Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:07, 12 January 2010

Announcement: This is Now a Worry Free Zone

You are all Now Free to Worry, so Please, feel free to Worry Now.

• NOTE: All Worries Must Be Left Below The Neutral Zone in Triplicate and Double Stamped in accordance with Every Statute There Is which pertains to the Freedom of Speech, dependent upon which level the initiate wishes to initiate their worry.
  

Keep in mind, Worries are not a requirement in Freespace. Each shall be dealt with in it's own simple way eventually.

Proposals on choice of His Majesty

• Starting Monday, all Earthbound Corporations shall institute droid processing facilitation procedures as set forth in the Manual.
• All Slaver Force Copyrights are hereby deemed Transferred to Ultimate Athority.
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12

Pronouncement: New Entry Regulations

Lightspace entry requirements installed as per accordance with the Supreme Emperor of Freespace's whim.

• Requirement one: Consider first this perilous question first before attempting to enter Lightspace.

Remember at all times the answer to the Question will determine your fate for all of eternity.

How Many Takes Does It Take to get to the Center of a Tootsie Roll Tootsie POP?

— His Most Wisest of All Mighty Emperors in the Universe

Welcome

Getting Started First steps • FAQ Misplaced Pages Tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Community Portal • Help desk • Village Pump Where to ask questions or make comments • Request administrator attention Misplaced Pages: The Missing Manual Place {{helpme}} on your talk page and a small message explaining the problem The Commmunity Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists		Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

ukexpat (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Page Break Photo

I find this image very relaxing. Go ahead and zoom on into it, and then just sit back, relax and release whatever is on your mind. If it's something you want to remember, you already have, and when you need it, you will have it with a fresher perspective. Just relax and enjoy the beautiful day.

P.S. Having your own window like this is great, and I highly recommend it.

touch up

I like your reformulations in atlantic blue marlin. --Ettrig (talk) 11:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey thanks. I know it's sick, but I sort of like working on puzzles like that. The article still has a problem in one spot, but I think I figured it out. --Neptunerover (talk) 22:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

No, it's not sick. You derive pleasure at the same time as improving humanity's knowledge base. Today I was very puzzled at first by finding a NEW user page on my watchlist. But of course, the talk page could exist and be watched before the user's own presentation. --Ettrig (talk) 09:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Improving the readability thereof, perhaps, one tiny little bit at a time, but all of my original research, it's no good here. Neptunerover (talk) 07:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I discovered I was basically already on the typo team, but I needed a user page to flash the badge. Neptunerover (talk) 07:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect label of "vandalism"

It is never helpful to refer to "vandalism" in an edit summary. If it's really obvious (adding genuine nonsense and so on), just revert (or say "rvv" and mark your change as minor). Vandals know what they are doing and will regard a "vandalism" comment as a badge of honor (see WP:DENY). If it is not vandalism (like in this edit where you incorrectly accused an established editor of vandalism), the damage can be quite severe (a good editor may be lost). Per WP:CIVIL, we comment only on edits and do not inject opinions of other editors (like "identified as possible vandalism motivated by personal reasons" in your edit summary). Johnuniq (talk) 04:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I would think an established editor should know better than to remove something from an article while summarizing their edit by saying basically "I'm sick of all this crap, and this has got to go."--Neptunerover (talk) 08:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

It is true that the user you reverted gave an unhelpful edit summary ("this entire article is a piece of garbage, but I cannot stand this idiotic picture and its caption any more - please, someone delete the whole mess"). However, that summary does not violate any rule (it's not uncivil, it's not a WP:BLP problem, etc), and the edit (removal of an image) does not meet the definition of vandalism used on Misplaced Pages (see WP:VAND). Reverting vandalism is very worthwhile, but it must be done carefully. Please read WP:VAND#How not to respond to vandalism. Finally, even if the edits were vandalism, WP:CIVIL requires us to not comment on the possible motivations of other editors. In your position, I would have just clicked "undo" and added "unexplained" to the edit summary (or perhaps, "revert to consensus state"). Johnuniq (talk) 09:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I do agree, and I thank you for the helpful direction. Indeed my motivation was likely inappropriate as I was not actually trying to label someone a vandal, but rather send a wake-up call to a veteran editor who appeared to me, at the time, to be perpetrating destruction out of frustration, but it's not my place to send such a call. --Neptunerover (talk) 10:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I want to also point out that the user I reverted did start a discussion section where they elucidated further on their reasons for the edit prior to making it. The reason is stated as: "This entire article is pure crap, but the dog breed picture has to go." --Neptunerover (talk) 11:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

