2006 St. Louis Rams season and User talk:Cgingold: Difference between pages
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
→Guernica: original note & reply |
|||
Line 1:
==Welcome!==
Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and [[Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers|welcome]] to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
*[[Wikipedia:Five pillars|The five pillars of Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedia:How to edit a page|How to edit a page]]
*[[Help:Contents|Help pages]]
*[[Wikipedia:Tutorial|Tutorial]]
*[[Wikipedia:Article development|How to write a great article]]
*[[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedian]]! Please [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|sign your name]] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out [[Wikipedia:Questions]], ask me on my talk page, or place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -[[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] 09:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
<!-- == Re: User page ==
Hello -- I just did the initial set up for my user page, but the link doesn't seem to show up correctly on the contributions page. It shows a brown link for a page which hasn't been created yet. Any advice?? Thanks. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 17:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
:I just looked at [[Special:Contributions/Cgingold]] and the link works fine. Maybe you need to refresh the page/clear your cache.—[[User:WAvegetarian|WAvegetarian]]•[[User talk:WAvegetarian|(talk)]] 17:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
:If you mean link in your user contributions, it shows up properly for me. It might be a cache issue with your browser (do shift-reload) or something with the color scheme you have (a previously visited blue link shows as a sort of purplish-brown for me). —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 17:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC) -->
==Higginson==
Thanks for adding to the biography. I have a great interest in ablotionists and other reformers of that period. I add an entry for [[Abby Kelley]], being very surprised that no one else had. As you may note my wikipedia skills are somewhat limited, but I am trying to improve.
[[User:Peter Reilly|Peter Reilly]] 19:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
==US Spelling==
G'day, I appreciate the changes you made to the waterbirth and Odent articles but please do not change English spelling to US spelling. It is against WP policy. Basically, you leave the spelling as you found it. If it is US you leave it that way and if it is English you leave it that way. And given that Odent is French it would be quite normal for labour to be spelt with an 'ou' rather than just an 'o'.
Cheers Henry [[User:Maustrauser|Maustrauser]] 09:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
<blockquote>Thanks for the note. Somehow, I had acquired the (apparently mistaken?) understanding that US word spellings are preferred over UK spellings. Personally, I'm fine with either -- I read British papers regularly -- and besides, those charming UK spellings do lend a nice touch of colour. :) I may have changed one or two words in the water birth article as well -- feel free to revert them, too. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 10:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)</blockquote>
:: Oh there were some very nasty battles in WP over spelling changes until the policy of 'no change' was brought in. I do think it brings a sense of tolerance and internationalism to the project, which can only be good. And your work on the WB article has been great. It's much clearer. Cheers, Henry [[User:Maustrauser|Maustrauser]] 11:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
== Where do I report a missing page? ==
I tried looking in all the obvious places (Help Contents, Help Desk, etc.) to no avail -- so I hope somebody can direct me where to take this. In the "See also" section of the article on [[Hearing impairment]] there is a link to an article on [[Deaf history]]. But instead of "Deaf History," all I found there was the article on "[[Deafness]]", which I had already seen at its URL (I believe it was redirected). How do I find out what's going on here? [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 04:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
:At the top left corner of the article, there is a note saying it was redirected. Appearently there may have been an article entitled Deaf history at one point in time, but may have been merged with deftness. --[[User:Skywolf|Skywolf]] <sup>[[User_talk:skywolf|''talk'']]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/skywolf|''contribs'']]</sub> 04:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
::Looking at the history of the Deaf history article, there appeared to be not much of an article. It was most likely blanked and redirected because the article did not need to be on a page by itself. You can look at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deaf_history&action=history history here] --[[User:Skywolf|Skywolf]] <sup>[[User_talk:skywolf|''talk'']]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/skywolf|''contribs'']]</sub> 05:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
::For requesting an article, check out [[Wikipedia:Requested_articles]] --[[User:Skywolf|Skywolf]] <sup>[[User_talk:skywolf|''talk'']]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/skywolf|''contribs'']]</sub> 06:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
==nice job==
Nice job on [[Smedley Butler]] [[User:Travb|Travb]] ([[User talk:Travb|talk]]) 15:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
== Protecting articles ==
We generally don't do protection of large groups of articles. If there is a particular article that is a target of vandalism by several different users (anon or otherwise), let me know -- that would be a candidate for protection. If it's just one vandal, we can block them. Thanks, [[User:NawlinWiki|NawlinWiki]] 17:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. Those articles don't look like they are '''current''' targets, so I'm not going to protect any of them as of now. Again, the criterion is if they are a target of rapidfire vandalism from different users (for an example, look at the edit history for [[San Francisco]] last Friday). Keep me posted, [[User:NawlinWiki|NawlinWiki]] 17:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
If you want a specific page or pages protected, go to [[Wikipedia:Requests for page protection]]. [[User:NawlinWiki|NawlinWiki]] 02:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
== User StavK ==
"He's dead, Jim!" --[[User:Mhking|Mhking]] 01:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
:LOL -- no, I'm not an admin (though sometimes I feel like one with the all the reporting of vandalism I do). But you can take a look at the Block Log for StavK at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:StavK which shows that he's been completely blocked... --[[User:Mhking|Mhking]] 18:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
==Carl Sagan==
I should apologize for treating your edits roughly. However, what you have added to the article seems to me irrelevant. So, if I had edited it, my edits would have been almost the same as reversion. Perhaps I have misused terminology. [[User:Michaelbusch|Michaelbusch]] 16:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
== Dangling Ref ==
Good catch on the [[Robert A. Heinlein]] page. Thanks! [[User:Hu|Hu]] 06:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
:Hey, thanks for the note. Yeah, that was really insane, first discovering an '''entire section''' stuck in there with the footnotes, then figuring out that the hugely-extended footnote preceeding it was really the second half of another section. How on earth did that get by everybody for a whole week?? :) LOL!
