User talk:Onorem/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Onorem. 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 4

→

I-35W Mississippi River bridge

RE; your message - the material in question was on multiple webpages yesterday - if you enter text fragments now you only catch the rapidly diminishing cache hits. Clearly a non-web citation will be required, but I did not make this up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djg2006 (talk • contribs)

OK, then why not add your citation - time of day, and call letters of the radio station. This can be verified via FCC logs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djg2006 (talk • contribs)

Hmm...I've never seen a radio station cited as a source...and I don't think it's all that important to the article. --Onorem♠Dil 20:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Linking dates

Well, I think it is redundant, but it does make the autoformating easier after reading your link. So if you insist, then do that. Chris! _{my talk} 20:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

List of Internet slang phrases

I see you and I have been keeping an eye on this page for various unsourced IP additions for the last few weeks. Now rejoice, it has been semi-protected indefinitely! :-) Mel sa ran 17:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

IIHCR

We are different people working together on atricles with a single user account. Is it against the policies of Wikipedia? If so, we are ready to create individual accounts.IIHCR 04:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it is. If you all register an own account, we know which edits come from which person. Mel sa ran 11:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

IIHCR

As you suggested, we will be using different accounts for each one of us. Some of us (including me who write this ) already possess own personal accounts. Thank you for your advise.IIHCR 12:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Princemathewalleppey

I am a member of IIHCR. As you suggested, now I am using my personal account. Sorry for the 'tag removal'. Such activities will never be repeated.Princemathewalleppey 12:41, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Tancred

G'day,

So I can not delete the sockpuppet accusation notice, but Tancred can delete the uncited material notices? I am not trying to whinge about being treated unfairly, I am just curious to know whether that is the situation as you seem to know the rules very well. --Tomasthetankengine 18:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. --Tomasthetankengine 18:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Please help block

Please block or get an administrator to block the IP 24.117.147.70 for vandilizing Down III: Over the Under and attacking me and my religion he reverted the edit again by saying

(Undid revision 150456211 by Skeeker (talk) I will not be controlled by a CHRISTIAN metallica fan. Fuck off douchebag.)

I seem to be ignored when I try getting administration help, so please help for me. Thank you. Skeeker _[Talk] 03:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, he also personally attaked me so he should be blocked now shouldn't he? Skeeker _[Talk] 03:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

He also said "fuck off douchebag" that should count as a personal attack. Skeeker _[Talk] 04:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I don't know how I found this out but you can put {{protected}} on the page and he will not be able to take it off. Skeeker _[Talk] 04:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Skeeker _[Talk] 04:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Removing the "This article does not cite any references or sources" template

Hi. It seems you stuck the template referred to above on the Basque grammar article which I began uploading this afternoon.

I have written a number of grammar articles on Wikipedia over the past 12 months (my user page states which ones). I started the Basque grammar article many months ago but have only started to upload it today. Because my work is still unfinished and some sections are more finished than others, I have started to do so by parts. I have so far put up one section, and it is not the bibliography; therefore there were no "references or sources" visible, but over the next few hours (or couple of days) it was may intention to take care of that. You just didn't give me time! (Notice that my note on my first upload states: "More coming soon"!)

After seeing your template on reopening the page, I have dropped everything to attend to this problem first, at least provisionally, by listing four important book references (two of which are items written by myself, but that is not strictly relevant: they are mainstream publications). A far longer bibliography could be provided to accompany this article (although few of the items would be in English), but for starters this is surely enough?

So my question is: can I now remove the template stating that the article does not cite any references or sources? Or can you do so? And if not, then when can this be done. I have no wish to jump the gun of Wikipedia etiquette by "reverting" your "contribution" if such behaviour is not warranted, and this is the first time I have been faced with this particular issue. Alan --A R King 16:08, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Message from Rouge Crimson

What does npov mean? I don't get what you're talking about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rouge Crimson (talk • contribs)

AIV

This recent AIV report Should go to WP:SSP. That Page is for Sockpuppets. Happy editing! J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 20:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree that it belongs at SSP. SSP is for discussion and none was needed in this case. --Onorem♠Dil 20:31, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

My point was that you were requesting a block for sockpuppetry, not vandalism. Unless I misunderstand, and this guy who you reported is a vandal. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 20:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 22:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. --Onorem♠Dil 12:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Message from Havendark (talk · contribs)

