User talk:Dusti/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Dusti. 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.

Hi, I've removed your request from Wikipedia:Announcements, as that is not an appropriate place to make requests. Please direct requests like that to the talkpage of the article in question. In this case, Talk:Albert Einstein. Thanks. --Quiddity 19:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: how to get a quote added.

Well, Wikipedia is not meant to be used to collect quotations. For that we have a separate sister-project, Wikiquote: see wikiquote:Albert Einstein. This page is linked to at the end of our Wikipedia Albert Einstein article. Hope that helps. --Quiddity 18:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I was going to suggest you raise this matter at Talk:Albert Einstein, which I see you've already done. The article is only semi-protected by the way, protected from editing by new and unregistered accounts. -- Longhair\^talk 20:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I moved your post at Talk:Albert Einstein to the end of the talk page and replied to it. When you add a topic to a talk page, you should add it to the bottom of the page; that is where people expect to find new topics, whereas topics at the top are subject to archiving. My reply says (as Quiddity said above) that miscellaneous quotes belong in Wikiquote and not in Wikipedia. As Longhair said, Albert Einstein is only semi-protected. Inasmuch as you have been a registered user since April 4, you ought to be able to edit it. But if you added your quote to the article, I am sorry to say it would be removed by other editors. --teb728 03:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Your quote is not pertinent to Einstein’s biography; as such it doesn’t belong in the article. Even if it were pertinent, it would require a source; so that we could verify that Einstein actually said it. In the Wikiquote article (which apparently has a lower standard of verifiability) there are four different versions of the quote; in Wikipedia we would require to know which (if any) he actually said. I guess you could put the quote on your user page, User:Dustihowe—if you feel you have to put it somewhere. --teb728 17:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I renamed your ISSCH article to Indiana Soldiers' and Sailors' Children's Home. A redirect still links from ISSCH.

I also converted your personal message into a couple of wp:stub templates. You shouldn’t put unencyclopedic messages or signatures in article space. --teb728 19:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I need help setting my page up so it looks pretty good!!!

If you're unfamiliar with HTML and other coding languages, you're best bet would be to leave the design of your page alone RyanLupin (^talk/_contribs) 18:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Did I or did I not help you? Did you expect me to create a userpage for you? I was being realistic, for someone who has no experience with coding should either leave their pages alone or copy bits of code from other peoples' pages (be sure to look for notes from users requesting that people don't do this) RyanLupin (^talk/_contribs) 20:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I said if you're unsure about coding, don't attempt it. Quite frankly, Wikipedia isn't MySpace or Bebo or any other personal site (WP:NOT#USER}. If you want to contribute to wikipedia, why not direct your attention to editing articles rather than attacking me and worrying about how pretty your userpage looks. Some of us have more important things to worry about than the way your userpage looks. RyanLupin (^talk/_contribs) 18:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

		Ready to swab the deck!
		Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! - - Jehochman Talk 03:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dustihowe,

Certainly I have considered your request. I am deeply sorry for not replying for days (I have a real life outside of Wikipedia). Would you mind if I directly edit on your user page? I will try my best to do it but I will not 100% guarantee that I can absolutely fix it.

Smcafirst the Roadgeek|Questions? 21:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry again!

Dear Dusti, ______ __ __ __ /\__ _\/\ \ /\ \ /\ \ \/_/\ \/\ \ \___ __ ___\ \ \/'\ __ __ ___ __ __\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ `\ /'__`\ /' _ `\ \ , < /\ \/\ \ / __`\/\ \/\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/\ \_\.\_/\ \/\ \ \ \\`\\ \ \_\ \/\ \_\ \ \ \_\ \\ \_\ \ \_\ \ \_\ \_\ \__/.\_\ \_\ \_\ \_\ \_\/`____ \ \____/\ \____/ \/\_\ \/_/ \/_/\/_/\/__/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/`/___/> \/___/ \/___/ \/_/ /\___/ \/__/ For your contribution to My RfA, which passed with 8000 Supports, 2 Neutrals and no opposes. The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I am privileged to stand among them. Thankyou for putting you trust in me, I'll not see it abused. And now, I will dance naked around a fire. Party at my place! Cheers! Dfrg.msc 09:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Expand for picture....