:By the way - I am totally with you on using the "Show preview" button! (It occurs to me that the little mess I cleared up probably would have been caught if the editor had used that button... ). Is there anything more maddening than going through a whole series of successive edits where the person is just trying out tiny little changes en route to the final draft? I've recently started posting a friendly note on serious offenders' talk pages, explaining how to make good use of the "Show preview" button. I would love to find a way to promote this issue more widely. Any ideas? [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 10:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
== Haitian Rebellion ==
Thanks for all your changes. Much improved! I'm over my head in that article and even went to the Language Help desk to get suggestions on "martial tradition". The final suggestion from there was to explain what that is and how it arose, rather than finding the right Wiki words for it -- those words are already taken by other irrelevant uses. But I think it is important that it be explained since it is still in process today. Thanks! Sincerely, [[User:Mattisse|Mattisse]][[User_talk:Mattisse|(talk)]] 13:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
::P.S. Plus I have been afraid of changing too much since I don't want to offend previous editors who may actually know about the subject, although I did manage to put reference citations in -- there weren't any before -- and in the process did learned much more about Haiti. [[User:Mattisse|Mattisse]][[User_talk:Mattisse|(talk)]] 13:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
== Explanation of edits to [[Biodiesel]]==
I deleted a sentence from the Biodiesel article because it was a statement which had no reference to back up what was being said, and also, later in the article the sentence is practically repeated and expanded upon:
"Biodiesel is a better solvent than petrodiesel and has been known to break down deposits of residue in the fuel lines of vehicles that have previously been run on petrodiesel[citation needed]. Fuel filters may become clogged with particulates if a quick transition to pure biodiesel is made, as biodiesel “cleans” the engine in the process"
[comments by 131.111.8.104 - originally posted at [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 11:30, December 5, 2006]
== Neo-fascism and religion ==
You said:
<blockquote>Hi, Bob - I just now saw my edit summary on [[Neo-fascism and religion]], and I just want to be sure you don't think I was "shouting" -- I used the ALLCAPS only because there's no '''bold''' available in edit summaries. (I hope my explanation was clear enough!) Cheers :) [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 14:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)</blockquote>
I wouldn't have read it that way, but that's really nice of you to be worried. Thanks! I think I'm persuaded too. [[User:Bobfrombrockley|BobFromBrockley]] 16:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
== Lennon ==
Thanks for the pointer to the protect pages and also for your eminently reasonable suggestion regarding the "unsourced" statement that he was most famous for founding the Beatles. Yours is an improvement over the original, for sure, and I hope will satisfy. Have to say, though, that of all the unsourced statements in the article (which I dearly wish were better sourced) that's not the one I would have expected someone to focus on! (And I kind of like my idea of a survey.....) [[User:Tvoz|Tvoz]] 18:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
== Kofi Annan ==
I've noticed the amount which was why I agreed, but after considering main page protection policy I reverted. That said its on my watchlist and i'll be around for another hour so if the vandalism starts up again I'll semi-protect and list at [[WP:AN]] with my reasonings. That said you may like to list there now with diffs showing the amount its getting, asking for discussion on whether its appropriate for semi protection. [[User:Gnangarra|Gnangarra]] 15:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
== Re:Kofi Annan ==
It's a noble idea, and I appreciate your care for such articles on Wikipedia, but I doubt anyone would actually follow through with your idea. I mean, it's not just African-related articles that get hit with vandalism; it's all sorts of articles! The purpose of Wikipedia was so '''''everyone''''' could ''edit'', and by semi-protecting pages would hurt Wikipedia even more. Besides, it's not Wikipedia that's posting libelous material on articles, it's people like you and me. It's ''our'' job to stop these people from doing so. Basically, all the racial sentiments in the world (against Asian, Mexicans, Africans, Jews, etc.) carry over on Wikipedia, and it's tough to deal with it, but we're such a strong community that we have people who are constantly monitoring these pages so people won't see such racial epithets or slurs and think negatively of Wikipedia. We can only hope, but face it. It's human nature. People have prejudices and they'll take it out on others. '''[[User:Nishkid64|<span style="background:#009;color:#7FFF00">Nish</span><span style="background:cyan;color:#009">kid</span>]][[User talk:Nishkid64|<span style="background:orange;color:navy blue">64</span>]]''' 04:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
<!-- Posted at [[User talk:JoeCarson]]
==Re: your edits to [[Fascism]]==
Hello. I see from your user pages that you are rather new to Wikipedia editing (unless you've done some anonymously or under another name). In any event, you really should familiarize yourself with [[WP:Revert|WP guidelines and policy re: Reverting]] -- especially the part about [[WP:3RR|repeated reverts]]. In all sincerity, I would much prefer not to ask the WP admins to enforce this policy vis-a-vis you (or anybody else). I hope you will agree to adopt a more collegial/collaborative ("Wikipedian") approach. Perhaps that strikes you as "collectivist" <LOL> -- but that IS how most people strive to work here. It's one of the fundamental guiding principles. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 15:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC) -->
== my colors ==
Well, it sure does get attention!!! But okay, what would you suggest? I am open to suggestions. [[User:Slrubenstein|Slrubenstein]] | [[User talk:Slrubenstein|Talk]] 17:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
:Well, I am not going to change it (yet) out of respect to your elves but I must say I miss the older garish colors. Still, you did get the question right which carries a lot of weight. Thanks for the effort, [[User:Slrubenstein|Slrubenstein]] | [[User talk:Slrubenstein|Talk]] 12:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
== Searching earlier versions of articles ==
I would dearly love to be able to run searches of earlier versions of articles. This would be absolutely invaluable in terms of locating the exact edit where a particular change took place. Is there any way to do this? I've already read thru [[WP:SEARCH]], but that didn't address the subject. If you don't know the answer, please be good enough to pass this question on to somebody who may be able to help. Thanks! [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 14:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
: Go to the article, and click "history" (right side of "edit this page +"). When you are in it, click on the times (Let's say, 00:39, 8 December 2006), and it will display that particular version of the page. Hope this answers! <font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">AQu01rius</font> <small>([[User:AQu01rius|User]] • [[User_talk:AQu01rius|Talk]])</small> 17:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Apparently I didn't manage to convey exactly what I'm asking, so let me try this again. I'm already very familiar with use of the edit history and earlier versions, etc. What I want is to be able to run a search on a keyword or search string that will enable me to locate, for example, exactly when a particular alteration took place, without having to look all the way back through dozens of versions until I finally hit the page I'm looking for. As far as I can tell, there doesn't seem to be a way to perform a search of those pages. As I said above, I've already read thru [[WP:SEARCH]], and couldn't find any reference to this particular issue. Is there a way to perform such a search? [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 12:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
:Hi. At the moment, such a search isn't possible in the MediaWiki software by itself, but it is possible that the [[meta:toolserver|toolserver]] has a project of this type. Have a look at [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/tstoc http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/tstoc], and see if there is anything to be found there. [[User:Bjelleklang|Bjelleklang]] - [[User_talk:Bjelleklang|talk]] 15:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
== re: Charles Durning ==
Thanks for offering you opinion on this topic. This is strange because [[user:Calgarytanks]] did the original edit, then the text was re-inserted by [[user:Kaspazes]]. It is also interesting his IP address is apparently blocked right now because of an indefinite block on [[user:Pkaza]]. Perhaps they are all the same person? I don't know.
