Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:06, 30 April 2008

Re: Speedy question

Re your message: Sorry. =) The generic {{db-a7}} would be fine. You could also use {{db}} and then fill in something. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page. ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 06:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from myself also. :) -- Longhair\ 09:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

They'll run out of pc's at their local pre-school soon enough :) -- Longhair\ 09:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you for your reply. It was really, really kind and thoughtful. Misplaced Pages needs more people like you. Thank you.Thright (talk) 07:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

For keeping an eye on my Talk page. Edison (talk) 04:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Gracias

We're all douchebags from time to time. :-) You're welcome. Hersfold 03:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I was going to explain that with a link, but it's just too funny the way it is. Redrocket (talk) 03:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hulked Up

I'm reporting all of the socks to this administrator. Could you alert User:Daniel Case? He has also dealt with them. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Can't believe these accounts weren't blocked yet :( -- Well I'm going to bed, and User:Bluerockett or someone else is probably going to keep bothering my talk page. Think you could watchlist it for me? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

If you're gonna file a report, make sure you mention all of the socks from here. See ya, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you please take another look at the Theresa Duncan article?

I'm afraid I just botched things up by attempting to revert Theresa Duncan to the last version prior to numerous edits by User:Door1134 and User:192.58.221.151, none of which were substantiated. The version I reverted to was this one, but I acted hastily and apparently did not do what was necessary to properly identify the version I was reverting to. Therefore I just undid my changes.

As far as I can see, none of the changes made by this person (I am assuming it's one person) were substantiated in any way, and the changes replaced text that had citations. While you undid some of the changes, I don't see any reason that any of them should have been kept. I would appreciate it if you'd take a look and see what you think. Also, the same person made similar changes to the Jeremy Blake article, which I also believe should be reverted. Thanks. Candy (talk) 04:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I just took a look at your changes to Jeremy Blake's article. There are still some things that I think should be changed back. The main thing is that the person who made the changes seems to believe Blake did not die, so he or she has removed references to Blake's death being confirmed when his body was found and identified. I haven't seen any reliable press calling that identification into question. (If you want to see the changes I'm talking about, see here.) I will leave these for now, because I realize I may be missing something since you allowed them. I also made a couple more changes on the Theresa Duncan piece because the editor had rephrased a sentence to be passive ("it was believed," not specifying who believed). I didn't reinstate the part about Blake's body being found, though I don't see why it shouldn't be mentioned. Again, it seems to have been deleted because the editor believes Blake didn't kill himself. (FYI, there is a past history of conspiracy-themed edits to these pieces.) Candy (talk) 12:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Tyar

I have filed a block request on this editor here. You can ignore his trolling. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I read this edit summary and was wondering who's sock you think it is. Could you let me know here? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The user in question

Tivedshambo temporarily protected its talk page, as you may have noticed. Now we have to deal with its socks, apparently. Enigma 07:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

comment from sock of blocked user

Please remove your comment from WP:AN. It is cruel. When persons are getting hurt, jokes don't help. You would go to a funeral and start laughing. 165.21.155.108 (talk) 07:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, if it was a funeral for a clown. Redrocket (talk) 07:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I also would order the Socks Gone Wild video. By the way, community consensus is that IPs are not entitled to blank their talk pages. Enigma 07:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:BLANKING says otherwise, because consensus says otherwise. And leaving the above comment uncorrected will deliberately misinform people reading this page, so hopefully redrocket will allow my comment to stay. 86.44.30.169 (talk) 12:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Sockadelic!

Suspect Michaelfriesen is a sock puppet (or at least a meat puppet) of clayzer? I find it hard to believe that anyone reasonable would eagerly step up to the plate for a guy's right to award himself, inter alia, "the barnstar of jew-killing." Non Curat Lex (talk) 08:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. I know you're reading this too, Clayzer. Have fun at ANI. Redrocket (talk) 08:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha, it's conclusive. Check the sock's talk page. Enigma 16:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Inactiveness

Just stoping by to say hello, and explain a few things: I haven't really been active on WP, or anything for that matter recently because my computer is reaching its final days. I've had it for 7 years, and it is un-upgradeable. You know, one of those all-in-one apple iMacs. So.. ya. I have to quit netscape every so often as it gets slower the longer I leave it open, and right now it is quite slow, taking about 2 minutes to go to a page in WP despite the fact that I have broadband now.