Hey bro, be nice eh? ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Havendark (talk • contribs) moved here from user page by --Onorem♠Dil 14:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll make you a deal. You stop adding your nonsense and I'll be nice. --Onorem♠Dil 14:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for rolling back my userpage before. Very much appreciated. :) Cheers, Sarah 14:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Anytime. --Onorem♠Dil 14:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

MY NAME IS NOT AN IMPLAUSIBLE FUCKING TYPO MOTHER FUCKER. CEASE AND FUCKING DESIST BEFORE I OPEN A CAN OF WHOOP FUCKING ASS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Havendark (talk • contribs) moved here from user page by --Onorem♠Dil 14:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Just an FYI: 2007 images

Just to let you know, that previous editor had added very low quality screen-captures, (and to other pages, and removing images with no explanation from other pages as well) and so I replaced them with Commons images. When possible, we are encouraged to use Commons images, so I could not understand that editor's action, and there was no explanation in the edit summary. Also, I balanced the page visually by moving the images, when images are all on the right side, it makes the page "heavy" on that side, and visually imbalanced. Not so noticeable on the 2007 page, since it has fewer images, but definitely noticeable on articles with many. I've asked that editor why s/he is removing images and replacing them with junk quality images, or removing them altogether, but the editor does not answer. Just wanted to let you know my thinking, so you weren't wondering. Thanks! ^Ariel♥Gold 18:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Message from Jimmythegothfreak

hey, the article im creating shouldnt be speedy deleted cos i havent finished wrioting it yet! give me a chance lol, i cant even finisht he article before someones trying to get rid of it :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmythegothfreak (talk • contribs)

Reliable sources that verify the band's notability should be included in the first edit you make when creating a new article. --Onorem♠Dil 15:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

hang on, hang on...i tried recreating the article and finding references, but its been deleted yet again before i can even find references! I cant understand why articles actually being written are being deleted before theyre ccompleted. although you're right, i cant seem to find any sources to verify. i thought that by having an album in stores, it made the band's music notable and not in the category for speedy deletion, at least giving the author time to find articles to verify, but it seems yet another user has come along and BOOM! article gone without a chance. I've got a copy of the cd right here in front of me that proves this band is a real band and thier music is notable, most of the info i got from the cd booklet. I saved the article to a word document, should i be able to find verification. You gotta admire wikipedias speed when it comes to quality standards, i guess lol :P anyways, i'll know for next time —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jimmythegothfreak (talk • contribs) 16:25, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

Similar situation

This is exactly the situation I was in earlier. Johnjoecavanagh 14:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Very true. You had also created an article that did not assert notability and had no reliable sources. --Onorem♠Dil 16:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't given a chance to assert notability or use reliable sources. A nice little note on the talk page saying: 'You've got until the end of the day to improve this or it will be deleted', rather than blazing through any common human decency most of us possess to delete it to get some kicks. I'm serious about organising a petition - there are enough disenchanted users here who agree with me. Johnjoecavanagh 18:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

You were given every chance to assert notability. After the article was deleted the first time, you should have found Reliable sources that verified the creature's notability before creating it again. You shouldn't create an article in the first place without them. Instead, you decided to start in calling people fascists and trying to recruit other people who had their articles (rightfully) deleted instead of trying to fix the problems with your article. --Onorem♠Dil 18:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with your petition. I'm still wondering why you haven't looked into discussing the deletion policy on its talk page before looking to organize a gang to try to force change somehow. --Onorem♠Dil 18:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Its interesting that you think I was given a chance to find references. In fact, I even cited one, gave the publisher name and everything but it was still deleted because someone arrogantly thought it didn't matter. You do realise that you are one of the tiny minority who support this policy, and that most people who read wikipedia read it for the Oodles of Noodles of this world? Johnjoecavanagh 18:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

First, I just want to apologize because my comments thus far have been far too aggressive. I took offense to some of your initial comments and may have been a little too bitey.

I saw your reference, and tried to look it up. I couldn't find a publication by the name you gave.

After the article was deleted the second time, I tried finding sources of my own for it. I was going to let you know if I found any.

I didn't find any...and then I noticed the complete lack of civility you were showing to those you felt were responsible for the article's deletion. - "arrogantly" - There you go again...try assuming good faith just once.