My comment about original research was because of his comment "considerable amount of research on him", which he then makes vague references to EB and his service record, neither of which he will produce. The information that is in the Durning article is well reference by multiple sources. After the disagreement with [[user:Michael Dorosh]] back in July, I added the references. He even questioned Durning's Tony Award, which I found a reference for, also. If we had to provide references backing up every Emmy, Oscar and Tony award winner, that would require a lot of work. I think that if it weren't true, some member of the press would have uncovered it by now. No, he didn't directly say that Durning lied about his record, but if what is in the article about Normandy and Malmedy is untrue, it would mean that he lied. It this point, he has not re-inserted his text, which is perhaps because of said block. I guess we will stay tuned to see what happens.
Thanks
--[[User:Rogerd|rogerd]] 02:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
==Jack Horkheimer and punctuation==
'''My original note: <nowiki> == Jack Horkheimer?? ==</nowiki> '''
Hey there - When I saw your username, my first thought was that you might actually be [[Jack Horkheimer: Star Gazer]], but I see from your user page that you're someone else entirely. (In case you're not familiar with him, take a look at http://www.jackstargazer.com/SHbio.html )
So, is that your real name? The reason I'm asking is, if it isn't really your name, taking it for your ''username'' would be frowned upon (disallowed, to be perfectly honest) under Wikipedia's policy on such things. At [[WP:UN#Inappropriate usernames|Usernames]] it explains as follows:
:"Wikipedia does not allow certain types of usernames, including the following:
:"Names of well-known living or recently deceased people, such as Chuck Norris or Ken Lay, unless you are that living person."
Presumably, if it actually is your '''real name''', none of that would apply, as far as I understand the policy. Anyway, I thought I would bring it to your attention, just in case you weren't aware of the issue. Good luck - hopefully, they'll let you keep the name, if it's really yours!
Oh yeah, one other '''very tiny item''': there's no need to move punctuation to the inside of quotation marks. Believe it or not, it's discouraged under the [[WP:MOS#Quotation_marks|WP Manual of Style]]:
:"When punctuating quoted passages, Wikipedia strongly prefers to put the punctuation mark inside the quotation marks only if the sense of the punctuation mark is part of the quotation (“logical” quotations). This is commonplace outside the US."
It takes a little getting used to when you've had the American style drummed into you all the way through school! :) But I've actually come to prefer it, after reading British papers on the internet for some years.
[[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 15:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
'''REPLY: Jack Horkheimer and punctuation'''
:No, I'm not that Jack Horkheimer nor any Jack Horkheimer. I must admit, I was totally unaware of that policy when I created it. I guess I just resonate with JH's kitschy enthusiasm. I have been using it as a pseudonym for some time now, so I am somewhat reluctant to let it go; I wouldn't put up a fight tho if I was forced to change it. But I don't think the name needs changing for two reasons: I'm not sure Jack Horkheimer qualifies as "well-known" as the strict wording of the policy prohibits, although that term is pretty vague. Also, Jack Horkheimer isn't '''that''' distinctive or unusual a name I don't think.
:Punctuation: thanks for pointing that out to me. I agree that it's somewhat of a relief, as I'd avoided putting non-native punctuation inside a quote, since that seemed the sensible thing to do, until I had the opposite drilled into me in higher education. --[[User:Jackhorkheimer|Jackhorkheimer]] 00:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
===Jack Horkheimer Redux & Resolution===
'''<nowiki>== Your user name ==</nowiki> '''
Before I take any action, I am going to suggest you change your user name. Someone else has already brought up the User Name policy with you, and you replied that [[Jack Horkheimer]] wasn't necessarily famous, nor the name unique. This is not the case, of course, as any Google search will pull results for only '''the''' Jack Horkheimer, and when I saw your user name I immediately thought of Jack Horkheimer, Star Gazer.
Changing your user name is actually a very easy and painless process. Simply file a request at [[Wikipedia:Changing username]]. All of your previous contributions and credits in article histories will now be assigned to your new username. If you do not, though, this account will simply be blocked and you'll have to start from scratch.
