Revision as of 12:47, 5 January 2008 editRhanyeia (talk | contribs)2,088 edits something :)← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:05, 7 January 2008 edit undoBiggilo (talk | contribs)11 edits →'Spam Chop': new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your active work around mineral articles. ]]] 12:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC) | |style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your active work around mineral articles. ]]] 12:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC) | ||
|} | |} | ||
== 'Spam Chop' == | |||
I will be instructing my solicitor refrence the printing of libelous material. I will remind you the onus is the on the person who printed the libelous material to prove what they said is true (without any doubt) and not vice versa. Should remedial action or suitable justification not be received promptly I will persue this case. I will be informing the owners of Misplaced Pages about said case also as this also involves them. |
Revision as of 15:05, 7 January 2008
Please note - rules of the game! I usually answer comments & questions on this page rather than on your talk (unless initiated there) to keep the conversation thread together. I am aware that some wikiers do things differently so let me know if you expect a reply on your page and maybe it'll happen :-)
Archives
- Archive1 7/7/2004 - 6/15/2005
- Archive2 6/15/2005 - 9/6/2005
- Archive3 9/6/2005 - 1/01/2006
- Archive4 1/1/2006 - 5/31/2006
- Archive5 5/31/2006 - 8/15/2006
- Archive6 8/15/2006 - ~11/30/06
- Archive7 11/30/2006 - 1/31/07
- Archive8 2/01/07 - 5/17/07
- Archive9 5/17/07 - 8/31/07
- Archive10 9/01/07 - 12/16/07
Hidden copyvio
Thanks for this deletion. I had simply assumed it was written by a contributor and had no idea it was a copyvio. --Uncle Ed (talk) 14:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not sure 'bout the copyvio bit. It seemed rather odd to paste a large "quote" as a hidden comment - I assume you were intending to use/summarise it within the article space? Better to userfy it to a user/work subpage seems to me. Is this common practice for you? Material "published" even in blog form should be considered copyrighted material, you did provide inline links, but the main one didn't work for me. Vsmith (talk) 02:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- OK, after further digging. Seems the long Kuhner bio bit was added by Special:Contributions/69.143.32.190 on Dec. 6, within the infobox(invisible in article), at the same time as User:Jkuhner began editing the Insight (magazine) page. Rather a mess :-) Vsmith (talk) 15:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- I had forgotten how useful it can be to paste rough, unfinished material into a user subpage. Also, I simply assumed the Kuhner quote was okay instead of doing the digging that *you* did. Once again, thanks for correcting *my* errors! :-)
- I myself am not so interested in writing a bio of Kuhner. He seems to be a lousy editor of a second-rate web magazine. I wrote off Insight several years ago and get my news from wire services, network news shows, and of course The Washington Times. (Not to mention The Guardian and a few other UK news sources.) --Uncle Ed (talk) 16:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
DohgonCarbon
WHY YOU DID DELETE WHAT I PUT IN THE CARBON PAGE! I AM ANGRY BECAUSE EVERY THING I DID ON THE ENCYCLOPEDIA IS DELETED BY PEOPLE! MUST YOU BE ELITE TO USE THIS SITE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DohgonCarbon (talk • contribs) 16:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please don't SHOUT. The material you added to carbon was deleted as unsourced nonsense. Now if you can provide a source for it, please do so. Vsmith (talk) 16:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Bentonite
I can see how the image I put on there may be considered spammy and a couple of references unreliable and I have therefore removed them, but I refuse to remove the mention of medical benefits with the reference to about.com. On there website, they link to the follwing research:
Sources
Abdel-Wahhab MA, Nada SA, Farag IM, et al. Potential protective effect of HSCAS and bentonite against dietary aflatoxicosis in rat: with special reference to chromosomal aberrations. Nat Toxins.1998; 6:211-218.
Ducrotte P, Dapoigny M, Bonaz B, Siproudhis L. Symptomatic efficacy of beidellitic montmorillonite in irritable bowel syndrome: a randomized, controlled trial. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Feb 15;21(4):435-44.
Santurio JM, Mallmann CA, Rosa AP, et al. Effect of sodium bentonite on the performance and blood variables of broiler chickens intoxicated with aflatoxins. Br Poult Sci. 1999; 40:115-119.