Hi Dustihowe,

All right. I'll start renovating your user page starting from today. It might take a while, though, before I could completely finished. (P.S. It took me weeks to do mine, since I have other work outside of Wikipedia)

I added some subpages onto your userpage. I'll start the navigational gadgets tomorrow. Today, however, I started on the "Status" Gadget. It's on your top right corner. In case you wonder how you can change your status, replace the word "available" in the following code:

{{User:Dustihowe/Status|available}} 

with "busy", "unavailable", or "temporarily away".

From now on, I would like to avoid jamming your talk page, so the renovation progress would be listed on this page: User:Dustihowe/Progress

Thanks for your faith,

Smcafirst the Roadgeek|Questions? 23:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Archive 1! Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was a success, and I look forward to getting started! Hiberniantears 18:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It was successful, and I was promoted to Administrator today. I appreciate the support! — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for voting in my Rfa, which I withdrew from yesterday. Though I did not get promoted, I see this Rfa as being a success nonetheless. What I got out of this Rfa will help me to be a better, all around editor. Because of this Rfa I have decided to become better in other areas of editing. I'm not going to just be a vandalfighter. Though vandalfighting is good, being active in all areas of editing is even better. Have a nice day.--SJP 22:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

		My RFA
		Hey Dustihowe! I wanted to say thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any help or opinions! GlassCobra 00:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA which unfortunately did not pass at (47/23/5). I will be sure to improve my editing skills and wait till someone nominates me next time. Have a great day(or night)! --Hdt83 ^Chat 05:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting my RfA, it closed today with a final tally of 39 supports, 1 oppose and 1 neutral. As always, if you ever see me doing anything which would cause you to regret giving me your support, let me know. henrik•talk 18:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then.

Thanks again! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA nomination. Unfortunately, I have withdrawn the nom early at 17/13/3. I am presently going to undergo admin coaching in preparation for a second candidacy somewhere down the line. I hope to see your continued support in the future. Regards, —Scott5114↗ 07:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for giving me a word of encouragement. Dalekusa 19:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

This user is heterosexual.

Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme (talk) 20:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

What is with your questions on user's sexuality? -Billy-talk 23:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

You know, if you'd like to find gay users, just go to Wikipedia:Userboxes/Life#Sexuality and next to the userboxes that indicate homosexuality, click "what links here." That should give you a number of users. bibliomaniac15 03:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words...they are some what rare on wiki. feel free to use any userbox that you want! Ctjf83 19:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL, i'm single there aren't the highest quality gays in my area Ctjf83 ^talk 17:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

i'd prefer to use AIM or yahoo messenger, do u have either? Ctjf83 ^talk 17:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

i do have V but not comfortable on the phone with a stranger....ctjf83@yahoo.com Ctjf83 ^talk 17:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

hmm, do u DJ? and remember to type 4 ~~~~ to sign posts Ctjf83 ^talk 17:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

sweet, what kinda music, and is it online so i can check it out? Ctjf83 ^talk 17:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

not at all, i hate country, lol, with the exception of a few pop country type songs...my fav song is Forever and For Always..the pop version though and i like a few of Faith Hill's popish songs Ctjf83 ^talk 18:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

umm...where do u even live?! and if you don't mind, i'm a bit busy trying to do a major clean up of Iowa so it would be better to chat later :) Ctjf83 ^talk 19:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

i might on and off...much better off after 9-10ish Ctjf83 ^talk 19:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

well i don't have unlimited V to V for text, and texting would defeat the purpose of me not giving my number to a stranger...let's just e-mail for a while Ctjf83 ^talk 20:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

where is my shout out?! Ctjf83 ^talk 18:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

u were suppose to e-mail me!! did u ever? Ctjf83 ^talk 18:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

ya try again real quick Ctjf83 ^talk 18:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

i sent u a message yesterday, did u get it? Ctjf83 ^talk 19:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I sent it early yesterday morning, it was just inquiring about where your e-mail was Ctjf83 ^talk 20:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Still waiting! lol Ctjf83 ^talk 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Regarding the status bot. What do you think you have done wrong? Eddie6705 (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Your code looks fine to me. (BTW, could you add some line breaks at the top of the page? Firefox is showing your page with overlaps of text and template.) --Kushal^t 21:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC) Would you like to add {{User:StatusBot/Template}} to your userpage too?