I know this is a bit annoying, and that you are fond of the name, but it is undoubtedly a user name policy violation that must be addressed. Thanks, --[[User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson|Jeffrey O. Gustafson]] - ''[[User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson/Shazaam|Shazaam!]]'' - [[User_Talk:Jeffrey O. Gustafson|<*>]] 11:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
:Sorry to be tenacious about this, but you're right, I am fond of the username and it's been my net nom de plume for about three years now. But I would've given up by now if it was as clear (to me) to be a violation. I guess it depends on how you interpret the extremely squishy phrase "well-known". Is a host of a weekly five-minute public television show which is typically played at the end of the night well-known? I don't know. Most people who I give my e-mail address to usually scratch their head about what the name could refer to, given that it differs from my real life name. Also note that Jack Horkheimer doesn't even have a Wikipedia page.
:Anyways, if you still think my username violates policy, I'll change my name or at least open a [[WP:RFCN|RFCN]]. --[[User:Jackhorkheimer|Jackhorkheimer]] 04:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
::Sorry, but the name change is best. It protects the project and it protects you from getting blocked and losing all your contributions. There are plenty of alternatives ("Jack Horkheimer Fan" and whatnot), or anything else you feel is best that doesn't violate policy. It is a bummer, but in the end I would hope to think that we all gain from it. Thanks for your consideration with this. --[[User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson|Jeffrey O. Gustafson]] - ''[[User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson/Shazaam|Shazaam!]]'' - [[User_Talk:Jeffrey O. Gustafson|<*>]] 07:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
:::Hi there, thought I'd ring in. I gave you a heads up about the username issue so you'd have time to think it over and work things out -- I figured someone else would come along eventually and press you on it. Now that you've heard from two different people, it should be pretty apparent that Jack Horkheimer is, indeed, a "notable" figure by Wikipedia standards. And as I pointed out, he ''does'' have his own article at [[Jack Horkheimer: Star Gazer]]. Gustafson's suggestion for a username seems pretty good to me; you could even make it "Jack Horkheimer's Number One Fan" or some variant thereof! :) Regards, [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 07:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
::::Nothing personal, but I've already heard what you think. Nothing is apparent from hearing two people. I've listed myself at [[WP:RFCN]] to try to get some more voices and a final decision so I can move on. And I never disputed whether he is notable or not, only whether he is well-known. --[[User:Jackhorkheimer|Jackhorkheimer]] 08:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::Sounds good. I hope it works out to your satisfaction. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 14:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
'''WP:RFCN'''
Has decided your name is not allowable. Please file a request to change it. [[User:pschemp|pschemp]] | [[User talk:pschemp|talk]] 20:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
== Re: "My unintended vandalism of [[Fuck (disambiguation)]]" ==
'''My original note(s):'''
<nowiki>
== Your unintended vandalism of [[Fuck (disambiguation)]] ==
</nowiki>
Okay, here's a new one. You inadvertently [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fuck_%28disambiguation%29&diff=prev&oldid=102982040 reverted] the ''cleanup edit'' that had just reverted some blatant vandalism -- in other words, you (actually your vandalbot, [[WP:VPRF]]) ''restored'' the blatant vandalism. Aye, aye, aye. Well, if it was gonna happen anywhere, I guess this was a good page for it!. :) [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 07:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
:oops. Never mind! 07:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
'''reply from user:Markdr'''
Well thanks for pointing out my error - I've started using [[User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof|VP]] only recently and as such am learning how it works - my edit was just a mistake. Also, I think calling my revert ''vandalism'' is a bit strong, especially as I reverted my erroneous revert immediately. No hard feelings. Regards, <font color="#5AA424">[[User:Markdr|<b>M</b><i>a</i><b>r</b><i>k</i>]]</font> <sup><font style="a:link{color:#5AA424}">([[User talk:Markdr|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Markdr|Contribs]] | [[Special:Emailuser/Markdr|Email]])</font></sup> 17:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC).
==Minot edits==
Hi there. I feel your insistence on a "See:" link at the end of the Minot history section goes contrary to the style and flow of the article; Breakout articles traditionally are given at a section heading, but I feel this would be inappropriate without treatments for other aspects of Minot history. I feel an inline link, as I had edited, is most appropriate in this case. --'''[[User:Alexwcovington|<font style="background:#000088;" color="#FFFF88">AlexWCovington</font>]]''' ([[User talk:Alexwcovington|talk]]) 02:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
== Question re editing of template/box ==
How do I go about editing the contents of the template/box <nowiki>{{VietnamCorr}}</nowiki>? I need to add some names. Thanks! [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 19:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
: Just go to the template itself and edit it. i.e [[Template:VietnamCorr]] --[[User_talk:Pgk|pgk]] 19:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
==[[User:Timeoutmom.com]]==
Wow, that lady's bound and determined to get her linkspam inserted into as many articles as possible (check out her other "contributions"). Apparently she's on a mission from GOD as well. :) She just kept working away, ignoring my warnings, one edit after another -- so I'm glad you turned up to lend a hand.
PS - Nice collection of quotes on your user page!
Regards, Cgingold 17:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
:The thing that caught my attention was her overt proselytizing on the [[Parenting]] page. I have little tolerance for that sort of stupidity. Truthfully, I'm surprised she got away with it for as long as she did with a username like ''Timeoutmom.com''. Damn noob spammers. I suspect she's probably creating a new username right now... -- [[User:Big Brother 1984|Big Brother 1984]] 17:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
YOU ARE VERY RUDE AND MEAN ! You seem to get enjoyment out of being mean. What kind of person are you ?