Hopefully, once I get a new computer, you won't be the only one around here who's a vandal magnet, cuz then well, I'll really be able to help.

So, bascially.. I'm on a.. on and off-constant wikibreak. I edit when my computer decides not to be stupid(slow as hell, takes 5 minutes to realize I moved an item to the trash -_- , well, see you later.— Dædαlus / Improve 10:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Note of thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for trying to help the new editor trying to re-re-re-recreate Harbour square; I appreciated your helpful approach, even though it's unlikely that the article will remain. He may feel bitten, but it certainly won't be your fault. Accounting4Taste:talk 03:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I was just about to delete it as spam when I noticed the assertion within the body of the article about the National Register of Historic Places. I'm not sure if this qualifies as an assertion of notability -- I'm not American and so not familiar with this Register. Your opinion would be appreciated. Accounting4Taste:talk 03:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from me, too. =) Hopefully he or she will take you up on the offer and a proper article will result from it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:34, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment from blocked user

Do you see it as abusive? You have my IP. -- 125.69.247.138

Honestly, I see it as unproductive and more than a little bit willfully ignorant of the way things work around wikipedia. The whole point of getting a registered user ID is to establish an identity, and to do so by claiming an ID and promptly turning around and redirecting everything to an anonymous IP page seems kind of silly.

From the first time you made an edit to remove a hoax page through improper means, you've seemed to enjoy walking right at the edge of disrupting wikipedia to make a point. This move, combined with your wikilawyering approach of talking anyone into the ground who tries to discuss things with you, is the same thing. Redrocket (talk) 04:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD for Coronado_High_School_(El_Paso, _Texas)

Redrocket, just wanted to give you a heads up that I have nominated the above page for deletion. It does not appear to meet standard notability guidelines, and does not even meet the (non-standard) school notability guidelines. Discussion is, of course, Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Coronado_High_School_(El_Paso, _Texas). Sapph42 (talk) 11:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Recent messages

Oh...no personal attacks. Right. Don't care.

Oh yeah, and if you're so smart, do you think you can tell me how to delete an account? A friend of mine wants to know. They said it's "a nerdfest and a complete waste of time. I want to get off." Hey, don't talk to me about it. Talk to a Wikiquote user and a friend of mine: Nicktoon Warrior.

Oh, yeah. Thanks for letting me know. I could use a new name, because mine makes me sound like a total loser.

From SONIC 123 Hh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SONIC 123 Hh (talk • contribs) 17:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: sockpuppet?

Well, I am not familiar with how to identify sockpuppets, so I don't think my comments would be very helpful. The sockpuppet will most likely succumb to AIV, does it matter to you if that happens? J.delanoy_adds 20:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

That was quite the fast rv. Thanks much, --Bfigura 01:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your advice on the question I posted on the editor's assistance page. I'm still not clear. If someone thinks I am a sockpuppet, does that make it acceptable to delete comments others wrote on my page? You advised me to open my own Wiki username account. I hesitate to do that for a number of reasons. I'm in favor of net openness. For instance, I resent having to "register" just to read certain newspapers on line (I still have to see the ads there and that's how they make their money). Every time I've ever registered on any website, I've ended up with spam and other unwanted contacts. Anyway, HiDrNick has had all kinds of trouble with other users (as you can see by tediously going through the history links on his own discussion page--he routinely deletes anything posted there which challenges his own opinions). He's been "warned" and "blocked" repeatedly in the past. Maybe I'm just being too sensitive to someone else's abominable behavior. Thanks. 206.74.61.67 (talk) 00:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm just saying with two anonymous editors editing the exact same article in the same way, it does raise some red flags. I advise all IP editors who are interested in working to make the wiki better to go ahead and get an ID. If you don't want to be contacted, don't give your email address. You're actually more anonymous with an ID than without. Good luck! Redrocket (talk) 02:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sockadelic