And by the way, if it truly is never useful, as you said to me, then perhaps you could leave a similar message for the veteran editor who I incorrectly labeled as a vandal. One pertaining to the edit summary he was perfectly willing to leave for me, even though he shortly reverted it as an overreaction. Still, his edit summary does all the things that you just pointed out to me as being the wrong thing to do (and he's like an administrator of apparently high rank, so if anyone should be scolded...) --Neptunerover (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

User IP69 and I have pleasantly interacted several times and if I ever felt that some benefit may arise I would gladly provide my advice. However, there are certain difficulties. The major issue is that while the comments made by IP69 were strong, they were (initially) directed at the article and not at any editor. While we may hope that people would always be nice, there is no requirement for that, and Misplaced Pages culture generally appreciates plain speaking (in the example we are discussing, the speaking was too plain and unhelpful in my opinion, but it was not a CIVIL problem). After IP69's edit was reverted as vandalism, IP69 reacted somewhat strongly (I have read the deleted comments on this talk page), but there was no attack. IP69's edit summary on this talk page was strong (and the word "maliciously" is clearly incorrect and is a breach of CIVIL), but if you spend some time reading the drama sections of Misplaced Pages you will see that as a reaction it's mild (particularly since it was redacted).

Thanks for discussing all this very calmly. The culture here is quite different from many corners of the Internet, and it takes a lot of time to get used to it (there is still lots of stuff I don't know about). Please don't be concerned about the tiny issue we have been discussing. The point I really wanted to make is that while we often see "vandalism" used in edit summaries, it really is not helpful. I have made a couple of blunders by accidentally reverting the wrong edit, and I'm very glad that I had learned from someone to not use that label. Johnuniq (talk) 01:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Your question on NCH

I've left a reply to your question at the New Contributor's Help Page. Your user talk page is typically reserved as a place where other Wikipedians can leave you messages, so (if I'm correct in assuming the section you want to archive is the stuff below), it might be better to copy-and-paste the section onto your userpage or onto a separate userspace page, like User:Neptunerover/Sandbox. Use the WP:NCH page again or contact me at my talk page if you need more help. Liqudluck✽talk 06:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Protectorate Zone

User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything

"Just 'cause you don't understand what's going on don't mean it don't make no sense, and just 'cause you don't like it don't mean it ain't no good, and let me tell you something, before you go taking a walk in my world, you better take a look at the real world, 'cause this ain't no Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood."

— Suicidal Tendencies, You Can't Bring Me Down

That's all news to me. Hadn't read it in the rules, myself. I'm not going to bother looking either, so either quote something official or stay away, please.--User:Neptunerover/another talk page (talk) 04:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe a key part of Misplaced Pages is that it is free. I'm not forcing anything on anybody as you attempted to enforce bogus rules on me. People are free to read what they want to read here as well as they are free to not read that which is here that they do not wish to read. Please feel free to get off my back, as I am not on yours, nor would I want to be. You are free to go away from my userspace if you do not like it here. --Neptunerover (talk) 05:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

"Hey wait a minute. What if we don't even really know what our own rules are? What if we're just pushing our own buttons here?"