Hi I am timeoutmom.com. I do have to say in my defense that I honestly did not know it was not allowed for me to to contribute to articles such as the christianity one and then put myself down as a reference in that one since I have information about local christian conferences specifically for moms. Also, I do have an informational page regarding toddler time-outs and present these at local parenting groups and conferences and submit articles to parenting web-sites and have time-out resources - recommended reading and of course the time-out animals. I do apologize for upsetting the Wikipedia World. I obviously wasn't trying to hide anything or be secretive since i signed up with a log on as my web-site name. So, sorry i did not know i was violating your community. I received several '''NASTY''' and rude e-mails which is distressing to me. It would have been better for your community to have an e-mail that is more friendly and education focused - since that is the gist of this web-site. Example: "Hello ! Welcome to Wikipedia. We are glad you have joined our community. However, it has come to our attention that you are doing X (fill in the blank) and that this is something not allowed on Wikipedia. So, we did X (fill in the blank). Please go to X (fill in pages to go to) for more education and understanding about this site. If you have any questions, you may e-mail X (insert name)." So, this is something to consider before you start sending mean e-mails and bashing people. Think to yourself "Are you being helpful or harmful/hurtful?" I would categorize the e-mails/notifications I received as hurtful and mean and '''they simply could have been HELPFUL and educational'''. So, in your Wikipedia mission that you are on - consider that in your future communications and think about being INCLUSIVE. {{unsigned|User:Timeoutmom.com|15:21, February 28, 2007}}
== Re: MichaelSavageConservative ==
Hello, P.B. Pilhet - I spotted MichaelSavageConservative's similar POV-pushing edits over on [[Democracy Now!]] and [[Amy Goodman]] (both of which I have watchlisted). Then I took a look at his "contributions" and discovered his trail of POV edits on [[Juan Gonzalez]]. Whew!
Judging by the, um, ''savage'' tenor of his remarks, it occurs to me that this user is either ''parodying the style'' of the notorious right-wing talk show host [[Michael Savage (commentator)|Michael Savage]] -- or quite possibly, ''he is Michael Savage''. In light of his seeming fixation on the ''radio program'' Democracy Now!, etc. that strikes me as a distinct possibility. Whatever the case, the question needs to be answered, under [[Wikipedia:Username#Inappropriate usernames|WP policy re using the name of a well-known living person as a username]]. This could get ''interesting''... :) [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 13:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
:Wow, I had no idea that this guy might be a celebrity (I had never heard of Michael Savage)! I wasn't aware that he had committed any more vandalism except what he did to Juan Gonzalez. Glad you were there to revert him, though. I'll keep my eye on him ;-) -- '''<font color="blue">[[User:P.B. Pilhet|P.B. Pilhet]] / [[User talk:P.B. Pilhet|Talk]]</font>''' 16:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
==[[Black History]]==
Thanks a lot for your detailed comments which are for the most part correct!
As new as I am here, I actually do use the Preview as often as I can before saving; probably not as often as I could, so maybe more can be done here (two spaces LOL). Probably, what you are seeing is the mere fact that while I read and try to format links I had been replacing a stop with a stop and 2 spaces--the way I was taught to type. That seems to result in whole paragraphs I have reviewed (in light green on the left side of the Diff screen to show up in light yellow as entirely changed on the right--and probably makes your reviewing a nightmare. It is kind of a bug in WP. I have decided to stop doing that, due to the above negative result, until further notice.
I hope this helps you, and that you are able to fill in some of the CONTENT blanks, e.g., Black Yankees is perhaps overdone in this article and the Segregation section could use some more work.
It is interesting about Wiktionary not being required. I will investigate further.
I hope you're still having fun with this all.
Bob in vegas - [[User:uriel8|<span style="text-decoration: underline; font-weight: bold; color: #000080; border: 1px solid;"> uriel8 </span>]] <small>[[User_talk:uriel8|<span style="color: #3399FF; text-decoration: underline;">(talk)</span>]]</small> 19:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
== The Beatles WikiProject ==
You and I seem to have got off to a bad start. You are new to the project, so I would like to explain myself better. The Beatles is a massive project, there are five huge main articles (the band and its four most famous members), perhaps a dozen big articles ([[George Martin]], a couple of albums, etc.) and then scores and then hundreds of articles of lesser length and quality. To administer all of these disparate pieces we need to adhere to policy which reflects both Wikipedia and the subject matter. To this end we require consensus, as each article needs to follow the same format as every other, and we debate endlessly over both major and minor points.
It is not [[WP:Civil]] to edit an article and then give notice that ''"this is the way things are going to be, folks"'' '''without''' having first discussing the matter beforehand, or even giving notice of intent, and it is especially uncivil to issue threats should any other editor revert, change or amend what you have unilaterally decided is the format. It just isn't the way things are done.
Nor, to be honest, is my use of swearing. So that makes us even. ''Every'' editor who makes a contribution to the project is welcome and regarded as valuable. We all tend to help each other out, and support each other both in and outside of the project. Most of all, we like to talk about how to make the articles better. Once a project policy is decided upon we all tend to support our colleagues in applying said standards.
Anyway, I hope you enjoy your editing and bear in mind the community ethos of Wikipedia that is so strongly supported within the Beatles Project. Thanks. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] 22:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
*To Mr. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]]: Mr. Lennon was born in [[Liverpool]] (Northern England) [[England]], but not in [[Great Britain]] and the [[United Kingdom]]—and in that order. Anybody that disagrees with with that will have to buy me a pint, and stand in the corner with a hat on their head that reads, "I am ignorant of the basic rules concerning birth places". [[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] 16:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
*This makes my blood boil... Lennon was NOT born in [[Great Britain]] (which means Scotland, England and Wales) or the [[UK]] (which includes Northern Ireland). He was born in England. Now shut up and put some in-line citations in, or I will feed your dog something unpleasant. You can now report me for being a vandal. [[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] 16:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
*Join us and contribute, but don't attack us. We have a great time, and so could you. [[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] 16:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
== Question re Copyvio deletions ==
Hi, glad to see you dispatched those two Mike Gravel articles. But I'm puzzled. I also tagged a third article -- [[Tom Vilsack presidential campaign]] -- that was created by the same user, [[User:Nick37|Nick37]], and for some reason it hasn't been deleted. I figured they'd all go together. Just an oversight?