I read the edits, but can't figure out if these are coming from a sockpuppet. Did you ask User:David A? He knows the content on the page well, try asking him. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Will do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redrocket (talk • contribs)

Thanks for reverting that vandal. Hope that's the last of him now. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

ALEX JONES EDITS

On July 25, 2001 Jones called on all of his listeners to call the White House hotline and prevent the impending false flag event that later materialised as the 9/11 attacks. He predicted the blame being placed on Osama Bin Laden and has been a champion of the 9/11 Truth movement ever since.

This was heard by thousands and has been replayed on his radio program as well as circulated on numerous video sites.

For you to blindly erase this fact is to erase a large volume of this man's life work.

There is a glaring gap of wiki info for Jones' life between 2000 and 2006, the most active part of his activisim.

WOLFSERPENTCROWRAT —Preceding unsigned comment added by WOLFSERPENTCROWRAT (talk • contribs) 03:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page on this one, which involves removing totally unsourced material as per WP:BLP. Redrocket (talk) 05:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

From one wiki page to another

I have made a more suitable contribution.

Alex Jones claims to have predicted the attacks in July 2001, on his syndicated radio show at infowars.com, even mentioning the World Trade Centre as a potential target and that Bin Laden, the known CIA asset, might be used as a ‘patsy’. He launched a campaign to try to stop the attacks, which he called “Operation Expose The Government Terrorists”. Jones has been referred to as the progenitor of the movement.

As opposed to:

On July 25, 2001 Jones called on all of his listeners to call the White House hotline and prevent the impending false flag event that later materialised as the 9/11 attacks. He predicted the blame being placed on Osama Bin Laden and has been a champion of the 9/11 Truth movement ever since. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WOLFSERPENTCROWRAT (talk • contribs) 05:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied again to your talk page , I appreciate you trying, but the statement is still completely without a source. Redrocket (talk) 05:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Non sequitur

You are one funny guy. I'd like to party with you, bucko, if my two-headed llama didn't keep me home at nights.74.234.39.218 (talk) 02:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Amos Matthews

please leave the article in place - significant figure in Towson history, I don't have all my sources with me at this time —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teda13 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page. Redrocket (talk) 05:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

i disagree with your thought about deleting an in-progress page or considering it within such a short period of time completely, this is a collaborative and sharing enterprise and as such the materials should hang around for more than a few hours so someone who is not the originator but with actual interest in the content can collaborate and edit with thoughtfulness, someone who might be from Towson, or interested in local history, who doesn't have the ability to be awake at the late hours when I am able to contribute --Teda13 (talk) 05:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page. Redrocket (talk) 05:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I disagree / if someone has no direct interest in the subject, or knowledge in a tiny specific subject - it seems to me that there is no reason to be hasty to do so seems arbitrary and hurtful to the knowledge gathering of a few in favor of some mindless mechanical construct --Teda13 (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Teda13 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty. Good luck. Redrocket (talk) 06:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Question for you...

Do you work at a radio station? If so, how much do radio stations pay per song to play them on the radio? Thanks...IP4240207xx (talk) 07:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I did at one point, but I only rarely worked at music stations. That was all handled through BMI and ASCAP, from what I recall. Sorry I couldn't be of more help! Redrocket (talk) 07:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

... to our sock-tribe. Hope you enjoy the company of User:Dbachmann, User:Rudrasharman and self-admitted member User:Relata refero. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the attempted vandalism on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha its sad when it is "attempted" yet not successful =D « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 07:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Being Civil

I tried being civil and i tried discussing the issue i had with him to him, and he only sent me a random generic message, he needs to explain himself. --Axeman 10 (talk) 04:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a personal matter between the two of you, and sending incomprehensible messages like this won't help. Redrocket (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Then what do you propose the right thing is i should do?