PDR Health. Bentonite. <http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/nmdrugprofiles/nutsupdrugs/ben_0308.shtml>
Jason7825 (talk) 22:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Pyknometer
Hi V! I do not understand why you changed the entry as non-glass pyknometers exist. Please see the link below. I do not work for the company. What do you think remove glass from the description or add steel as well?
http://www.ejpayne.com/productdetails.asp?ProductID=PYK&Section=SANITARYWARE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.147.121 (talk) 01:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see no evidense that you have edited that page - the edit I reverted was made by ip 81.153.31.16 who was in a revert war and has been blocked as a sockpuppet. I will check out your link and consider changes to the article. Meantime, as you seem to be a sock of a blocked ip - I'd just suggest cooling it - or perhaps a range block is in order? Clue, if you are blocked for whatever reason as one ip and you return to edit as another ip, you are a block evading sock - can't get any simpler than that. OK, now I see you've been blocked at this ip as well, so - I can't do it :-) Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 01:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello V. Yes I have fallen foul of a trigger happy admin., but I wil not go into details here other than to say I am not a sockpuppet as despite using different IP addresses I have never hidden that I am the same person. I would say though I was a little taken aback to see that whilst I posted quite a polite comment your reply was titled "reply to clueless sock." I don't think that was necessary when I was mearly starting a discussion with the aim of improvimg an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.64.40 (talk) 02:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- You really are clueless ... geez - how about doing a reality check. Note, the article has been modified per your request. Now stop the nonsense. Vsmith (talk) 02:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi V. I am aware the article has been modified. I am at a loss to comprehend that nature of your reply: "clueless", "reality check", " "nonsense." I just don't understand why you need to speak to me like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.66.183 (talk) 02:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Maby a range block should cull the nonsenses, this seems to be Disruptive editing. --Hu12 (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- All of Ripenet - that'd be fun :-) Vsmith (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Would save the project some bandwidth:-D--Hu12 (talk) 03:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- All of Ripenet - that'd be fun :-) Vsmith (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Yellowstone National park link
Spam? You have to be kidding. Did you look through the entire section? I spent weeks developing just that one section (I already know you didn't look at all, since the web log shows you only looked at the Overview Page). I spent weeks in Yellowstone photo-documenting and developing the content for that section. I'd like to see a link to something MORE relevant to this entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamNP (talk • contribs) 22:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please read WP:SPAM and WP:COI. Vsmith (talk) 22:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Rock templates
Hello, I am an Italian Wikipedian. I am dealing with rocks. I am planning to develop templates. Looking around I found your templates on Igneous rock, Metamorphic rock and Sedimentary rock. I seem to be a good starting point. Why 'were not used? Let me know. Thanks --Mario1952 (talk) 13:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome to modify and use them. I created those a while back, but there was no interest and I got side-tracked and sorta forgot about 'em. Maybe I'll work them up now that you have jogged my memory. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 13:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Your work may have better luck in Italy. How Latins say nemo propheta in patria. Ciao --Mario1952 (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for cleaning things up in the Mont Saint-Hilaire article! I'm afraid I'm not quite as good as keeping things clean as I would want to be. <ref>insert footnote text here
- And as evidence of the above, I left a reference above rather than a signature. Go me!-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin (talk • contribs) 19:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem - fixed that ref tag w/ a nowiki tag. Hope I didn't messup any refs when I combined them into ref name=. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
USMC length
I'd appreciate a little consideration for those of us who have older computers. 114Kb total is awfully big, and often causes problems with my browser. I'm somewhat surprised an admin is not more understanding of the situation. I could "Be Bold" and just take an axe to the page,a s some editors have been known to do, but I've chosen not to take that path. There are new editors on pages all the time, and older editors who may have been inactive. Please give this a chance to work. Thanks for your consideration of others in this matter. - BillCJ (talk) 04:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Bill, dictator here :-) Why not be bold a bit at a time. You mention that a history article exists, just start moving material out of the main article - with a polite explanation on the talk page and see what happens. If someone reverts then ask for an explanation. And I'm aware of slow systems, I access by tele modem when my satellite connection founders and disable image loading to speed things up. The main problem then becomes looong talk pages. Which reminds me, time to archive here, thanks - Vsmith (talk) 15:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Full protection?
Hi Vsmith, at the CU report here, Alison said that a range block might be possible if attacks continue. I think this might this be a better solution than fully protecting the article. R. Baley (talk) 20:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- If a range block is emplaced and works - then unprotect. Seems the sock attack is not limited to the global warming article. Vsmith (talk) 20:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I can't do it myself, just acting as a "dot-connector" here. R. Baley (talk) 21:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings
- Thanks, and have a good one - easy on the spirits now, might affect your editing civility. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 22:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
A Happy New Year!
The E=mc² Barnstar | ||
For your active work around mineral articles. Rhanyeia♥♫ 12:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
'Spam Chop'
I will be instructing my solicitor refrence the printing of libelous material. I will remind you the onus is the on the person who printed the libelous material to prove what they said is true (without any doubt) and not vice versa. Should remedial action or suitable justification not be received promptly I will persue this case. I will be informing the owners of Misplaced Pages about said case also as this also involves them.