Also, for future reference, what's the best way to learn the disposition of a [[WP:Speedy|Request for speedy deletion]]?
[[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 15:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
:Howdy! When working C:CSD, I'll usually load up a series of articles that are next to each other alphabetically and work through them one by one checking them out and deleting as necessary. I don't cluster my deletions by a specific editor or tagger, with the very rare exception of cleaning up after some sort of mess. Keep in mind, the speedy tagged articles are, like everything else here, worked on by volunteers, so it can get backlogged a bit now and then. Also, there are fewer admins per capita now than ever before, and consequently, there's an increasing workload for each of us, but we're trying not to get too far behind the curve. In regards to keeping track of things you've tagged for speedy, since they disappear from your watchlist upon deletion, it's really hard to keep an eye on them. If you really wanted to, you could make a page in your user space that has links to the articles you've tagged. Then a quick glance at that page would show you if they had been recreated or not by the color of the link. It's a pain, but it's an idea. It's easier for an admin to watch the things they've deleted, because there are delete logs (I have a link to the one for my actions on [[User:Chairboy]], for instance, under 'das blocken lights'), but then again, keep in mind that there are plenty of times when a junk article is speedied, and eventually replaced by a good one later, so there shouldn't be a speedy stigma attached. Just because something was deleted previously doesn't mean that it must always be deleted on sight. Anyhow, hope my rambling has been of assistance. Regards, [[User:Chairboy|C<small>HAIRBOY]]</small> ([[User_talk:Chairboy|☎]]) 15:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
== Your revert to Abbie Hoffman ==
Hello Cgingold! I have noticed that you reverted my infobox to the article [[Abbie Hoffman]]. I understand your good intention not to make him a "criminal". However, in our [[WP:CRIME]] project the infobox can be used to '''any individuals that have been convicted of a crime''', including Abbie Hoffman. As you can see I have put the box to the article [[Ken Lay]], [[Martha Stewart]], among others. I did not intend to use the box for any POV reasons. In contrary, '''Personally I deeply respect Abbie Hoffman''' as a person, and I wrote in the infobox that '''his conviction was overturned'''. He was a very principled man, a very good speaker, and a person who fought for what he believed. Sincerely I hope you can reconsider this and restore the box, not because he's a "criminal" in a real sense, but he was once the convicted by the system and almost served jail time. [[User:Wooyi|Wooyi]] 19:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
:Hello Wooyi, thank you for your explanation. I appreciate your sincerity on this issue. But it's precisely because he's '''not''' ''"a 'criminal' in a real sense"'' that it would be wrong to label him with that infobox. Even though it may be clear in ''your'' mind that you don't really ''mean'' to imply any such thing, '''that fact would ''not'' be clear''' to readers. So regardless of your intentions, the label of criminality is what would be perceived. Especially considering that this crime infobox ''replaces'' the standard biog. infobox, it should only be used in cases when the person's criminality is his/her most notable feature -- which certainly is not the case with Hoffman. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 10:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
==J. William Fulbright==
You asked "what did this have to do with his "Post-Senate career"?" to my update about Fulbright's status as a Junior Senator. The answer is "very little"... post Senate, it is only revelant that he spent the rest of his life as the former Junior senator... so it was a status he retained post senate. This got me thinking... I started examining why I decided to add it to that section anyway. What's in this section... it talks about the 1974 election (when he was still in the senate) and people remebering him at the time of his death (not exaclty career oriented information is it). So I added back my sentence (with a slight rewrite) and I changed the name of the section to "Final Election and Legacy" which seems much more apropriate.--[[User:Dr who1975|Dr who1975]] 20:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
==Barnstar==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Barnstar.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This barnstar, the first on Wikipedia, is given to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated. Keep up the wonderful edits on wikipedia Cgingold [[User:Travb|Travb]] ([[User talk:Travb|talk]]) 21:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
|}
Wow, I just was informed of the [[WP:DYK]] entry for [[Ludlow Amendment]] after I gave you the barnstar--thanks! If I would have known about this before, I would have submitted many more articles for DYN too, I have written or expanded at least a hundred articles over the years. [[User:Travb|Travb]] ([[User talk:Travb|talk]]) 03:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
:I guess it was [[User:Duk]] who nominated the entry. I see that you usually dont respond much to your messages... [[User:Travb|Travb]] ([[User talk:Travb|talk]]) 16:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
::Hey there! Sorry it took so long for me to reply -- our power got knocked out by a snowstorm for much of the day. Very kind of you to award me the Barnstar, Travb. I've never quite made up my mind what I think of them, generically speaking. But I appreciate the sentiment, all the same.
::That's really cool that the Ludlow article made it into the DYK box. (I knew it would!) And it's already getting more traffic, judging by the sudden appearance of some new editors. Good job! [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 15:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|small|standard}}-talk"
|-
|[[Image:Updated DYK query.svg|15px|Updated DYK query]]
|On [[27 February]], [[2007]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know?]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[Ludlow Amendment]]''''', which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|"Did you know?" talk page]].
|}
Hi Cgingold, I failed to credit you in the DYK nomination - very sorry for the oversight. Nice article! --[[User talk:Duk|Duk]] 17:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
:Hey, no problem. I guess I got the ball rolling, but Travb deserves the lion's share of the credit. I was just glad to see it get mentioned on the front page! [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 15:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
== Reverting Vandalism ==
Hi there, Could you please be a bit more careful when you are reverting vandalism? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexican%E2%80%93American_War&diff=prev&oldid=113157032 This recent edit] created a problem which took a while to get properly cleaned up. As you can see, you reverted a reversion -- thereby '''restoring the vandalism'''. Subsequent editors (or their bots) assumed that your reversion had left a clean edit, thus prolonging the mess. Obviously, that wasn't what you intended! But this kind of sloppyiness sure isn't helpful.