--Axeman 10 (talk) 05:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Stop sending weird messages, as above. If you have a problem with the user, talk it over with them. If you think it's a problem you can't get past, take it to WP:ANI. Regardless, making edits like you did above makes it look like you're the one vandalizing someone else's page. Redrocket (talk) 05:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I get the whole "Stop sending weird messages" thing. But i just tried to explain to you he won't talk it over, and as far as the thing he has an issue with me goes, i didn't vandalize that page, he needs to get the guts to explain how what he did was fair or mind his own business. --Axeman 10 (talk) 05:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

What edit of yours did he call vandalism? If it was a one time thing and a mistake, it's best just to let it drop. Redrocket (talk) 05:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It was on the Cell (dragonball) page, i just made a minor edit adding some info not mentioned, and he sent me a generic warning about not vandalizing. I wrote back about a week later asking him how exactly i was vandalizing the page, and he sent me the exact same thing again, with the old date on it and everything. --Axeman 10 (talk) 05:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

(OD)Looking back on it, your edits on April 2 to the Cell (Dragon Ball) page were unsourced. Please read WP:OR for details on what original research is, but basically you drew conclusions that weren't supported by an outside source. That's not allowed by wikipedia standards. It appears that he warned you about that on April 2, and then didn't post on your page again. You have on three occasions tried to make posts on his page, and he has declined every time. He doesn't have to respond if he doesn't want to, so leave him alone. Don't resort to vandalizing his page to try and get his attention. Redrocket (talk) 06:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you don't waste your time on this one, RR, as you can see from his past blocks, he has a history, even if it is small, wish harrassing other editors, along with addition of unsourced material.— Dædαlus / Improve 06:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you mean "with" Daedalus969, and to be honest, i do have a small history, but i've been trying to improve. I will be posting again and with sources this time. But i won't bother your friend anymore, since obviously he can't get beyond generic warnings. --Axeman 10 (talk) 06:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, is favortism, or discussing people like this really a good thing? I'm at least trying to stay out of trouble now. --Axeman 10 (talk) 06:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do, but that is beside the point. First, if you bothered to read WP policies, the warnings are there because of a rule regarding reporting vandalous editors to WP:AiV. Four warnings are given, then the user is reported if he or she continues to vandalize or w/e after the fourth warning.— Dædαlus / Improve 06:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This has been a waste of time for all of us, lets just drop it and forget about it, or at least for like a few hours at the very least, though i'd rather we not have to talk anymore. --Axeman 10 (talk) 07:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Then stop talking about it, please. Redrocket (talk) 07:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I already had, and hopefully we won't have to talk anymore. I don't know if you'll reply since i'm not planning on looking at this page again. --Axeman 10 (talk) 07:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, just leave already. Redrocket (talk) 07:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the background. It really does help me to evaluate situations like that. I'd appreciate you giving me a heads up if you see anything funny happening there.

Thanks, also, for your very kind comments about my work. I appreciate that more than you know. Best wishes, - Philippe 00:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help...

Ok, sounds good RedRocket. Thank you again for putting the links in your posts. That makes it really easy for me to go to them. Wiki is a little bit disorganized sometimes. I surely understand your concerns regarding citations. I like good citations in articles, too. When it comes to Scripture, we need to allow Scripture to prove itself. Put it up on the witness stand, so to speak. What I mean is this: if I can show you fifteen different passages that say the same exact thing in slightly different wording, that IS our secondary, and tertiary source. I could always site commentaries, and I probably will in some cases. That can get really wordy, though. As long as the citations are simple Scriptural passages, and the context doesn’t get into extremes, then I believe the changes should be left. The sections that I changed hardly had any citations, and needed some “body”. I added a lot of citations and organized the sections a little. We are trying to write an article that shows how MOST churches of Christ worship and how they use Scripture. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, and I love encyclopedias just like everyone else here. When it comes to the part of the encyclopedia where religion comes up, we’ll see quite a bit of Bible verses. And that’s ok. It’s when we start adding material from outside the Bible that the discussion will become difficult to understand. Cross referencing will be our best tool. Again, thank you for helping me with the links and the ways of Wiki. Mark0880 (talk) 02:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Redrocket..