I would have said the same as Kushal, the bot just hasn't updated you for a while. Eddie6705 (talk) 18:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the bot has updated you and as i am writing this it says offline. As for the line breaks, i'm not a 100% sure either. You will have to ask him im afraid. Eddie6705 (talk) 20:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, but a) we've never met, b) it's the internet, and you can't be too careful, and c) you could be on the other side of the country, for all I know. Eyeball kid (talk) 06:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

	Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 62/0/0 yesterday! I want to thank Snowolf and Dincher for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and since you are reading this, I haven't yet deleted your talk page by accident!). Please let me know if there is anything I can do to be of assistance, and keep an eye out for a little green fish with a mop on the road to an even better encyclopedia. Thanks again and take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey what's been going on. I haven't heard from you in a while. I see you have some fabulous new userboxes!! :) Message me back if you wanna chat more! Ctjf83 ^talk 17:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in my RfA. I definitely paid close attention to everything that was said in the debate, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. For now though, especially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions, I am going to take it slowly -- I'm working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school, double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. I sincerely doubt you'll see anything controversial coming from my new access level. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, though I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are a few more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status. If you do ever have any concerns about my activities as an administrator, I encourage you to let me know. My door is always open. Have a good New Year, --Elonka 21:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

are you gay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephenharper321 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a script i use for Greasemonkey for firefox wich leaves tags according to the CSD deletion requests. If it's attack, i can select CSD & Warn wich leaves a warning. --Party (talk) 18:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dusti, vandals are obviously blocked after a last warning, but if the contributions only comprise of vandalism or creating non-sense/attack pages, they are blocked with fewer warnings. New accounts with no constructive contributions whatsoever are typically blocked. Spellcast (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I deleted the spammy userpage per WP:UP#NOT. I'll still keep an eye on the user and hopefully (s)he doesn't advertise the company to articles. Spellcast (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Ilove69withmen" was already blocked (check the block log). The best place to report inappropriate names is WP:UAA. Spellcast (talk) 18:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I have removed a couple of speedy deletion tags {{db-g1}} because the articles do not fit the criteria. Please take a look at WP:CSD#G1. Thanks. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

You tagged this article and it got deleted. Did you notice that it is actually a notable person (scholar, founder of a political party) and was referenced ? It also has an article on Encyclopedia Brittanica (first google result). Poeloq (talk) 20:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

A short article, a Stub as you know, is perfectly okay. You could tag it for expansion, but not for deletion via Speedy Delete if it doesn't fit in any of the speedy categories. Please consider this when tagging for speedy, as it costs the article editors and admins valuable time Poeloq (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I see that you have tagged the Scripps Hall article as needing cleanup and wikifying.

I was wondering what you noticed that needs cleanup. I have reviewed my grammar, sentence structure, and spelling and didn't see anything out of place. Could you let me know what prompted the cleanup tagging so I can avoid the problem in the future?

I am also curious as to what text should be wikified as a relevant link. There are a number of items that COULD be wikified, such as the word home or private school. I feel that most Wikipedia visitors know what these are, and don't need to refer to an article about them. I feel if I wikify much more in this three sentence stub article, it will get flagged for being overly wikified.

Thanks for your feedback! Epolk (talk) 20:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article David William Dodds, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of David William Dodds. Korg (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest modifying the way you display that email address on your user page, it's a target for spam. — NovaDog — (contribs) 22:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tag removed

I have removed the speedy deletion tag because the article does not fit the criteria. This film is a new movie in production no different than the other films listed here. It is not advertising or spam —Preceding unsigned comment added by MovieMan1969 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I have just created the article David Tal (historian) ! You are a little bit "fast". I remove the tag. Ceedjee (talk) 18:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I was creating an article and completing this.

That all I have to say.

Ceedjee (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't dare to be sorry. That is a little bit too easy.

You don't deserve your admin POWER. That is all.

If you contest this mind, you can come on my talk page on wp:fr : fr:user:ceedjee where I would feel more free to tell you what I think, without risking to be blocked but where I will block you.

With all my respect. Kind Regards, Ceedjee (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please take care of this : David Tal and the differents moves I made ? Thank you. With my respect. Kind Regards, Ceedjee (talk) 18:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Why did you tag Gopher Pox as nonsense? It is coherently written, and properly sourced. I'm going to remove the tag until you can provide sound reasoning for placing it there. Sicomadman (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You might be interested in this. Prodding is always better when there's a claim to notability. Relata refero (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dusti, I'm sorry to inform you that I've closed your request for adminship early because it was unlikely to succeed. For users to be granted admin status, they have to show that they are trusted members of the community. Individual editors each have their own standards for adminship candidates, but here are a few tips that may help you pass the next time round:

• Wait a bit longer before your next request. Many Wikipedians think that the length of time that users should be active on the project to get a firm grasp of all the policies and guidelines is roughly 3 months.
• Try to make some more edits. Administrators need to show they have a thorough understanding of policy, so it would be a good idea for you to contribute in wikipedia space, article space and talk space to show you can communicate with others.