— proposed user realizing a vast truth

Explanation: The above unsupportable claims of Wikidisobedience have been blocked off with a pretty green bar due to their extreme negative nature and inconsistency with a civil, collegial atmosphere, including a lack of proper context in quoting me while supplying no link to whatever is being referred to in the rant. --Neptunerover (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Spinningspark. How does that apply to me though? I have asked legitimate science questions and responded when prompted. How do I appeal users like you assaulting me in this manner? Or rather whom should I appeal to to prevent being attacked without reason like this, (if the longer sentence form is required to avoid confusion)? How do we resolve our differences fellow user? Is there a way for you to just ignore me? --Neptunerover (talk) 12:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Tell you what, I did ask a bogus question about AI, and so out of courtesy I will no longer pose any questions there. Thank you for pointing that out to me, and I apologize for my mistake. Too bad nobody came after me right after that query, for I might have then stopped sooner and saved you some grief with my more recent single question of this evening that sparked such outrage on this page. --Neptunerover (talk) 12:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I am working on the encyclopedia. I'm reading it. Go poke your finger at someone else. --Neptunerover (talk) 22:54, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Neptunerover, hiding people's comments in boxes like that (and calling them "spam" and "troll") is incivil and usually frowned upon. We are not going to extensively quote from policies, guidelines, and essays just because you refuse to read them yourself. Furthermore, they apply to you whether you read them or not. I linked to a number of policies, guidelines, and essays in the deletion discussion recently. I think you would have a better understanding of what is happening if you read or at least skimmed some of those pages. Fortunately for you, I think the MfD is likely to close as "no consensus", which has the same effect as a keep outcome, but may be more easily questioned in the future. If you continue to protest the discussion using legalese, however, I fear you may turn consensus against yourself. --Thinboy00 @955, i.e. 21:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC) I seem to have misread the above wikitext. Striking part of the comment. --Thinboy00 @956, i.e. 21:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

No one has explained to me what I have done wrong. I require only what Misplaced Pages requires. My needs are Ours. Where are the outside references for any of these "rules" that are so incredibly vague as to be considered complete and sheer nonsense. Outside references are required on Misplaced Pages. I merely require specifics, and that is all I have been asking for. All these people are attacking me, but none of them offer any helpful suggestions as to what may help the 'article' conform better to their strict standards. BTW My suggestion would have been for you to first ask me why I am using such boxes to hide comments from my talk page, rather than to make assumptions as to my motivations as you did. The reason, now that I have asked for you, is that that was the box I found. I got it to say something else by switching a number, but that was the best I could get. I apologize for my being delayed in adjusting them in any way, but there are other matters requiring my attention at this time. --Neptunerover (talk) 12:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything

"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."

"And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."

— Ezekiel 25:17

User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Fences&Windows 17:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, how often do user pages get nominated for deletion? Should I feel special? --Neptunerover (talk) 22:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

"This is 1L19; westbound on Olympic, approaching Overland."

— 1L19 ?

"You don't try to kill me. I'm the least of your problems."

— Michael Clayton

user space practice article deletion warning?

Why would an 'article' a new user is practicing on and learning how to code these pages with be nominated for deletion? It's just a practice area right? I'm being attacked. Just a couple days ago I got help here on starting a new user page. Maybe I did it wrong though? Thank you.--Neptunerover (talk) 22:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages, including user pages, should not be used for social networking (unless you keep it brief). If you put up a lengthly personal page just for fun, it might be regarded as something more appropriate for MySpace, etc. If you make a page that resembles an article, but has no chance of being accepted as a real article, that could be a good reason to delete it. If you have created a pseudo-article for practice, you should put a note at the top explaining this. I notice you have created some "fun" pages which have a lot more content than what we would expect to see for a practice / sandbox page, and that is probably the concern. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 23:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, A Knight Who Says Ni. As far as I know, I have riddled it with warnings stating it isn't any sort of reference from Misplaced Pages. Do I need better warnings? And I am not trying to social network, that's not something I do. I don't know how that could be an interpretation. (Talk about TMI, some of these other users' pages...). If I am speaking there to anyone, it is to myself. Web hosting? What's that? There are no links to anything outside of the encyclopedia except for a reference or two. Is there any way to get the deletion warning off my page other than going through whatever the appeal process is that has been artificially imposed by the warning itself?

In truth, I have severe memory problems, and that's the only way I can keep track of what I'm reading and take notes. I paid money to this, not to pay for my own space, but because I think this is a great place. I've never been able to keep track of so much different easy to reach information from one central location before. I love it here. I wish they would leave me alone. I'm not hurting anyone. Thank you. --Neptunerover (talk) 23:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The box at User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything links to Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything which is where it will be decided whether to delete the page. You can post there but first read Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not#Misplaced Pages is not a blog, webspace provider, social networking, or memorial site and Misplaced Pages:User page#What may I not have on my user page? User pages and subpages are often deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I understand better the situation now. --Neptunerover (talk) 00:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) A web host is a place where people can publish their own web pages with content usually unrelated to the organization running the host. The concern is that you appear to be using the Misplaced Pages website http://wikipedia.org as a web host. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

This is the policy I was able to find Misplaced Pages:Deletion_policy#Discussion. I believe it applies extremely well in my case. --Neptunerover (talk) 02:40, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