Hi Epecho/RedRocket! Thank you for the responses. Can you give me any specific examples of this bias that is not objective in some of my postings? I'd like to make some comparisons so that I better understand everyone here. You know, I spent a lot of time thinking about biases, and citations, and such today. I want to firstly apologize for posting w/o coming here first. Of course, I was not aware of the rules/regs. (Wiki is a little disorganized) However, that is not an excuse. Maybe a reason, but not an excuse. So to everyone out there who has been perplexed and irritated by my postings, I say: I apologize. It wont happen again. I will take the orthodox methods that are the norm to make suggestions. Thank you!! Mark0880 (talk) 03:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

User:BrianKarjala

Since User:BrianKarjala isn't actually Brian Karjala, I think this name fails the username requirements test, and should probably be blocked indef. Do you think this is a reasonable thing to do? Or would it be better to leave the troll with the current known name, rather than have him pop up somewhere else under a new name? Loren.wilton (talk) 06:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I think he should probably be blocked for misrepresnting himself, as a courtesy to the real BK. I'll keep the article watched, so if the IP comes back I'll spot him. Redrocket (talk) 06:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I posted over at username complaints mentioning he was impersonating someone else. I imagine that will result in a block. Loren.wilton (talk) 08:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Non-Notable Question

Why did you undo my change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GrapefruitFuture (talk • contribs) 19:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Left a message on your talk page. Redrocket (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

what about sites such as sex2ube, and RedTube, they are on there and don't have their own wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GrapefruitFuture (talk • contribs) 19:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sockpuppets & Whatnot

Re your message: I'm not familiar with the topic either, but one of the accounts has been dealt with and it is on WP:ANI so, there's not much more that I can do about it.

On a different note, thanks for reverting the sockpuppet's comment on my talk page. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Re

I saw that you declined semi-protection. I'm assuming this is some sort of grand experiment to see how many vandals you can attract in 4 hours? You seem to have atracted some fans. Redrocket (talk) 03:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You try dealing with these guys when they move on to harass someone else. See how YOU like it.

This is why I want my page to remain unprotected - if it is semi'd, they'll go off and bother someone else. -Jéské 03:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

So you're kind of acting as a human bug zapper? Redrocket (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. -Jéské 03:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

So, since you were just going to delete the whole thing, do you not want other editors to watchlist your page and try and keep vandals off of it? Redrocket (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism warnings - edits summaries

Here's what I do when I can. A summary that people (or an admin) can relate to has got to help some. And I think it did - blocked. (though I suppose the 18 bad edits following the comment figured in there too. (sigh) ) Shenme (talk) 04:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

You pinged my page, so I had to return the favor. It's always a pleasure to meet an insightful editor/admin with a sense of humor : ) Doc Tropics 06:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I appreciate the comments. Some things are too funny not to chime in on. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 06:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Seems we have another trivia problem

Sorry to disturb you RR, but since we had something like this(trivia dispute/debate/arguement/discussion/(some word)) in the past. I need some help on the article Repo Man (1984 film) as an editor keeps adding a huge glaring trivia section.— Dædαlus / Improve 16:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll help keep an eye on it, thanks for the heads-up. That doesn't even seem to be trivia, it looks like a huge chunk of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Redrocket (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

I see that you flagged a comment where I called another user a coward as a "personal attack". While I understand your concern, please take into consideration that I only used the term after he had made blanket statements describing my own and other users` contributions which he had not read as "steaming crap". I ask you, who is being more personal here? Kont Dracula (talk) 20:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

