→Template:Infobox Bibliography: glad it works |
No edit summary |
||
Line 143: | Line 143: | ||
'''Thanks''' It looks like between your input and a little tweaking on my end, this has become usable. I really appreciate it. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 17:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC) |
'''Thanks''' It looks like between your input and a little tweaking on my end, this has become usable. I really appreciate it. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 17:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
:You are welcome, unfortunately, I was wrong, what broke the template was specifying "Image size =" without a value. Well, it's fixed anyhow but... [[User:Equendil|Equendil]] <small>[[User talk:Equendil|''Talk'']]</small> 18:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC) |
:You are welcome, unfortunately, I was wrong, what broke the template was specifying "Image size =" without a value. Well, it's fixed anyhow but... [[User:Equendil|Equendil]] <small>[[User talk:Equendil|''Talk'']]</small> 18:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
==IGN site== |
|||
It looks like the IGN has changed their site. I will no longer link to it. [[User:Ksnow|Ksnow]] ([[User talk:Ksnow|talk]]) 15:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Ksnow |
Revision as of 15:44, 10 April 2009
AFD Predictive indexI have now listed the copyvio link on the AFD for this article Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Predictive_Index Fallenfromthesky (talk) 03:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC) A tough one to fix... though I think I did okay for not being able to read Croatian. Can you suggest what else I might do to improve this thing? Thanks, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 08:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC) MisinformedThe articles for 'Surrender Monkey' and 'Cheese eating surrender monkies' do not exist to legitimise hating the French. Noting silliness is not the same as supporting it. In conclusion, I can understand saying the article is not noteable but to say it exists to hate the French is pointless and wrong. Lots42 (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC) XidanThank you for reopening that non-neutral closure of the deletion debate. The editor in question was very belligerent in their reaction. Also could you point to any sources for the mall? I tried google but did not find anything reliable and then google scholar turned up nothing.Chuletadechancho (talk) 22:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I would appreciate it if you could comment at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Personal attacks by User:Arbiteroftruth (AoT)Chuletadechancho (talk) 01:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC) ongoing vandalism at Michel PlatiniHi there, thanks for semi-protecting the page. These accidents occasionally do happen because the article is vandalized by 2 separate ip/user vandals in succession. Unfortunately Huggle doesn't have an option to restore to previous a reversion :( --Superflewis(talk) 13:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Just a note to remind you that per WP:NAC, non-administrators shouldn't close deletion discussions unless they are nearly unanimous keep after a full listing period, or snowball closures. Stifle (talk) 14:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the revertThanks for the revert on the Food packaging article. I really appreciated it. Chris (talk) 15:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC) Your comment at ANPerhaps you'd like to revisit the discussion? Both Guy and I have proposed solutions for the dilemma. I symapthize with the dilemmas RC patrollers face and there ought to be a way to relieve some of the pressure. Best, DurovaCharge! 23:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I admire you......For having the brass ones to make "no consensus" AFD closes as a non admin. I'm still afraid of getting yelled at. (ZOMG yur not an admin) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism questionThanks for the link to content dispute. Since the user has continued making POV/uncited contributions to Wikipedia, despite many warnings, I had thought it might be sufficient evidence to stop "assuming good faith". At what point does the user cross that "good faith" line?--Rsl12 (talk) 14:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Nice work...About @#@&#^*&#^* time someone did that. Cheers. --Merbabu (talk) 22:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC) Catholic EncyclopediaRe some comments of yours at AfD, please note that Catholic Encyclopedia material is not copyright, the book being from 1913. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
The ever growing list of stub templatesHi. I wonder if you are thinking of abandoning your proposal here? I'm in favour so I'd be interested to know your thoughts. --Kleinzach 03:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
trusted computer systemYou redirected trusted computer system elsewhere, saying it is not a proper article. It is a proper article: the US government uses the term in a different way than the one you redirected it to, which I have not read them use yet (though maybe they do) and means something slightly different.--Dchmelik (talk) 06:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC) Help please?Equendil, I/we need your help. I am the editor who began working on the article Dan Debicella back in late September, attempting to replace copy lifted from the subject's website with some semblance of a proper article. The article has improved a great deal since then and I have been trying very hard to stay on top of it, but there seems to be an individual very motivated to protect Debicella's record who has constantly reverted the good faith edits I have made and was the same person doing that before I even came on the scene. Now they are accusing me of being someone I am not. I don't see this ever ending without some decisive third-party intervention. From what I remember, you were the first, or one of the first, people to realize what was going on. I'm not asking you to take my side or anything, just that you objectively take a look at the article and make any recommendations you see fit, or even just refer someone who could mediate this dispute. I'm getting really sick of it but I also don't want to give up because I know once I do the article will go back to the same crap it was in the first place. Any help at all is greatly appreciated. 64.252.251.75 (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC) Your usernameJust saw your comment on the Reference Desk, "I'm out of the office", and was quite interested: what's the etymology of your username? Is it from Quenya, one of J. R. R. Tolkien's invented languages? I ask because (aside from enjoying his writings a lot myself) I saw the "ndil" at the end of your username, but I don't remember reading about any of his characters that have anything like "eque" or "equen". Nyttend (talk) 03:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC) SalutHello. I'm a Wikipedian living in Paris as well. If ever you want to meet for a cup of coffee, give me a shout! Rhinoracer (talk) 12:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC) Cinco de Mayo vandalismOn Jan 7, 2009 I accidently observed a vandal attack on Cinco de Mayo and I rolled back the most recent changes but I did not pickup on the earlier more subtle vandalism. I didn't feel qualified to fine tune the article. I looked down the list of recent editors and could not find anyone who seemed to be a seasoned caretaker. On Jan 8, you reverted the article to a month old version. This raises the question: Who should the accidental Good Samaritan inform when an article is being repeatedly abused and needs attention by someone more qualified? (A quick Wikipedia search didn't answer my question.) jwalling (talk) 00:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Re: French "out of office" on the language reference deskRest tranquil, my friend. Me, I took not the offense. Truly, I had fear of him giving. (Get it?) But, seriously, I think it was I who was too abrupt. Nice to meet you, mon ami. Your sightings are hilarious and so bad as to be hard to believe—"lighter", indeed. --Milkbreath (talk) 03:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC) Debicella AgainEquendil, would you be able to review the article Dan Debicella? I have tried to mediate this article about a local politician unsuccessfully. There are two partisans who continue to edit the page-- one very pro-Debicella, and one very anti-Debicella. The pro-Debicella editor removes information that might be perceived as negative to Debicella, while the anti-Debicella editor misquotes cited sources and uses biased language to make Debicella look bad. I have tried to create a neutral version based on the best of both, but would be good to have a second set of eyes on it--and possibly lock the page or at least bar these two partisans from continuing their edit war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBard2 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Equendil-- thank you for stepping in. As you can see, both pro-Debicella and anti-Debicella editors are a little out of hand. I would encourage you to give a neutral review to the content of the article (as I believe I did), rather than the accusations of both partisans. I would also encourage a long-term lock on the page or stopping these partisans from editing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBard2 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks It looks like between your input and a little tweaking on my end, this has become usable. I really appreciate it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
IGN siteIt looks like the IGN has changed their site. I will no longer link to it. Ksnow (talk) 15:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Ksnow |