From the above policy: "Deletion discussions that are really unresolved content disputes may be closed by an administrator, and referred to the talk page or other appropriate forum." So, do I need to get an administrator myself? I think I have seen how to do it by going through some links that Ukexpat left for me on my talk page. --Neptunerover (talk) 02:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

No, an administrator will close the debate in due course without you needing to inform them. What you need to do is place that argument on the deletion debate page where the closing administrator will see it if you want them to take it into consideration. However, it is hard to see how this can be characterised as a content dispute. SpinningSpark 10:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you went spinning in the dark there, I didn't mean to trick you. This is a memorex discussion from another page. You came from out of the loop. --Neptunerover (talk) 11:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Why not?

I just think that both infinity as well as finiteness (finity?) are concepts I can't accept. Then again I can't grasp many concepts in cosmology. I also tend not to accept anything I can't thoroughly understand. That rules out a lot. : ) Bus stop (talk) 05:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

They are very misunderstood concepts. Fractals contain it completely though. A fractal of the proper number set would be good, as a model, I believe. I often have difficulty locating the misunderstanding of the concepts in my mind, and I'm certainly not going to believe something is true based on a bunch of gibberish that I cannot understand. I firmly believe that if something doesn't make sense; skip it. --Neptunerover (talk) 06:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

On that note, all these people are attacking me, but none of them offer any helpful suggestions as to what may help the 'article' conform better to their strict standards. This of course also means that if anybody has a question about the sensicalnessof anything in the article, they can leave an inquiry on any of my numerous talk pages.-- Neptunerover (talk) 06:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

1. (assuming it isn't already obvious what is meant and they are just trying to start problems.., e.g. "That's not a word!" =)
2. Thank you Bus stop

MfD nomination of User:Neptunerover/The Only Economic Solution

User:Neptunerover/The Only Economic Solution, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Neptunerover/The Only Economic Solution and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Neptunerover/The Only Economic Solution during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Cyclopia 12:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, the pleasure is all mine. Thank you. --Neptunerover (talk) 12:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

We have with us here a writ of Habeas Corpus, and We demand to see the alleged body of the dead person so that he may be interviewed and questioned as to the events surrounding the nature of his supposed demise.

— Attorney for the Accused

Use of non-free images in user space

Please note that I have removed the screenshot image from User talk:Neptunerover/The Only Alternative Economic Solution We Have - it is not appropriate to use non-free use images in user space. The same applies to the Star Wars images on this talk page -- please remove them. Thank you. – ukexpat (talk) 16:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Images

(edit conflict)Please do not use non-free images in your user space. It is against our copyright policy. -SpacemanSpiff 16:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Why are they in Commons if they aren't supposed to be free? -Neptunerover (talk) 12:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk pages

Your edit here to The Dead Kennedys is not constructive. Talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article, please limit yourself to that. SpinningSpark 12:38, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry sparky, I just never realized that they rocked. I was overtaken and never should have made such a comment on the talk page.I understand opinions are unwelcome in the encyclopedia proper. -Neptunerover (talk) 12:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Note

Please refrain from name-calling and taunting, as you did in a few of your remarks here (specifically the ones responding to TreasuryTag and Clockwork Soul). See WP:NPA for more details. Thank you, rʨanaɢ /_contribs 11:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Consensus at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Neptunerover/Theory About Everything was that this content does not belong on any namespace of Misplaced Pages. Please do not restore it to your talk page. Cunard (talk) 23:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Repeatedly re-creating content that was deleted through consensus (e.g., reposting your Theory About Everything) can be cause for blocking if it keeps up. Please do not do it again. rʨanaɢ /_contribs 00:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Use of images

The image that I removed - File:Grind07 Grindhouse.jpg - is not on Commons. – ukexpat (talk) 04:02, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

My mistake. I guess I didn't realize that not all of the photos used in Misplaced Pages are free use. It seems odd to me. The photo in question says "" right under it's name on the file page. If it's not for free use, why is it here? --Neptunerover (talk) 04:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

And above all Ukexpat, I don't mean to bother you with this question, since I'm sure you don't make the rules. Can you direct me to where I should go to figure this out? Thank you very kindly. --Neptunerover (talk) 04:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