To begin with, you've said that before, you'll need to provide some DIFFs for those to provide context. However, it doesn't really matter. There is no "tit for tat" policy on wikipedia that entitles you to make personal attacks on another editor if you feel like they started it. Redrocket (talk) 20:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

But you didn`t provide any DIFFs when you decided that I was the one being personal. I am afraid that my context has gone, it has been deleted. The person who deleted it will no longer respond to my questions. Let`s get it straight- I am not haranguing some haplesss bureaucrat. I am questioning someone who had the temerity to decribe my own contribution as "crap". He is hiding away from my responses. If he is allowed to call my contributions "steaming crap" then surely, by anyone`s measure, I am entitled to call him a coward when he will not respond to very specific questions. How can you disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kont Dracula (talk • contribs) 20:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I can disagree because that's not the way we do things around here, by policy and by common decency. Don't do it and expect to get away with it, regardless of the circumstances. By the way, I did provide a DIFF for your personal attack, it's on your talk page. If you'll go through the contributions page of this editor here , perhaps you can find the edits that upset you and bring them to the attention of someone who can help you. Redrocket (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

(OD)So the "way you do things around here" according to "common decency" is to delete other people`s work and describe it as "steaming crap" and then to delete their comments when they respond? By saying I am the one who has unfairly had his work deleted on grounds which the person which deleted himself does not even conform to? Not content with just deleting my work, the administrator who deleted it then proceeded to engage in a mutual back-slapping session where my work, and others were described as "steaming crap" and one administrator actually "awarded" another for deleting it. It is all here: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:NawlinWiki.
When I have aired my grievances over this matter, my comments have again been deleted. So I am not sure what you perceive me to be "getting away with". As I have written in previously deleted comments, where I think I was owed a little apology, I instead received an astonishing level of arrogance and had my justifiable complaints deleted. So don`t worry, I am well aware of both "the way you do things around here" and the concept of "decency" that is common currency. As far as I am concerned, this matter is closed. You can tell your cowardly friend that he can open his talk page again. Hilariously, despite being the person who inflamed this situation with his insults, he hilariously closed his talk page when he got some negative response. As I told him in comments he promptly deleted on the page quoted above, if he is not prepared to take it, he shouldn`t dish it out. Kont Dracula (talk) 04:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to suggest you read up on some wikipedia policies, such as WP:5P and WP:MOS. You don't seem to understand what a DIFF is. For example, I can show you here where you made a personal attack. If you say this editor was incivil, please provide a diff showing where it occurred. Deleted comments can easily be found by checking user's contributions.

I don't know what your article was, I don't know if it was a steaming pile of crap or not. If you really feel like you're having a raw deal, take it to WP:ANI where other editors will see it. Arguing on a talk page isn't going to help at this point. Redrocket (talk) 05:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

And you shall never know what my article was or whether it was "steaming crap", as it was deleted while I was still writing it. I can`t help but wonder if it is good practice for wikipedia editors to weigh in and publicly describe articles they have not read in those terms. I would have thought that would not be the best tone for an ""administrator" to adopt. It is hardly encouraging for potential future contributors. I suspect though, that is just the way some people like it. Do you have an opinion on that? Or are you just going to direct me to the "relevant" pages?
You have got me on the diff thing though. I don`t know what a diff is. At this stage, I don`t know if I even care to find out. However, I did post a link to the page where the uncivil comment was made. I think you are being more than slightly disingenuous to try to latch onto my ommission of a "diff" (whatever it is) as a reason for genuinely being unable to appreciate the nature of my grievance. I am not really seeking redress at this stage. I am merely responding to your message on my talk page where you said that I was making a personal attack. You can clearly see that on the link I provided, I was being personal towards an "administrator" who made the initial personal attack himself. As I said, this issue is pretty much closed as far as I am concerned. While I can`t help but take umbrage at your flagging me for making a personal attack and claiming not to be able to see the personal attack which prompted it, I can see that you at least are coming from a good place. As I said, the issue is closed as far as I am concerned. Kont Dracula (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Again, I would suggest you do a little more research on wikipedia, and read WP:FIRST, which will help you write your first article. If you were writing your article on wikipedia as an active page and it got deleted while you were working on it, I can tell you that's standard operating procedure around here. You can work on an article in your own user space and get it properly referenced and written, and then upload it to the main space. Unfinished articles should not be on wikipedia, since it's an active encyclopedia at all times.

