band; I only saw the net change to remove a large part of the ground zero article. Now, what to do about User:Ground Zero Official/sandbox? I'll ask at the help desk. Astronaut (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pindobind Formula.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pindobind Formula.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Leyo 14:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Jason Leonard

http://www.rugbynetwork.net/main/s245/st50222.html

http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/player/10878.html

Please see both links, Jason Leonard is stated at absolutely nowhere near 137kg in either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.70.3 (talk) 00:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC) [reply]

OK, I trust you. I just was really suspicious about weight and height, two commonly vandalized statistics, being changed around without the introduction of new sources. My bad on being a little too bold. Cheers! An Illusive Man (Contact) 00:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me research this

I don't know. Let me read up on this. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 05:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate speedy tagging

Your placement of a speedy deletion tag on Don Shields was quite inappropriate; the article was obviously under active construction by a new user. While listing references before providing text may not be the standard approach, it certainly shows a quite admirable interest is satisfying RS and BLP requirements. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mr. Wolfowitz - I see you are a great deal more experienced than I ever was in the process. I do take a rather unapologetic deletionist stance on pop culture, media and persons and an inclusionist stand on history, science and mathematics; This pisses many people off. I agree with your main point, however, I disagree with the removal of the speedy deletion tag. While I won't spin the wheel against a better educated editor, I believe that article will remain context-devoid unless another editor picks it up. I am just coming back up to speed from an extended Wikibreak, and a considerable deal of the wording surrounding CSD has changed since my departure. If articles like this meet the standard nowadays, perhaps it is best I back off and watch CSD through a window for the time. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Cheers! —An Illusive Man— (Contact) 02:15, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Phenopicolinic Acid.png

Thank you for your contribution. Could I request that you have a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry/Structure drawing, if you need to do any more. The structure is already present in the system (in the preferred format(svg), on the preferred server(commons), and with the correct license {{PD-chem}}), so the new image has been tagged as "vector version available".  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Phenopicolinic Acid.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Phenopicolinic Acid.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Leyo 07:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saunders Valkyrie

Please point out the content I removed on Saunders Valkyrie. --91.10.34.158 (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Resolved, with error on my part being the case. Thank you for noticing and reverting this fallacious revert. —The Illusive Man— (Contact) 00:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LE WHAT

Admins/Crats, I have no idea what is going on but there is a sock chewing up huge blocks of dynamic IP. Is it allowed under 3RR for me to keep reverting the copy/pasted message? I have decided to stop either way, hoping not to screw up the rule huge. Cheers! —The Illusive Man— (Contact) 00:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

70.137.143.31 (talk) 00:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions and removing the vandalism at my talkpage. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 21:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of ICS 205-930

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on ICS 205-930 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Hahc21 [TALK][CONTRIBS] 17:29, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

-Page was found to both identify the subject and meet notability guidelines.

Edit tests on Denver International Airport

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your edits to articles, such as the edit you made to Denver International Airport. This is a common mistake to make and has probably already been corrected. There is no need to sign your edits to article content, as the article's edit history serves the function of attributing contributions, so you only need to use your signature to make discussions more readable, such as on article talk pages or project pages such as the Village Pump. If you would like further information about distinguishing types of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! This is an automated message from 28bot. False positive? Please report it. 28bot (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

-The Rollback was to a vandalized copy of the page, and as the Rollbacker my signature replaced the vandals.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

I broke the HTML on my signature. Will work correctly from here on in. The Illusive Man(Contact) 20:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC) [reply]

hi

hi can help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmel (talk • contribs) 21:55, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

phone

can i contont you by phone — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmel (talk • contribs) 22:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the revert on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Thanks! Hadn't noticed it and was about to log off. Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for !voting

at my successful RFA
Thank you, The Illusive Man, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. I shall remember to take it slow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right to Vanish versus Cleanstart

Hi. Unless you were explicitly given permission by the Arbitration Committee to do so, you cannot return to editing under a new account if you have vanished (i.e. if you account was renamed to something else). If you did vanish and want to return, you must have a bureaucrat unvanish (restore the original name) of the old account. If you instead are doing a cleanstart' (you left your old account but it was not renamed, and you waited a while before starting the new account) then you should never describe yourself as "vanished", because they are two very different processes, and Right to Vanish has become a politically charged issue after several users abused it.

Either way, you must inform ArbCom (in private, of course), as this protects you should someone link the two accounts and accuse you of sockpuppetry. You do not have to link the two accounts yourself though.