Also, please take a look at the edit summaries you've been leaving, all of which read the same: "Revert to revision $1 dated $2 by $3". I don't use ''popups'' myself, but I presume that you need to adjust the settings in some fashion.
Personally, I prefer to do things manually -- even though it probably takes a little longer, it avoids these errors. Also, it allows me to look at the user's talk page to assess which warning template is most appropriate to post -- a crucial step in dissuading them from further vandalism.
[[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 14:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
:<nowiki>== Re:vandalism ==</nowiki>
:I make it my duty to be the fastest user on RC patrol on wikipedia. Which mostly I am, I'm doing near 60 edits a day reverting vandalism. I did not mean to vandalise that article, apologies, it was even worse the other month with that automatic undo. I do have 1100 edits, to proove I'm a legitimate editor. Whilst also could you comment on my editor review? [[User:Retiono Virginian|Retiono Virginian]] 16:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
=== Mexican–American War ===
:<nowiki>== Sloppy Revert ==</nowiki>
:Hi there, I see from your user page that you're a serious vandalism fighter. (Thumbs up to that!) Unfortunately, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexican%E2%80%93American_War&diff=prev&oldid=113157996 this recent edit] did not help things -- it only served to prolong the mess, especially when a subsequent editor carelessly assumed that you had made a clean revert. Whew! Btw, you weren't the first -- a previous editor made the same mistake! (and I just left a note for him/her, too) Anyway, please try to be just a bit more careful, so this sort of thing doesn't happen again in the future. Regards, [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 14:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
:Hey there, fellow vandalism fighter. I'm afraid that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexican%E2%80%93American_War&diff=prev&oldid=113158974 this recent edit of yours] didn't really help things -- it only served to prolong the mess. Btw, you weren't the first -- two previous editors made the same mistake! (and I just left notes for them, too) Anyway, please try to be just a bit more careful, so this sort of thing doesn't happen again in the future. Regards, [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 14:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me that - I will take a bit more care in future. '''''<font color="#FF0000">[[User:Hut 8.5|Hut 8.5]]</font>''''' 18:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Same here: Thanks for pointing that out: I'll try to slow down a little, and make sure to check page histories.[[User:Danski14|Danski14]] 18:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
== Propaganda films ==
Why is everyone riding me about this?
I don't have an agenda, as all the right leaning films I've put in the propaganda cat will show. I merely want a full listing of the relevant topics, or else the category would consist of little more than WWII newsreels and 50s exploitation films. Why is it so controversial that latter day American propaganda films. which touch on contrmpory debates, be excluded? It isn't POV, either. The FTA tour, Outfoxed, F9/11 all were films which had a clear policitcal and/or social agenda, why is it so difficult to admit that they are propaganda? (No one has ever raised objection to Stolen Honor, FahrenHYPE 9/11, or Michael Moore Hates America, btw).
That isn't my only reason for putting them in that cat, they all use selective editing and presentation of the facts, fail to show the other side, and try to be "entertaining" enough to lure in an audience. What other qualifications for propaganda could I possibly give?--[[User:Dudeman5685|Dudeman5685]] 20:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
:Hello, Dudeman. Thank you for taking the time to lay out your thoughts on this issue. The problem as I see it is very simple: you have a very broad notion of what constitutes "propaganda", whereas many people feel that "propaganda" is a highly loaded term that should, indeed, only be used very sparingly. Clearly there is no true concensus on what is and what isn't propaganda -- and there never will be. That in itself should be a major red flag.
:As you may recall, 2 months ago there were debates/discussions at [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion]] which resulted in the '''deletion of 3 sub-categories''' of propaganda films. By strong majorities, those who weighed in with comments were concerned that using the "propaganda" label for all of those films was highly NPOV, and therefore not appropriate. Those discussions are worth taking a few minutes to read, so here's the links to those pages:
:[[Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_27#Category:American_Vietnam_War_propaganda_films|Vietnam War films]]
:[[Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_31#Category:Left-wing_American_propaganda_films|Two discussions: Left-wing & right wing films]]
:I made a point of including the "right-wing" films category, because, as you say, this isn't about a particular agenda, but rather about a consistent principle:
::That pinning the "propaganda" label on a film merely because it has a strong POV is fundamentally wrong for Wikipedia, because for the vast majority of readers the term "propaganda" is highly pejorative.
:That being the case, all of those films are, in a sense, ''damaged'' when they're tarred with that label. On the other hand, the only "damage" from NOT labeling a whole bunch of films as "propaganda" is that those Categories & Sub-categories will be ''sparsely populated''.
:In short, the desire to have ''"full listings"'' simply is not a good enough reason to slap an inherently disparaging label on dozens of films. Regardless of your personal views (which you are certainly entitled to), such labels simply have no place in Wikipedia.
:I hope I've helped you understand why sticking lots of films in those categories is always gonna bother people. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 09:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
== Google books and Amazon books ==
Hi. Please see the talk section for the page you linked to concerning [[Phoenix Program]] links. This section in particular:
*[[Wikipedia talk:External links#Google Books?]]