Although I don't know exactly what your article was, I can tell you admins see a lot of random articles uploaded to wikipedia and the majority of them aren't ready and get deleted. That's just the way it is, and the way it should be. There's plenty of space on the wiki to write your article before uploading it. Redrocket (talk) 07:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I genuinely appreciate your advice but, as I am sure you are aware by now, the nature of my complaint extends a bit further than the mere fact that I had the notability and relevance of an unfinished article questioned. It is the sheer hypocrisy that I can not stomach. The very same "administrator" who deleted my article on the basis that i did not have "references"? It took me all of 2 minutes to find an article of his which did not contain references. Was his article deleted? No. Was mine? Yes. Not content with deleting my work, the very same "administrators" rubbed salt into the wound by congratulating each other and describing it as "steaming crap". You seem to be a fair-minded person. Surely, surely you do not believe that things are "as they should be". There is a blatant double standard at play here, so I can not, will not agree with you when you say that this is the way things should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kont Dracula (talk • contribs)

I appreciate you trying to make your point, but you're completely missing what I'm telling you about wikipedia policy. If you were working on a new page in the main space, it very well may have looked like unsourced "steaming crap" to an uninvolved administrator who deleted it. Without you showing me what he said, I have no idea what the context was. You're making a lot of accusations, but not backing it up with links and differences.

Again, if you'll look on the history of a page, you can find the various revisions and changes that have been made. Furthermore, you can click on the editors and check out their contributions to find what you're looking for. Redrocket (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

While your feelings about the matter are understandable it's very important to realize that, at least at Misplaced Pages, policy does not allow us to consider things in that light. An impropriety in "situation A" is never an acceptable justification for an impropriety in "situation B". However, if you feel that any article, even one initiated by an admin, is not fit for the encyclopedia or fails to meet some policy then the easy solution is to nominate it for deletion. This can take a couple of different forms including Speedy delete and AfD. As a registered editor you can do that yourself, just by following the instructions on the pages I listed. If the article is judged to not meet WP standards then it will be deleted. But as RR noted, the best way to avoid a frustration like this is to work on the article on a personal page and bring it up to WP standards before saving it into the mainspace. If you're not sure how to do that, drop a note on my takpage and I'll help. Doc Tropics 18:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Desert Vista High School

Max Crumm did go to DVHS, so stop deleting it. --Elaborateliar (talk) 04:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

My apologies, he did go to that school. Perhaps if all of your other edits weren't vandalism like this , I would have been more likely to believe unsourced material from you. Redrocket (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

WP does not operate on Facts, but verifiablity. If you can prove it by citing a source all can access, it will stay on the page. Otherwise, no.— Dædαlus / Improve 03:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

About Powers and abilities of the Hulk

Hey man. First off, kudos for all your recent help on my talk page. As for said Hulk page, I don't think they're socks but look at what the page was reduced to. Kinda bad grammer all around, especially on the refs. Thoughts? Please reply on your talk page, which I'm watching. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, my pleasure to help. I was pretty sure when I saw you blocked that it was a sock-related misunderstanding. Glad to have you back. I'll help keep an eye on it. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 07:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah man, I hope User:David A comes back. He takes care of the page more than anyone. Well, I'm out for the night. See ya, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Mr. "Fantastique"

Thanks for the assist on the issue with my homepage. I'd dislike to take this fellow to AN/I, but it sure seems like it's headed that way.  RGTraynor  12:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

TPIRFanSteve

You should stay out of that situation, it is something you do not want to be in. Thank you for your understanding