| Revision as of 03:26, 9 February 2008 editDiscospinster (talk | contribs)Administrators464,183 editsm eh, all I did was remove some vandalism← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:23, 9 February 2008 edit undoZebra91 (talk | contribs)86 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
| You seem to be a great user ready for the mop, so would you like me to nominate you to be an administrator? ]]] 01:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC) | You seem to be a great user ready for the mop, so would you like me to nominate you to be an administrator? ]]] 01:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| Disco Spinster, | |||
| i have a few things to clarify and discuss with you. | |||
| firstly an apology. in my first adress, i did not mean to infer that as a past memebr of the college community, i have any more right to decide what goes on this page. However, as a general editior, i have just as much right as you to edit this page. you mentioned consensus. my self and others have made simmilar additions to the page regarding the list. yet, you and others are continualy threatening with action | |||
| you spoke of guidelines by consensus. not to rehash old quarrlels, however on WP:SCH#WNTI the last line of the intro sates ''Note that these are only recommendations, and editors are not obliged to follow them''. they are recomoendations. not laws. hence lists of students '''CAN BE INCLUDED'''. | |||
| i do not intend on engaging in an edit war. if it seems so that i am, than both yourself and loopla should also be banned, because loopla (and with ure supoort recently) initiated the edits. i have maintained this site for nearly 6 months now. it has become what it is on the most due to my input. including the list of cptns. it was loopla who choose to undo my reviosin, to which i redid it. if i am guilty, then so are the both of you. and before you start throwing ] back at me, i am not suggesting that i own the page, merely that i was here first, and the both of you began this ''war'' | |||
| '' Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors.'' that was a line you wrote on my talk page. i feel that you (and loopla) dont want this discussed. you both want your way, and i am being told to deal with it. conversations regarding this originated as discussion, however, recenty, i have been threatened with blocking. my views are not being heard. again, i have seen all the medals and praise on your page, but as you said, noone has any more right on this site than any other. | |||
| i wish to work towards a resolution, at the same time, i am not intending on backing down. i have continusiously justifies the inclusion of the lists anf have refuted any fight that has been put foward. not one '''''wiki law''' has been put foward to me that overtly oposes my additions. | |||
| ] (]) 04:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:23, 9 February 2008
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
 |
|---|
| 12 December 2024 |
|
There are loads of examples of bands who don't meet every requirement that have full articles on Misplaced Pages. Does the band's internet popularity have to do with it's following on the streets? This is an article I feel should stay on. Is there anything that can be done to keep it on?
Takenforaride77 (talk) 02:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Response:
I would say that they singlehandedly rebirthed the punk scene in the Lehigh Valley, but really things like that don't get listed on what is considered to be a verifiable source, besides like kids commenting about it or whatever on message boards (obviously not what you would consider verifiable). I guess they're too underground for even the internet haha. But they are valid, and there was never an emphasis on recording it seemed, so it's gonna take some time to prove that, and according to those rules, it seems they will never be fit for Misplaced Pages, because their music provides intentions of going against big things, such as major labels or being nominated for music awards etc, which is what that list is comprised of. And there's nothing to verify representation for a scene...Any thoughts?
Takenforaride77 (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Response:
Haha, it's different tho. It's something the people can change, which IS what they seem to stand for. It doesn't matter. I thought that if people wanted to learn about them, they could do so, but I guess not. We'll see what happens. Thanks for your time and wit, haha.
Takenforaride77 (talk) 03:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Fettes College
Hello, I am a current pupil at the school i believe i have the right to edit the page more than you!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.31.126 (talk) 01:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC) No never mind, I'm way too stupid and retarded to know this or anything else. You, of course, have earned the privelege far more than I have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.167.114 (talk) 04:20, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Rollback
I have granted you administrative rollback privileges, as I trust you to make good use of them in your patrolling. Yup, admins can grant rollback now. Use the tool wisely. :) Wizardman 23:26, 9 January 2008
Thanks
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| You've probably received more than your fair share of these, but I wanted to thank you for the quick reverts on my user page. Cheers, Caknuck (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC) |
That 90's Show
Please do not remove {{fact}} tags as you did to this episode, without adding a reliable source. It maybe obvious to you, but not to others, such as myself. I have no idea what that painting is. Ctjf83 03:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- Please, with your 50,000+ edits you should know that a picture on another article is hardly a reliable reference. Ctjf83 03:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- Exactly, it needs a source that explicably states the connection. We have decided that it is probably true so we left it, but it still needs a reliable source.--The Dominator (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hollywood North
Greetings & salutations. There is an article here on wikipedia Hollywood North in which there seems to be a disagreement with me and another person who appears to me has taken ownership of that article. I added a link there in the "See also" section of List of films shot in Hamilton, Ontario and the person in question kept removing. At first no reason was given for the removal of the link I added to it by the party in question. Please have a look at the discussion we had there regarding the issue and give me your opinion it please. The link to that discussion page is over here: Talk:Hollywood North Thanks. Greatly appreciated. Have a good day. Nhl4hamilton (talk) 11:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the two reverts on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Adminship?
You seem to be a great user ready for the mop, so would you like me to nominate you to be an administrator? NHRHS2010 01:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Disco Spinster,
i have a few things to clarify and discuss with you.
firstly an apology. in my first adress, i did not mean to infer that as a past memebr of the college community, i have any more right to decide what goes on this page. However, as a general editior, i have just as much right as you to edit this page. you mentioned consensus. my self and others have made simmilar additions to the page regarding the list. yet, you and others are continualy threatening with action
you spoke of guidelines by consensus. not to rehash old quarrlels, however on WP:SCH#WNTI the last line of the intro sates Note that these are only recommendations, and editors are not obliged to follow them. they are recomoendations. not laws. hence lists of students CAN BE INCLUDED.
i do not intend on engaging in an edit war. if it seems so that i am, than both yourself and loopla should also be banned, because loopla (and with ure supoort recently) initiated the edits. i have maintained this site for nearly 6 months now. it has become what it is on the most due to my input. including the list of cptns. it was loopla who choose to undo my reviosin, to which i redid it. if i am guilty, then so are the both of you. and before you start throwing any more right back at me, i am not suggesting that i own the page, merely that i was here first, and the both of you began this war
Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. that was a line you wrote on my talk page. i feel that you (and loopla) dont want this discussed. you both want your way, and i am being told to deal with it. conversations regarding this originated as discussion, however, recenty, i have been threatened with blocking. my views are not being heard. again, i have seen all the medals and praise on your page, but as you said, noone has any more right on this site than any other.
i wish to work towards a resolution, at the same time, i am not intending on backing down. i have continusiously justifies the inclusion of the lists anf have refuted any fight that has been put foward. not one wiki law has been put foward to me that overtly oposes my additions.