Cheers, Sven Manguard Wha? 16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for telling me this! I completely had the two muddled. I will contact ArbCom and see to getting these two accounts linked. However, I had the past account hardbanned for being compromised falsely, sort of to avoid this drama if I reappeared. Let me formally say here with a better degree of confidence that I am the result of a Cleanstart, not a Vanished user. Cheers! The Illusive Man(Contact) 16:40, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

your Request for Filemover

Hi, I was writing you a reply when i found that you had deleted your wp:RFP/F request. You had said that you might need file mover as you will be uploading files. While I have no reason to believe you will not upload the files. But the question remains, should n't you use proper names before uploading ? I mean you will have to rename it any way , why not do it before uploading scans if at all a renaming is required and save the logs some space, and file movers some trouble. :) File mover right is for rectifying inadvertent errors not for dliberately making an error and rectifying it, hope you got my point. regards--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 17:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why can't the files you're planning to scan be uploaded to Commons instead? --Stefan2 (talk) 9:45 pm, Today (UTC+5.5)
I agree with Stefan2 can you also answer Stefan2's question ? --ÐℬigXЯaɣ 17:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean for this to get tracked back onto my userspace, but I still owe you all answers to your questions. In response to DBigXray's question, yes, I should name them correctly the first time - I was kind of counting on myself to make more than a few mistakes though, considering I would be using alien hardware. That probably reflects more on me than it does my necessity to get the flag. In response to Stefan2, I really don't like the people at Commons, I hope this isn't insulting, but anytime I've worked with them in the past they are kind of callous arses to me. I may or may not be uploading it to the Commons depending on how the Extrava-SCAN-za type event runs. (If I have a say, we won't be.)The Illusive Man(Contact) 21:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You may have your opinion, but the files you upload here will eventually be moved by a Bot to commons. So its destined to end up there. So its better to upload yourself at commons, so that your attribution (as an uploader) will remain there. apologies if you felt tracked, Had honest intentions of clarifying your doubts regarding the rights.--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 21:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thats's cool Pal, thank you for going out of the way to educate me! I am sure that your last comment will stick with me for some time. I honestly did not think that en-Wiki syncronized free images to Commons - that alone will help me substantially as I actually start to work with files again. To clarify, this is a Clean Start account, and as an old fart we never had as many scripts running as the RfA page involved in file manipulation. Thank you! The Illusive Man(Contact) 21:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My use name doesnot violate any policys of yours

Sir, 

  The name of our group is SWASTHAYA KALYAN GROUP. The name SWASTHYA KLAYAN means to work for welfare of people,to work for good health of people.

  The engineering college SWASTHYA KALYAN TECHNICAL CAMPUS is also a part of this group which ensures that the technical education can affordable and available to each section of people. There should to no social and financial barrier which stops any individual to learn such professional and technical course.

  So our name exactly follows your policys


Thanking You Swasthya Kalyan Team — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sktcengineeringcollege (talk • contribs) 07:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Robertson Field (Connecticut)

Hi, You may be interested in questions that I raised regarding the Robertson Field article. I think the article needs to be reverted back to a 8 June 2012‎ version. If interested, please check out Talk:Robertson Field (Connecticut). Thanks,--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your reviewer request

Thank you for taking my declining of your reviewer request in good stead. It was a tough decision to make, and I felt it best to give you a decent rationale for my decision. I notice you haven't edited since your post on my talk page...I hope everything's okay. Best. Acalamari 08:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Aderbasib (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Receptor, Inhibitor and Proliferation
Alrestatin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Inhibitors
Ameltolide (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Inhibition

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Note

Check out what happened at article "Cordless phone" today. Looked like an author blank, but need to be sure. The Illusive Man(Contact) 18:21, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Service award

You have the wrong Service award. You're edit count is 1410, that makes you an {{Apprentice Editor}}. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops! I'm getting ahead of myself.  Done. Cheers mate! The Illusive Man(Contact) 22:35, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for taking the time to participate in my RfA. I hope that I will be able to improve based on the feedback I received and become a better editor. AutomaticStrikeout 22:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for taking the time to write me a reply on my talk page. There was no reason in my mind the RFA failed but for a political gong show, I wish you the best of luck going forward and hope to support a new RFA nomination in a few months. Mayhaps the trolling opposers will cool their jets by then, but somehow I doubt it.

Cheers! TIM

Well, I knew coming in that the lack of experience would be a problem. Next time I run, it won't be an issue. AutomaticStrikeout 22:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AFC Backlog Elimination Drive

Hi there, I see that you have shown interest in participating in the October - November 2012 BED for the AFC WikiProject. Because you have already seen the page you may think that the drive will begin on November 1, but due to the rapid increase in submissions these past few days, I am pushing the start date to October 22, 2012.--Dom497 (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

afc and speedy

Only the general reasons for deletion-- copyvio, abuse, and the like are reasons for deletion of AfC pages. Lack of notability is not--in fact, it's not a reason for speedy deletion of anything at all. Lack of any plausible good faith indication of importance is a reason for speedy deletion of articles, but AfC pages are not articles.