In general when a free image is not available, a non-free one may be used in an article if certain conditions are met. See Misplaced Pages:Non-free content criteria for details on this. But the current rule is that no such image may be used for any purpose in userspace. Every image has (or should have) a detailed statement of licensing on its image description page. Before using any image anywhere, you should check that statement. See also Misplaced Pages:Copyrights#Re-use of non-text media. I hope this is helpful. DES 15:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes you've been helpful, and I thank you. I just wish it was clearer. It should say "non-free" right at the top. I just got some new guard dogs on here, but one was not from commons, so I'm not entirely sure if I'm gonna be able to keep him. I'm sure someone will let me know if I do something wrong though (they always do), so I guess I shouldn't worry. --Neptunerover (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

"another talk page"

If you enable e-mail in your account then I can send you the deleted version of your page and you can find the parts that were different from Theory of Everything (anything that's part of Theory of Everything should not be restored). You can enable e-mail in your Preferences menu. rʨanaɢ /_contribs 15:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Only if you promise not to send me hate mail. =) Let's try to keep hate out of this. Actually Rjanag, I don't think you are hateful, or rather how would I know?, but the thing is that some people here I think definitely are, and so giving them access to my email could open me up to the reception of all sorts of angry comments about webhost and quackery and .. well, you've seen all the angry things people call me and say about me, so perhaps you understand why I cannot do that just yet. I'll see if I can get the page back on my own somehow. Thank you for offering to help me. --Neptunerover (talk) 20:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

If that is how you feel, I seriously suggest you take a look back and re-examine your own behavior. You are going around admonishing other editors for being "hateful" and impolite (), but look at how you yourself are acting. Accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being a "hater" or a jerk is, in of itself, impolite and not very understanding. You are not doing yourself any favors by repeatedly leaving rude messages at the MfD page or by snarkily accusing every editor who disagrees with you of "biting". All that does is make people think you're immature. rʨanaɢ /_contribs 10:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but I strongly disagree with your assessment of my activities. Rude messages? I don't know what you're talking about. I haven't accused anyone of biting who hasn't actually bit. And who says I'm accusing anyone anyway? You. I simply gave some people reminders of the way things are supposed to work around here. You may not like it, but I'm new here, and new people here are almost expected to make mistakes. I'm only allowing the angry people to show themselves. I personally don't get angry. It's far beneath my level of logic. I'm sorry, but If anyone thinks Commander Spock is mean and cold, that is merely their irrelevant opinionated projection. --Neptunerover (talk) 11:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

BTW just in case it's too far above you, I never called anyone a hater. My comment on the MfD page was a "what if?" You take things too personally. I think you should re-examine the behavior of all involved participants in these discussions. You say I called someone a jerk, and that is a flat out lie. That's not my style at all, and I dare you to try and back up your statement. If by some chance I did call someone a jerk, then it was only because they called me one first, which begs the question of just who the jerk is. I respond in kind and I try not to assume things which are not evident based upon the available facts. --Neptunerover (talk) 11:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

BTW, it's Theory About Everything. TOE was already taken and it's a stupid name anyway so I never would have used it. That's just a name used by scientists who get enormous amounts of research funding in order to keep stuff very confusing for the funding public. Their TOE is a giant expensive fantasy.--Neptunerover (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

On Ph.D

I don't know who said it to me, and I can't find it now, but someone actually suggested that I should get a Ph.D before attempting to come up with a "theory of everything".
My response: Are you kidding me? How the heck would an extreme specialist ever be able to see the big picture? It'll never happen. Blinders only allow for tunnel vision. Get real. --Neptunerover (talk) 02:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Neptunerover/On the "TOE"

User:Neptunerover/On the "TOE", a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Neptunerover/On the "TOE" and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Neptunerover/On the "TOE" during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►duumvirate─╢ 14:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

It was already deleted earlier today. What the hell happened? What are you doing? Please explain. --Neptunerover (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

It was a different page that was deleted earlier today. ╟─TreasuryTag►secretariat─╢ 14:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

BS, that was a red link earlier, jackass. Don't call me liar, you piece of trash. Unless you sincerely believe what you are saying, then I take back my comments, and so then, check your records, please. --Neptunerover (talk) 14:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The above is an entirely inappropriate attack on another editor. Kindly refactor and refrain from further such comments. –xeno 15:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►co-prince─╢ 15:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

• Basically Neptune, watch your mouth or you'll find yourself blocked--Jac16888 15:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)