I'm one of the tiny minority that believes that articles should be well sourced and notable? I'm sorry, but you'll have a hard time convincing me of that. You seem to have an idea of what Wikipedia is that is completely off track of what Wikipedia is supposed to be. This is another policy that might be an interesting read for you. --Onorem♠Dil 19:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for that. I usually do assume good faith about people, but really, it needs to be reciprocated. An article of mine was deleted twice despite my plea on its talk page to be given a little time to improve it. I didn't demand that it be kept up indefinately, I just asked that I be given a little time. Deleting an article even though someone specifically asked to be given some time is not acting in good faith. There's a word for it but I wouldn't use it in civilised company! And now you see there are plenty more who feel the way I do. Johnjoecavanagh 22:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

sblobhering of penis

sorry for being non-elaborate, but sblobhering (käjäytys) is an old finnish tradition to prevent the penis sblobhering by itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basaka (talk • contribs)

You shouldn't be sorry for being non-elaborate. You should be sorry for being a vandal. --Onorem♠Dil 23:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Cort Guitars Link

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Hello,

Would you please why did you remove the discussion forum link from the external links?

As you may notice, someone always removing the link.

Cort Guitars

Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lastninja (talk • contribs) 15:16, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

Edit: You're right, it is a discussion forum :) I understand after reading the rules. Cheeers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastninja (talk • contribs)

It is not a discussion forum, it just looks like one. It's a commercial store-front which directs people to your online guitars store. Do not fool people here.. --88.106.104.36 22:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter. It's inappropriate either way. --Onorem♠Dil 22:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You should prove it Mr. Lier Abusive Emre Evren with IP "88.106.104.36 from Tiscali". If you're not lier, show the people just one of the links you mention and tell me why you are sending lots of e-mails with this IP addresses from Tiscali contains swearings and threats to us and our families. Otherwise it means you're a lier and abusive. Find yourself a job instead of fighting with the forums you're kicked from and banned.

(By the way, Onorem I'm sorry for that but I had to answer this lier's message) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastninja (talk • contribs) 10:33, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

I think you are a little confused my friend. My name is Baris .. I am not sure why you calling me as Emre Evren, I think someone is conning you or something.. My name is Baris.. Is this clear?? I have never been a member of your website nor sent you abusive messages .. I am just trying to stop you from adding your commercial links to every Cort page.. Wikipedia is not a dashboard --Barkinyus ♫ talk 23:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Message from 24.223.133.212 (talk · contribs)

Thank you for your positive criticism towards my edit of Best Buy. I will keep this in mind when editing in the future. ~Rockerrock —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.223.133.212 (talk) 02:33, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Curdy(character)

I ll try to improve the quality of this voice as you demand. It will be take some days. Thank u very much!!--Starwar25 14:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Simon Horn

Hello Onorem. I think that you might have misinterpreted some good-faith edits by User:Simonhorn as vandalism. This user has been editing under an ip address and another username, and I believe that he is actually Simon Horn, but simply unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies. I left him a comment on User talk:88.106.115.253, and now I will leave him one on User talk:Simonhorn, but I'm not sure that a last-warning vandalism tag is appropriate. Cheers. --דניאל - Danielrocks123 16:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with a final warning after he continued blanking the article after being warned multiple times. I would not have reported him after the next blanking, but sometimes seeing that warning causes new editors to take a breath and consider what they are doing. I saw where he claimed to be Simon Horn. I also am assuming that he is simply a different Simon Horn. There is a DJ named Simon Horn, although I don't have any knowledge of his orientation. --Onorem♠Dil 16:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, there's something odd going on here, he just recreated his article using the same material he was complaining about. The external links are fake, the recordings are fake, if it appears once more then I'm deleting it, protecting it from recreation and blocking User:Simonhorn. Unless anyone tells me otherwise... The Rambling Man 16:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm hoping that he recreated it accidently...although I'm not sure how he would have done that and removed the AfD template. Anyway, I can't find any information that says Simon Horn is notable, but I did find a few different links that suggest a DJ named Simon Horn does exist. --Onorem♠Dil 16:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I'll be watching! The Rambling Man 16:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Keith Olbermann

Hi, in reference to my recent edits to Keith Olbermann's bio. How does one cite a reference from earlier in an article?. By that I mean, I referred to him working at networks that are already included earlier in the bio. And how do I prove the latter - send you a tape featuring all of what I referred to?JThur1 17:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Where he worked is already in the article. I'm not sure why it needs to be there again. If you want to say that he exhibited an intense bias and hatred towards Auto Racing, to the point where he has made many exaggerations, embellishments and outright errors in his reporting on the subject, then you need to provide a reliable source that has made the same claim. What you observed yourself doesn't count. The same goes for the comments about Ron Gralnik, although I'm not sure that information would be notable enough to include even with a source. --Onorem♠Dil 17:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Artur Balder