You may wish to take a look at the admin coaching program, which would allow you to have your own coach who could personally direct you along the right path, or consider an editor review, allowing other users to comment on your edits and give you ways to improve. The guide to requests for adminship provides further considerations to make before applying again. Let me thank you for your contributions so far, and if you follow the above advice, there is no reason why you can not have a successful RfA in the future. Daniel (talk) 00:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dustihowe - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. I appreciated the question, and I'm glad that you didn't see my self-nom as prima-facie evidence of powerhunger. I also want to thank you for being the only strong support in my RfA, which passed 52/0/0. I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Expand tags on stub articles are redundant. Every stub has implicitely to be expanded.Afil (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on 1904 Ethereal defense of Germany, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 141.199.102.30 (talk) 18:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

What could it be kept for? No offense, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and that was utter, bleeding nonsense. Glad the battle turned out OK, as my my dad came from Germany, though maybe it would have averted WWI? At any rate, that would be better suited for Uncyclopedia. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 18:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ack! History?! Magical invaders defeated in a major battle of earth shaking proportions?! In which the decisive strategic move was using a Dragon?!! I'm as gullible as the next man, but really. Dlohcierekim 18:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

come again? Dlohcierekim 18:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. A totally made up battle involving D & D participants and a a German gymnast? Or am I missing something? Dlohcierekim 18:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way. Not once have you given me a valid reason to not see that page as nonsense. For instance, if you had said, "This is a fictional battle from such and such a story line, with verifiable sources here, here, and here," that would have been a different story. Tell you what, I'll restore the article and list it at AFD. Dlohcierekim 19:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, 1904 Ethereal defense of Germany, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1904 Ethereal defense of Germany. Thank you. Dlohcierekim 19:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

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/January 2008#Dustihowe. RFRBot (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

You recently warned me to to not vandalize WP. I agree that I should not vandalize it. However, I do not I agree with the fact that I did vandalize it. All I did was create a monobook.js page. I actually created this account so I could do specifically that (for I am not one hundred percent confident in my abilities to edit the code. I didn't know if I would be able to change it afterward or not). Can you explain to me where I did something wrong? Also, it would be helpful to learn how to clear my cace :). Thank you. TestDummyTommy (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your appreciation regarding the AfDs related to the Franco-Mongol alliance (especialy Mongol alliances in the Middle-East). A few editors are actually putting a lot of efforts into deleting a lot of the referenced material from the Franco-Mongol alliance page (all from reputable and published sources) in favour of a highly restrictive and dismissive point of view. Your support is appreciated. Best regards. PHG (talk) 11:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I looked over your contributions and found virtually no instances of recent changes patrolling. That, combined with your very recent and very unsuccessful request for adminship, gave me pause in considering to grant your request. Don't take it personally, I just think you need more experience. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 15:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message! I hope I can figure this out soon! TTYL--Softball13 04 (talk) 18:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The status bot isn't working at all, I'm afraid. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{play it cool.} 19:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

	Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 60/0/0 yesterday! I want to thank Mrs.EasterBunny and Royalbroil for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. To paraphrase a president ... I wish my mum and dad could see the comments made. My dad would be so proud to see the comments ... and my mum would have believed them". I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and you may be surprised to find that I have not deleted all of the pages by accident..... yet). Thanks again, Victuallers (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you tell me why Njallani has been (re)directed to cardamom minus the contents ? Harry Coomar (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)HarikumarR

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I expanded the article and added "context" as you requested. Can you remove the template now? --Mika1h (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Done Dustihowe  Talk  16:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the words of encouragement. SHame certain other editors don't see the long term potential. Check out the new pages since 1pm british time today!! Theres got to be 1500+ new pages in there!! When they develop and have full information it will be a job well done I hope ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 19:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

<How do I delete my account?Softball13 04 (talk) 16:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)>