But very possibly for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The New German Cinema (book - in Chinese), by Yu-shan Huang and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International Construction Information Society you did not deliberately mark it for deletion, but the software did so. If so, please let me know on my talk page, because that would be a bug that must be fixed. DGG ( talk ) 05:39, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • DGG; Thank you for catching these pages, which, when critiqued using the written policy, were certainly marked inappropriately for deletion. While I would like to say this was a bug or software glitch, policy clearly states that I am responsible for all edits using Semi/Automated tools. In addition, I have not been able to recreate this error, so there are overwhelming odds I was negligent and liberal in my use of the tool. I am glad you did not let this slide, and that you informed me I slipped up. I have looked at every article I have evaluated before and since (not a huge amount at this point, like 15) and this error was not made in the past and will not happen again in the future. I admit wrongdoing and pledge to not let it happen again. Cheers mate! The Illusive Man(Contact) 01:49, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this was supposed to happen

It created a blank page. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:13, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Smjg. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Auger Therapy without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Smjg (talk) 10:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Smjg, this was an anomaly. I was meaning to remove the AfC process tags when I accepted the article and moved to mainspace... Props for pointing out the error. I don't think a level one warning was really appropriate though, I am somewhat competent in the process. Cheers, The Illusive Man(Contact) 17:14, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of article about "Jozef Matejka",

Dear " Illusive man", you have recently review my article about the Slovak writer Jozef Matejka, link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jozef_Matejka and have not accepted it for submission. I would like to ask , what have I done wrong, for my article to not be submitted? I have followed the guidelines and I put in as many references to reliable sources as possible,big national newspapers and Tv stations. I had spoken to someone in the web chat help and they had told me that you did not find the article notable enough. Jozef Matejka is a well know, respectable writer who has many fans in Slovakia, and I do not understand what you mean by not notable enough? Is it not important? He has 4 published books,many fans, and often does various appearances. Why is this not notable? because I have seen far less "notable" things on Wikipedia before... Could you please tell me what was wrong with my article and why you did not find it notable enough?

Thank you for your time, Hope to hear from you.

Nikoma 93 (talk) 11:26, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nikoma, thank you for seeking additional clarification. You're a bright person it seems, so I won't child you. Here on Wikipedia, our Notability guidelines for the inclusion of persons are a little bit less about content, and more about whether or not this person was covered widely by multiple independent, highly visible sources. While I did look up all of the references you provided (excellent by the way, few editors go to that trouble at first), most of them appear to be anthologies or passages of work, and they don't explicitly state an overt significance of the subject. I know, it's a terrible terrible set of rules IMO; I myself make a habit of trying to get pages that are even less notable deleted. What's important to take away from this, is that a)Your contributions are noted and appreciated (please don't take this in a bad way, it isn't personal), b)The article itself is good enough to stand as an article, if even one or two news articles link to the cite notes. That's the real killer here, your citations don't seem to be linking to what you think they should, because if what you say is on the page I saw in the references, I wouldn't have hesitated to pass it. I would be happy to personally approve of it if you could fix those references.

Thank you for seeking my input. If you have any further clarification, I would be pleased to explain further or justify any of the actions I have taken. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! Cheers! The Illusive Man(Contact) 17:52, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Illusive Man,

Thank you for your reply, I sincerely appreciate your time! However I am not a native English speaker and I failed to understand the last part about what the real killer was. What do you mean by " your citations don't seem to be linking to what you think they should " . Do you mean that the references are not enough ? Do there need to be more outside links to photos from events and stuff like that?? I'm only 20 and not really a big fan of technology, and it's the first time I'm doing this and nobody from my friends really understands these things either so I'm really struggling to understand what exactly I have to fix ! But thank you for your compliments, I really did try to write a good article, with just enough information to give people a general idea about the author ! I put in as many things as I could find, unfortunately in our country not every thing is medialised on the internet yet ! I chose to write this article as I am attending a poetry group at my university, and we have come across many of his poems and I was inspired and wanted more people to be aware that modern poetry still exists in our country, and that there still are people who take great interest in it. But anyway, I would be very thankful if you could spare some time to guide me through what I could to maybe get this article up to an acceptable standard and fix what you thought was wrong ! I am determined to get this right! :)

Thank you very very much again, Sorry to be such a pain,

Nikoma

Nikoma 93 (talk) 22:28, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My wiki entry

I just saw your submission. I don't completely understand your decline. I follow the dc real estate world and this company has become a little famous in the area through its coverage on huffington and cnbc. I am not affiliated with the company at all (I work for the govt). Any specific feedback? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psv108 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Illusive_Man&oldid=520333833"