Dear friend, some references were translated into "Artur Balder". Tell me if its all right for both articles "Artur Balder" and "Curdy".--Starwar25 11:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank u! And I have to ask you: the same references of these one will be functional on Curdys article?--Starwar25 11:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think we are undestanding us. Balder is known as author of Curdy, and Arminius, so all thse references to Balder are refered to his main work and character, Curdy. The other fact is that articles en El Mundo, El Pais and ABC testify the force of these literary phenomenon on spanish area, now coming into italianish, french, polish, german... but beginning. The most important references are those. Ill try to improve it, anyway. Yours--Starwar25 12:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for moving warning

I can't believe I did that! Thanks for moving the warning to the talk page where it belonged. --Orange Mike 13:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. --Onorem♠Dil 13:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome messages

Thank you for taking the time to welcome new users. I was just curious if you meant to be including the warning about deleting other people's input into discussions. --Onorem♠Dil 18:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes I did Onorem. The greeter gave me that when I first joined so I thought it was standard practice to do so. yes I did copy my greetings from my own original greeting with a few changes such as names and my own sign. Hope I did nothing wrong...?Philippe Auguste 18:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the person who greeted you added just the welcome portion on June 25.

An anonymous editor added the warning on July 29. In any case, I think it comes off too aggressively as part of a welcome message to users who haven't made a single edit yet. I've removed that part from the talk pages you left it on.

It also seems a little strange for you to be editing the user pages of others. If they haven't asked for you to make changes, it might be a good idea to talk to them about it first. Maybe they've already said it's OK. I haven't looked into all of the histories. --Onorem♠Dil 18:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Alrightio, I'llstop with that anti-vandalism bit. I can see how it can be agressive. Thank you for bringing that to my attenion.Philippe Auguste 18:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Katrina comment

As I stated in my note, the press release on the White House web site itself is the source of the information.

The only thing the blog did is show the information graphically. Samer 19:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'll be dealing with this later, but I've found other primary sources that can make for a factual claim--that (A) there was a request by Gov. Blanco for assistance, that requested aid for regions that were not included in Bush's declaration; and (B) that the assistance declaration for LA was markedly different than the simultaneous ones for MS and AL (namely, that none of the coastal parishes in LA were included, but coastal counties in MS and AL were). (Unless I'm grossly mistaken, pointing out that there is a difference between Blanco's request and Bush's statement does not constitute synthesis, nor does stating that there is a difference between the declaration for LA and those for the other states.) Samer 19:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Ian Watkins (Lostprophets)

Thanks for fixing his age! I really don't know how I missed it, especially since I spent the best part of an hour looking at that page as I re-wrote his bio (what an idiot, massive d'oh)...Oh well, I guess everyone must have times like that some times... I kept reverting to age 29 purely because it was referenced and the other age changes weren't...*cringe*. Anyway, thanks again :-).

Seraphim ^Whipp 21:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Michelle Beadle

Spring Thomas and Michelle Beadle are the same person. why can't i include her stage name in her article? or a photo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newsmaker2000 (talk • contribs) 17:13, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Because this is a theory from a non-reputable source. Such allegations violate our guidelines on biographies of living people. Why not concentrate on making the article as it stands less mediocre? There are no wikilinks, no meaningful sourcing in general; it needs a lot of other work without insisting on inserting an unsubstantiated Internet rumor. --Orange Mike 17:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

can you cite a source for your claim of mediocrity? or a source for your claim of my insistence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newsmaker2000 (talk • contribs) 17:34, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Proof that BlackBeard2K7 & AdamOfEvil are the same person

Hi,

AdamOfEvil is the alias of the person owning the Website http://atarimule.neotechgaming.com/

The person who is propagating this Website here is BlackBeard2K7.

(1) I know this person since a few months on another Forum as AdamOfEvil. He gloated on PM there to me how he was "owning" me on Wikipedia. Do you want screenshots of that conversation. I will send it to you if you want.

(2) I have a running battle with him over this time for his software on that site which screwed up my PC.