Please stiop reverting without reading what you are reverting. It is irritating and counterproductive. Paul B (talk) 18:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, try reading what I wrote above. You are interferring with an article in progress and making it more difficult to improve the article by incompetent reverting. You must not revert without reading the changes that have been made. The article had already been wikified when you readded the "wikify" tag and removed all the wikifikation as you did so. If you had bothered to check you would have identified that. Such actions do not improve articles. They make them worse, and it is interferring, interrupting and delaying the very process of making improvements. It also puts off people who are creating or improving articles. That is why it is counter productive and that is why you should not instantly jump on new articles in that way. They are very rarely instantly uploaded in a completely finished state. Paul B (talk) 18:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

No most articles do not fist appear in "a most pure form", whatever that phrase is supposed to mean. You added a tag which said that the article had no references, even though it did have a reference, even in its earliest form, but you didn't bother to read it properly, did you? You readded that tag that should never have been added in the first place, and readded an expand tag and a cleanup tag to an article which had already been expanded and cleaned up - expansions and cleanups which you then undid because you couldn't be bothered to check what you were doing. I had to leave you a message, because otherwise you would probably have continued to interfere and mess up attempts at improvement. That's incompetence, and the fact that I accidentally said "wikify" when I was referring to "cleanup" does not have the slightest relevance to fact that you are the one who caused problems but you were and are too petulant to admit it. Paul B (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

If it's over why do keep adding to it? Make up your mind. You obviously have no idea what personal attacks are. Pointing out wholly inappropriate behaviour is not among them. Your every comment confirms what I wrote above. Paul B (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

hi dustihowe,

That was a kinda embrassing mistake, Actually , I was repling to a post by "SOXBOT" and i forgot to change the title section where it said "section_title_here", i stupidly/carelessly asked for clarification as to hs posts.

thats all, BTW, I am relatively New to wiki and i do know the 5pillars and other stuff...

Anyway thanks for bringing this o my notice...

thanks, Swraj (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Tim Trebes is a good example of why you might not want to request speedy deletion the same minute an article is created. Within two minutes the editor had a halfway decent stub in place.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

First off, you can put {{Adoptee|Fabrictramp}} on your user page if you so desire.

Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area has adoptee resources, many of which you are already familiar with, but basically you just ask me questions whenever you think you need help, ask me about resources on wikipedia, or ask me to review any work you'd like reviewed. (It's considered bad form for adopters to just butt in and offer unsolicited advice, although it's okay for an adopter to say every once it a while "Hey, I haven't heard from you, are things going okay?") I can also give you a bit of advice if you think you want to try again for adminship in a few months, although I have to admit I got off very easy on the questions on my RFA. Ultimately, the type and amount of mentoring you want will be completely up to you. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User talk:Ctjf83 may be offensive or unwelcome. If you are the user, please log in under that account and proceed to make the changes. Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. StephenBuxton (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Saw your comment and User:Ctjf83's on my talk page. My apologies for accusing you of Userpage vandalism. I'm a recent page patroller, and I saw a large amount of text being cleared. I went to view the difference, and saw that you were calling the other user a Dork (or sommat like that - my old memory is going. Where was I? Oh yes). Anyway, I undid your change, posted a gentle reminder on your page, and thought I would dig even deeper into what was going on. Edit war? Vandalism rife? Then I saw a there had been whole flurry of edits between the two of you, and felt my face redden. I was dithering about how best to apologise, when I saw two messages arrive in quick succession.

Once again - my apologies for any offence caused. My motive was just - but my actions were unwarranted. Sorry! StephenBuxton (talk) 18:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

You asked why I'm asking for tools -- I assume you mis-typed that and wanted to ask why I'm asking for rights. In any case, please be more specific in what you want explained, I think I already explained the overall reason why I'm asking for admin rights. Or, if you actually wanted to know something about some tools, please clarify that. --Gutza ^{T T+} 18:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, actually three admins blocked: Mike and I both unblocked after blocking, and I was waiting for Anonymous Dissident to agree to letting Adminster be unblocked so he could discuss his own name here. I'm not really concerned over the result though... whatever the community decides is best is good enough for me. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 20:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Why did u delete our convo on both of our talk pages? I sent that user that warned you a message that you weren't vandalizing. Ctjf83^talk 18:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

No, you didn't offend or anything, I enjoy our convo, u can leave whatever you want. Ctjf83^talk 18:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, ur only 17...but i suppose Ctjf83^talk 18:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

cute...it would be nice if we could find an easier way to chat Ctjf83^talk 18:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't have unlimited so this is better...check around to see if you can get in any chat rooms...like msn, yahoo, gay.com, etc Ctjf83^talk 18:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ya, but texting to other Verizon isn't free for me, I don't have V to V...don't any chat rooms work for you? Ctjf83^talk 18:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Aww thanks, that was sweet of you! :) Ctjf83^talk 20:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll do my best, if I can't figure it out, I'll get the guy that did mine...how do you want it to be? Ctjf83^talk 20:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