That is a recent talk section, and the page ([[Wikipedia:External links]]) needs to be updated to reflect that discussion. --[[User:Timeshifter|Timeshifter]] 16:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
== dn infobox ==
i have replaced the infobox in the ''[[democracy now!]]'' article. a discussion has been opened on the talk page, and i hope you will join in to express your views on its appropriateness. please do not continue to revert edits with which you disagree without discussion. --[[User:emerson7|emerson7]] | [[User talk:emerson7|Talk]] 18:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
==Regarding edits to [[Parenting]]==
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Cgingold! However, your edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parenting&diff=116732208&oldid=116632583 here] was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove [[WP:SPAM|spam]] from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule mothercraft\.ca, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read [[WP:EL|Wikipedia's external links policy]] for more information. If the link was to an image, please read [[WP:IMAGE|Wikipedia's image tutorial]] on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see [[User:Shadowbot/FAQ|my FAQ page]]. Thanks! [[User:Shadowbot|Shadowbot]] 07:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
:I just reverted Shadowbot's [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parenting&diff=next&oldid=116732208 second deletion] of the same legitimate '''''Wikilink''''' in the "See also" section of the [[Parenting]] article. This was nowhere near being '''linkspam''' -- it was a link to '''another article''' ferkrisake. Frankly, if this bot can't distinguish between external links and wikilinks it should be euthanized. Hopefully there's just a setting that needs to be tweaked. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 08:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
::I have repaired the document. To clarify, besides adding an internal wikilink, your edit also added a blacklisted external link (mothercare.ca, this link got spammed lately, a.o. to this document). It lays, for now, beyond shadowbots heuristic capabilities to only remove the external links and leave the rest of the edit alone (and I am also not sure if that is what should be done, technically both the external ánd internal link got spammed). Hope this explains, have a nice day! --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 09:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
==Sami al-Arian==
I noticed the content you moved on [[Sami al-Arian]] is critical of him and he is still alive. While ''I'' know the information is accurate, it violates [[WP:BLP]]. Please find a source or remove the content. Thanks, [[User:KazakhPol|KazakhPol]] 05:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
:Hello, KazakhPol. Feel free to do whatever you feel you need to do. All I did was move a paragraph I came across that was clearly in the wrong section of the article -- so I don't feel any personal responsibility for it. It was obviously sitting there for a good while without anybody taking notice of it, so I presumed it was considered valid info. It's curious that nobody questioned it or removed it. I have no idea who added it, or where it came from source-wise. I guess you're concerned about the statement referring to an FBI raid. If you know it's accurate, why not stick a "citation needed" tag on it? Anyway, it's your call. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 07:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
== Vandalism ==
Thanks for the tip. I usually do check to see what I am reverting to, I guess my mind was elsewhere. [[User:Malatesta|malatesta]] 23:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
== Kent State ==
The Kent State debate needs to be a part of WikiProject Anti-War. The debate has NO PLACE on the talk page for the article on the Kent State Shootings! The antiwar movement MUST BE on WikiProject Anti-War. And besides, ITS A TALK PAGE! NO ONE GETS INFO FROM THERE! {{unsigned|68.49.250.152|15:45, March 31, 2007 (reply to edit summary)}}
== Central American Crisis ==
Just a note about why I linked to the redirect for the Salvador article, I've actually initiated a Requested Move for "El Salvador Civil War," which I expect to go through. So when I created the Central American Crisis article, I thought I'd get a head start on the El Salvador link. Now that you've changed it, I'll just wait for the move. So far only one other person has commented on the move, if you have an opinion, you can go to [[Talk:El Salvador Civil War#Requested move]]. --[[User:Groggy Dice|<span style="color:indigo; border:thin solid cyan; background:aliceblue">Groggy Dice</span>]] <span style="border:thin solid gold;">[[User talk:Groggy Dice|T]] | [[Special:Contributions/Groggy Dice|C]]</span> 19:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
==Peer review==
An article that you had shown interest in the past has been tagged to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Burning_of_Jaffna_library peer reviewed]. Your input will be appreciated[[User:RaveenS|RaveenS]]
==find a grave and notable names database links==
hi the links to find a grave and nndb are not "poor quality links" like you wrote over on [[David Halberstam]], before you incorrectly removed them. if you had looked you would have noticed that wikipedia has templates for both links and that the wikipedia templates were what i used. wikipedia wouldnt have made up templates for those two websites if wikipedia felt they were "poor quality links." just letting you know [[User:Lurgis|Lurgis]] 05:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
== News Flash: William Mandel still alive ==
To paraphrase Mark Twain: accounts of Bill Mandel's death are greatly exaggerated. Where on earth did you get the idea that he died in 2006?!? Seriously -- it's quite bizarre that you somehow reached that conclusion from a Google search... [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 22:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
:<nowiki>== William Mandel ==</nowiki>
:Very sorry. I redid the Google search just now but I didn't find the page that I had seen. [[User:Hbdragon88|hbdragon88]] 01:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
== Ryan Johnson ==
Hi. I created a page for him and put him back in resisters list. Let me know if ok, thanks. [[User:HG|HG]] 08:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
==Guernica==
Hi there, GrahamBould. I was just reviewing the recent edit history for [[Bombing of Guernica]]. Firstly, a big "thumbs up" on your copyedits -- that article was riddled with typos & other minor errors, far fewer now that you've put in a good effort on cleanup. I'm sure you weren't meaning to mislead anybody, but I was a bit surprised to see how many changes you had made (including a brand new section!) when you had marked it as a "minor" edit. Not that big a deal, to be sure, but all the same I hope you'll be a bit more careful about using that description on future edits. Regards, [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 02:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
:Have rechecked my edits & still think they were minor, except adding some aircraft images in a gallery. None of this changed any facts, or the substance of the text. [[User:GrahamBould|GrahamBould]] 07:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
::Hello, again. Just so you know, I'm not in the habit of leaving picky little notes for people. (I really do have better things to do with my time... ) Although I was a bit surprised by the sheer number of minor corrections, I would have just shrugged and moved on if it wasn't for the addition of a ''brand new section.'' Not trying to make a "Federal case" out of this (as we say here in the States), but it really is helpful for other editors when we make proper note of what we've done in our edits. So I hope you will take this in the spirit in which it's offered -- no offense intended! Regards, [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] 08:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
| |||