(3) I know his home & work IP adresses as AdamOfEvil. You want me to send those to you so that you can cross-link to his IP's here?

(4) For Arguments sake, lets say he is not the owner of this site. Why is this person then desperately trying to propagate this Website here? Why dont you check out the Website yourself. The software that he offers for download there is a pirated / modified / illegal software. There was NO Windows version of M.U.L.E. ever made. He offers a Windows version of M.U.L.E. for download. Isn't this enough to stop him from Spamming his site here on Wikipedia?

(5) To fool the Admins here, he is now indirectly linking to this above Website though a unknown Game Blog source.

Hungrywolf 10:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

1) A screenshot would be OK. ~~A link would be better.~~ You can contact me using the E-mail user link on the left, although I'd much prefer that you post the information here so anyone can see it. (Ahh...PM'd you. I guess a link wouldn't work then.)

2) Congrats on your battle. That's not really proof.

3) I have no way to check the IP or IP's behind BlackBeard2K7. How do you know his home and work IP addresses?

4) Because he thinks it's a valid external link. I happen to agree with him. Does that make me a co-owner of the site?

5) He added a link to a blog of someone respected in their field. This person's blog is linked to several articles about gaming. There is nothing wrong with that. That it happens contains a link to another site is not evidence. --Onorem♠Dil 13:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

In my own defense, I have to say that there is no truth to anything this user has accused me of. Hungrywolfs latest statements are implying that he is Cyberstalking me, claiming to be attempting to obtain personal information about me because he doesnt agree with my opinions? Threatening to send my name, address, phone # to other users on Wikipedia? And threatening to "Wire Tap" my phone? Give me a break. I hope you will support my RFC on him when the time comes to create it. Note the recent reversion/correction he made on the M.U.L.E. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), changing the reference to one that does not support the comment that was made, whereas the original reference DID.Blackbeard2k7 16:19, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Curdy and Artur Balder, english references

Hallo! Let u here:

Artur Balder and Curdy in the important magazine America reads spanish

It links to a text in english about both Curdy and Artur Balder. Hope its all right. May be u can create the disambiguation pages for Curdy and Curdy (character). Im preparing new articles with new characters from the novels and new fan illustrations.Thank u--Starwar25 17:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment from 71.154.252.212

I SEE YOU EDIT ANY REFERENCE TO NEGATIVE ACTION BY A REPUBLICAN. VERY FAIR. GLAD YOU WANT THE DEBATE TO BE ONE SIDED. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.252.212 (talk)

Care to explain what exactly you are referring to? I don't want anything to be one-sided. I want things to be neutral. --Onorem♠Dil 15:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Changes you made to bill oreilly page and rush limbaugh. Why delete facts about these guys? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.252.212 (talk) 23:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The facts you added were redundant and out of place. They weren't being added from a neutral point of view. Again, please read the sections I linked to your logged in talk page. --Onorem♠Dil 23:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Prayerfeeder article

Hello, please help me understand how this speedy deletion could have been avoided (because I'm still new here). I'd only just created the page today, and I'd marked it as a stub. I had thought that according to the Criteria_for_speedy_deletion this would avoid speedy deletion. ("Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved or reduced to a stub; if so, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete.")--Hnc14 15:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, you have made a response to the fact that a page needs reliable sources that verify the notability of the subject. But you have not explained why it was not OK to create the article over the course of several edits. Incidentally, I understand that the Church_Times is likely to feature the Prayerfeeder website in a forthcoming issue, although of course this information remains "hearsay" until any such article were actually published. (But please respond to my question about creating an article over the course of several edits; it would not surprise me to hear that forthcoming articles do not count as verifiable.)--Hnc14 15:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Jane Tomlinson

Well done on your consistency and cool head during the rather strange "correctness" this user thought he had whilst redirecting the page to a very offensive title. Onnaghar^{tl ! co} 15:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Agent Ockenbock 81

Thanks for reverting some of that guy's vandalism. He's a sockpuppet of User: Nightmare 81. If you see any vandalism like that again, where the user is hitting multiple user's pages, you can report it directly to WP:AIV if you'd like. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 17:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

NOFX

I you look over past Wikipedia contributions, you will see that I do not tend to resort to trolling. It was a bit blunt and unhelpful in that form I admit, but I truely meant well. That point is, there are many uneeded comments and arguements that need to be "archived". The entire talk page, in fact, has become a NOFX fan forum. That needs to change. BURNyA 17:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