LOL, your just gonna copy off mine?! I'll see what I can do on it Ctjf83[[User

talk:Ctjf83|^talk]] 20:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ya, my lazy ass just got up at 1:51 central time! Ctjf83^talk 19:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ya, just lazy, I gotta eat and such, how long r u gonna be on? Ctjf83^talk 19:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, cya Ctjf83^talk 19:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Nothing, not as lazy today Ctjf83^talk 17:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

haha, ya....think of a better way to chat on here! Ctjf83^talk 18:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess...I just want a different format to chat...not easy to do, i know. try to see if this will work click launch on the right side Ctjf83^talk 18:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

well none will probably work anyway, damn your system admin...ok, use ur sandbox Ctjf83^talk 18:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Hows this Dusti^talk if you edit it, you can change what letters are which color. fortunatly mine was an even 6 letters Ctjf83^talk 20:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

A word of advice about giving speedy tags: the CSD criteria are fairly strict and limited, in particular WP:CSD#Non-criteria says that reasons derived from WP:NOT are not in themselves, enough to justify speedy deletion. Sometimes admins will delete anyway, but if you don't want your speedy nominations to be declined, it's best to read WP:CSD fairly carefully and use one of the standard tags like {{db-nonsense}} or {{db-nocontext}}. It's often frustrating, particularly with dictionary-definition type articles, and I wish there were more speedy criteria; but often you just have to fall back on a PROD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, in the strict terms of WP:CSD an admin could turn down a speedy that said {{db|WP is not a dictionary}}, and some of them would, though some might well decide the page was speediable anyway. What I'm saying is that you'll get a surer strike if you can match the page with one of the criteria listed and use the appropriate template. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the smile. Happy editing!  DavidJ710  talk  21:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ever so much for reverting the vandalism on my page! :) —— Ryan ^(t)•(c) 20:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick note. I'm a bit more back in the land of the living *grin*, and I did your editor review as promised. If you have questions, please drop me a note and I'll be glad to clarify and help. --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

		My RfA
		Thank you very much, Dustihowe, for your support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC) The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.

You've been granted the rollback permission. Please make sure you only roll back obvious vandalism, not disputed content, and make sure you follow the policies we have related to its use. Help:Reverting contains more information about when reversion (and by extension, rollback) is appropriate.

Have a nice day! ~Kylu (u|t) 19:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

lol, i've been waiting for you in the sandbox! Ctjf83^talk 19:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

in the sandbox Ctjf83^talk 19:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on his talk page: the mass removal of text from the Palace of Versailles article was due to his branching off sections into new subarticles; it wasn't vandalism. - Dudesleeper | Talk 18:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

CANBOXME? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.255.114 (talk) 23:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I have an account, I am just not using it anymore. I put my comments regarding the challenge on the talk page according to the guidelines. My issue with the article is that it associates "criticism" of the interpretation advanced by the article with homophobia, hatred, and physical attacks on gay people. In fact, the Criticism section only states these things, not allowing for any other point of view or interpretation. I think at state is a large principle, one of whether or not to accept science and medicine as convenient and dismiss when it is not convenient a la Conservapedia, or to list criticisms and additional interpretations. I am not pushing for a dismissal of the overall interpretation of the article, I am simply requesting that more information be provided from the medical community that addresses this from a medical perspective as the article comes along as very much a community soapbox that seems to reject the medical perspective as it does not support the community goals. I don't even know for certain what the medical perspective is, I just know it's been classified as not acceptable for this article because the article writer knows better than the rest of the world's medical professionals combined. That I think is a crying shame.

The additional shame is that I was silenced without being given a chance to justify my NPOV, and that an editor (you) reverted my NPOV after I put it back, and are still not familiar with my criticisms before doing so.