If the page needs archiving, archive it. Adding unhelpful comments only adds to the problem. --Onorem♠Dil 17:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah...I was in the process of adding more to the section. Was trying to find the WP:not a forum or eqivalant. Guess I let myself get pissed and fight immaturity with immaturity for a minute. BURNyA 17:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I added the {{talkpage}} template. At least there's a note up top about the page not being for general discussion. Probably won't help...but can't hurt. --Onorem♠Dil 17:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Vopt

Why did you not make an attempt at fixing the article instead of tagging it as an advert and waiting for some one else to do it. That's impolite --RitaSkeeter 15:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't originally tag the article. I replaced the tag because it was removed with an inappropriate edit summary. Removing the tag simply because an anonymous non-admin placed it isn't acceptable. --Onorem♠Dil 15:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Why did you not fix the article instead, if you agree with the advert claim? Why vandalise a perfectly good article with an advert tag when it isn't necesary? --RitaSkeeter 16:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Please Block DominvsVobiscm who continues his edit war even after your warning

Dear Onorem, Please note that even after several warnings from several Admins, including yours, this person persists in placing his material on the site Roman Catholic Sex Abuse Cases. Currently, his material has been locked onto the site Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami for over a month and was removed from the site John Favalora before that page was locked. There is clear consensus of editors on all three sites against this material. Can we please block this person and unlock these pages so the rest of us can continue to build the articles without spending all of our time and energy fighting DominvsVobiscvm? Please help! NancyHeise 18:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm not an admin. I can't help with the blocking part. I will watchlist the page, and try to catch any further edits which go against consensus. --Onorem♠Dil 18:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. NancyHeise 18:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

John M. Ford

Mike Ford was a frequent contributor to Making Light, one of the most cherished and well-known people there. If he had been impersonated, it would have come out in mere moments, and the scandal would have spread throughout the community. A Mike Ford post on Making Light is pretty much the gold standard for stuff coming from John M. Ford. --Orange Mike 16:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

/shrug. Fair enough. I'll chalk it up to spirit of the law, but not the letter. I'm not sure why that fact would be clear to anyone not familiar with the man or the blog, but I won't be removing it again myself. --Onorem♠Dil 17:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for that revert on my userpage. Was having a bit of trouble keeping up with that vandalism. Wasn't sure what button acutally reverted the changes at first. Arendedwinter 12:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Anytime. Happy to help. Looks like they're all blocked now. --Onorem♠Dil 12:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dil

The wikipedia codes are very interesting thanks. This is a fine thing wikipedia, is it not. I have heard many rumours about it, but now seeing it in all its historical depth simply amazes me. It probably makes most other encyclopedias redundant, it certainly is far above most other encyclopedias in the depth of its analysis of a character so minor and obscure as Mikhallis. What I added to the article was one of the anecdotes that Bede wrote about Mikhallis, which may make it unworthy as being simply stated but certainly is worth putting in the article, if the article is worth having in the first place. Sorry if my name seems silly, it is just htat I had tried every other name that I could come up with off the top of my head and was desperate to get one by the end of it. Thanks for the welcome message --Rebelwithaveryspecificcause 12:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

What did you do to the article? --Rebelwithaveryspecificcause 12:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I redirected it to an article that has sources. The article was changed from a redirect 2 weeks ago, and has remained completely unsourced since then. --Onorem♠Dil 12:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Grass-in-snow‎

Thanks for correcting my placement of my warning. I obviously am used to warning IP vandals, rather than registered ones, and forgot to click on the right area. Again, appreciate it. --LeyteWolfer 21:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. --Nlu (talk) 15:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Cody moldan

Why would you waste your time removing the attack? It's still non-notable, and will be deleted soon. - CobaltBlueTony 16:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Because "soon" often ends up being far too long. There is no reason to leave the attack up so the kids can point out the page to their friends and make fun of the subject. --Onorem♠Dil 16:33, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, what makes you believe I thought it would be considered notable? The page was created for no other purpose than to disparage its subject. Removing the attack doesn't change that. My edit should have done very little to slow down the deletion process. --Onorem♠Dil 16:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm. Making friends with a deletionist admin helps. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony 16:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

St George Christian

The principle of this school is v. corrupt, please don't take away the proper info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs) 09:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Ultimate Warrior's hatred of Gays

This is Kevin J telling you I do have a source of his controversies against gays, his own words from his website: his website was the source I listed. If you are a Warrior ass-kisser, I suggest you quit doing it and accept reality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin j (talk • contribs) 21:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

You have a source for his opinions about gays. You did not provide a source for any controversy. I'm definitely no "Warrior ass-kisser" either. I just prefer that we follow guidelines and policies. Here's a couple for you to look over. (WP:AGF & WP:BLP) --Onorem♠Dil 10:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Camden Falls

Thanks for the help with layout etc. I wasn't quite sure how to do it. Are you employed by Wikipedia to help edit, or did you just happen to come by my article? I am new to this (obviously) and was just wondering how it worked. I will try to set up my own talk page, but if I don't get time, please reply here. Thanks again. Sophierosellis 13:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

page clean up

Thank you. :) --Moonriddengirl 20:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fatevan3 (talk · contribs) Block the user...

...for this. - CobaltBlueTony 15:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but this thread on ANI should hopefully do the trick soon enough. By the way, thanks for the revert. --Onorem♠Dil 15:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Disamb thanks!

Thanks! I never quite understand how I'm supposed to make that work! --Tischlerpaul 16:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

why ?

i was playing around in sandbox not a real artical i dont think people get block for playing around in sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.211.184.198 (talk)

They do when they post copyrighted, offensive, or libelous content repeatedly after being told it's inappropriate. --Onorem♠Dil 22:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

oh

sry for wat i did but can i just chill with my friends there ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.211.184.198 (talk)

Wikipedia is not a forum or myspace. But, chances are good you won't be blocked for edits made to the sandbox unless they are consistently offensive. --Onorem♠Dil 22:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

St George Christian Part III

Re: Principle is corrupt.

Here are the Primary Sources,

1.)at camp teachers were getting stoned after smoking stuff provided by him that was bought using school money.

2.) Some teachers were getting involved in lesbian relations(L's pix were dirty and were displayed for all to see) together, and he covered it up (un-christian corruption) but all those teachers came right out.

I look foward to reading your response and getting shitty (again). P.S. Who do you think you are? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs)

Those aren't sources. Read this. Wikipedia:Reliable sources.

Even if the information was true, it doesn't explain the rest of the vandalism to the page. --Onorem♠Dil 10:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Viva Macau: Setting things Straight

This article is being used as an advertisement ( I don't care what the five pillars of wiki and rules say because they are a load of shit) because this is a small airline and they need all the publisitiy they can get. Don't you have any compassion for new companies? This airline is good and you should stop being a bully. Stop destroying it!

P.S: their 762's with Pratt and Whitney engines are very noisy at takeoff, AeroMexico has povo mx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs)

Sorry. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. --Onorem♠Dil 10:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, much of the information you added was a blatant copyright violation. --Onorem♠Dil 10:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Well if Wikipedia is not a vehicle for propaganda and advertising, why the hell do you let others get away with it? Are you being racist against me because I am Japanese?

The info that I put was not under copyright. Viva Macau can't afford copyright. If you are not competant enough to be an editor, you should leave Wikipedia alone and get a real job such as in a factory.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs)

If you see other articles that appear to be advertisements, please feel free to point them out to me and I'll do my best to remove the adverts.

Please do not accuse me of racism again. How the hell would I even have any idea what your race was? --Onorem♠Dil 11:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)`

Re:Carlton Public School

I need some help with the formatting and would like to add a table with facts such as the number of students, names of the admin staff etc. (in advance) thankyou for your help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs) 10:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was the correct school, and I thankyou for setting up the table. How long do you spend on Wiki each day!, it must be quite alot. Which country do you live in? Once again, thanks a million! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs)

No problem. I've also uploaded a logo for the box. I generally check my watchlist every 10-15 minutes or so while I'm at work. I don't usually edit much from home unless there's something specific that I'd started that needs finishing. Every once in a while, I'll new page patrol or recent change patrol if I'm bored. I live in the U.S. --Onorem♠Dil 11:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

What part of the U.S. do you live?, The logo is good, where did you find it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs) 11:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I have been to the U.S. many a time. I bet it gets cold up there in Minnesota in winter! What part of Minn. do you live. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs) 11:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I am glad you have strong limits on the stuff you tell. It's not good what some people would do as you mentioned before. Don't worry, i'm not one of those people. Bye for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanesne (talk • contribs) 11:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)