They are there, in the talk page, and here. This is my final contribution to Wikipedia, I had forgotten why I stopped contributing (which I did not do so often), and it is because of the ongoing creeping bias in Wikipedia and authoritarian behavior of editors. For every little bit you want to contribute, it is possible to get involved in hours of discussion with people ensconced in power and bias with whom you have no chance of winning. People who are concerned with information really lose out in this scenario, and Wikipedia shifts more and more to be like Conservapedia. I hope at least your offer to consider the criticism now is valid, and that you will go ahead and re-read the article with a neutral point of view in mind. I've read your own page, and I realize that you probably deal with a lot of jackasses with their own bias. I'm not going to expend additional time on the discussion, I will just leave it in your lap. My prediction is that after careful consideration, your opinion will remain exactly the same and it will justify the next dismissal of someone who does not agree with your point of view. I hope my cynicism is not justified. This is my last sentence on Wikipedia for good, thank you for reminding me about why I don't expend my time on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.144.99 (talk) 19:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Dusti. You have new messages at Voyagerfan5761's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 19:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I reviewed you; hope my comments help! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 01:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor review/Dustihowe

oh, hey, this is BlowSky and i JUST got that message. i signed up a couple of months ago to check out the site and create a page for the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center. sorry for the delay XD

you can contact me at blow-sky@sbcglobal.net if you'd like to talk

again, sorry for the delay

--BlowSky (talk) 06:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

.: RFA thanks :.

Thanks for supporting me! My RfA passed with a final tally of 5 neutrals, 1 oppose and 148 supports, a turnout I couldn't have dreamed of. I'm going to do everything I can to help out the community, help with sysop tasks, and of course, contribute to the encyclopedia. If you ever need a hand with something, feel free to give a shout! Cheers! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 17:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For your multiple failed attempts to fix your post to WP:ANI and the edit summaries that went with them, I'm awarding you this barnstar. They really cracked me up! Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 18:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dustihowe, it seems this IP has stopped vandalizing since your message, so I have not not blocked it. Unfortunately, I was not active at the time of your message, and couldn't block him then. You may wish to report vandals who vandalized past a final warning to all administrators at WP:AIV, where you are likely to get a more prompt response. Happy editing! Prodego ^talk 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

hey, in sandbox Ctjf83^talk 18:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well like I said, you probably can't use a pic you found on here, cause of the anti-image jerks. You might have to go outside and take one. Ctjf83^talk 17:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm in there Ctjf83^talk 17:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It may not have been your intention but your recent undoing of my pruning of the list Wikipedia:Missing science topics/NIST Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures showed a profound lack of understanding of what this list is supposed to be. These are missing articles. If the article exists, then that item can and should be removed from the list so that progress can be measured. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain the unconstructive edits I made to Now That's What I Call Music! (album) (U.S. series), as I was in fact cleaning up unconstructive edits which you reversed. --Wolfer68 (talk) 19:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• I was "wiki-warned" before that running times of songs are not standard of practice (see Now That's What I Call Music! 25 (U.S. series)). They had been removed earlier with no problem. No names were altered. One link was re-directed to the proper page and I removed inserted links to songs that do not have pages. --Wolfer68 (talk) 19:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I respect your judgment, and agree with it on most counts, but I can't understand the relevance of your comment for criteria number 5. An article is stable if it has no edit wars, etc. going on. "The article fails in this aspect, as it has some information, but can still use more information to support the subject" isn't really relevant to that particular area. Same goes for criteria number 1: that criteria actuall concerns the quality of the writing, not the amount of information covered by the article. Thanks, Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 21:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know of a template to give to users who have lost a family member recently. In these kind of situations it might be better to just leave a simple friendly message on their talk page. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Hema Sinha. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Travellingcari (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

no one made any efforts? What's the nomination for then? It should have been relisted to establish consensus. Travellingcari (talk) 19:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Commenting on users talk page

mind adding that to the DRV? It needs to be re-opened and relisted to establish consensus? Thanks Travellingcari (talk) 19:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks, it appears Keeper undid the close, so you don't have to. Have a good day Travellingcari (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Already relisted. Trying to catch up to you and travellingcari!  :-). I independently stumbled into this while closing old AfDs, I've already relisted it and commented at the DRV. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look through the guidance at Wikipedia:Non-admin closure. Thanks. --Sturm 19:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Quite the backlog to look over and hopefully clear out. :P. Spencer^T♦C 05:10, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem, keep up the good work! The reports are pretty straightforward (not like some of the reports when non-warned users are reported for basic vandalism done 3 days before, etc.) Spencer^T♦C 05:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't really have as much experience with the RFPP page and I'm going to go to bed after I finish up with AIV, but in the meantime I'll watchlist both pages to keep an eye on them for now. Spencer^T♦C 05:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)