Peter Damian (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Peter Damian (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 338: | Line 338: | ||
I'm bemused by your comments on the AEE talk page. What do you do in RL that explains this? [[User:Peter Damian|Peter Damian]] ([[User talk:Peter Damian|talk]]) 21:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC) |
I'm bemused by your comments on the AEE talk page. What do you do in RL that explains this? [[User:Peter Damian|Peter Damian]] ([[User talk:Peter Damian|talk]]) 21:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC) |
||
: [edit] Oh you write about Twitter [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&contribs=user&target=Greg+Tyler&namespace=0]. Actually what is Twitter? [[User:Peter Damian|Peter Damian]] ([[User talk:Peter Damian|talk]]) 21:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC) |
: [edit] Oh you write about Twitter [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&contribs=user&target=Greg+Tyler&namespace=0]. Actually what is Twitter? [[User:Peter Damian|Peter Damian]] ([[User talk:Peter Damian|talk]]) 21:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC) |
||
Hi. I'm a v old person. Nearly all my professional life has been based on the premiss that you succeed based on your expertise. In turn, the difficult task of choosing and paying experts to do a job is best done by reference or by consulting other experts, as well as checking people out yourself - but the problem is how to decide whether someone else is an expert, when you are not yourself an expert on the subject. My experience over 40 years has been mostly that when people choose experts at a particular job, they choose on the basis of expertise, rather than being 'nice' or good-looking or something like that. So I was quite surprised that an association of experts should be so viciously attacked like this. |
|||
My background is 6 years of editing Wikipedia and increasing frustration in battling vested interests and points of view. Hope that explains things - I was really upset by the attacks. [[User:Peter Damian|Peter Damian]] ([[User talk:Peter Damian|talk]]) 08:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:27, 18 July 2009
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Greg Tyler, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Beacon (disambiguation). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Marek.69 talk 20:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Re: Welcome Message
Sorry, if I've upset the 'Red Link' image. Whoops. You could always blank it and request for it to be deleted. Cheers Marek.69 talk 20:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Ohai
Harumph ¬_¬ Amzi (Talk To Me) 21:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
JPEG-avi
Just a friendly note on JPEG-avi. I declined the speedy deletion request, as "poorly constructed" is not one of the speedy deletion reasons, it's an editing issue. If you don't feel comfortable fixing the article yourself, slap a maintenance tag such as {{copyedit}} or {{context}} on it, and let someone else have a stab at it. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Total wipeout editing
Well, I'll give some reasons. Sorry I did not see your message before.
1. It seems like advertising. To some, perhaps, it does, but to others it is a good source of information to turn to. That's why it is in "external links"
2. It lacks notability. Notability means, according to Wikipedia, "worthy of notice". Perhaps you do not feel the need to notice this site, but I am sure there are many Avid Fans who do. 3. It contains little information and does not further enhance the reader's knowledge of the subject. Wikipedia when it was first founded contained the same. This is a discussion board. By people entering it, It will become a larger resource. However, It does show precise instructions of how to get on the show, which the Wikipeda page does not.
4. It is not a reliable source."" There are many members that have been on the show "Wipeout" which Total wipeout was derived from. Another member is the Admin of a forum which has several links here on wikipedia. Certianly the site has more creditability then most of the people even writing the Total Wipeout page.
FOund a source in the Newham Recorder that acts toward WP:V and WP:N. Added it. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 06:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I hope it will be useful for the article and the DYK. Best wishes, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 17:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Facebook Poke Interpretations...
Hi Greg,
Although I respect your contributions regarding editing Wikipedia I have found your comment about calling my interpretation of Poke on Facebook "absurd" to be a form of unfair censorship. There are a large number of Facebbok users who have interpreted "the Poke" in many different ways, including the edit that I had added. It is important to point out that in the original Wikipedia definition of "Poke" the following words are used:
"...When we created the poke, we thought it would be cool to have a feature without any specific purpose. People interpret the poke in many different ways, and we encourage you to come up with your own meanings.."..."
Sincerely,
Facebook User
The poke feature allows one user to virtually poke another. Some users believe that the poke feature is some sort of Facebook foreplay. However, according to Facebook's FAQ section on the feature, "a poke is a way to interact with your friends on Facebook. When we created the poke, we thought it would be cool to have a feature without any specific purpose. People interpret the poke in many different ways, and we encourage you to come up with your own meanings." One such interpretation is the idea that a "poke" is another way of "teabagging" another user. Teabagging is the act of lowering one's testicles onto someones face, or into their mouth while they are laying down. Kind of resembles dipping a tea bag into a hot cup of water. In principle, this is intended to be a "nudge" to attract the attention of the other user. However, while many Facebook users, as intended, use the feature to attract attention or say hello,[12] some users[who?] construe it as a sexual advance. There are several applications on Facebook which extend the idea of the poke feature by allowing users to perform other actions to their friends (such as "kick" or "wave to"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.252.210 (talk) 18:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Greg,
PhotoShare is an iPhone app similar to others listed including Twitterific. If you can suggest a modification to the language to reflect it not as advertising, but rather an option to tie in a visual perspective then that would be great. Again, your thoughts are welcome.
Thank you, Adam —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamJGSea (talk • contribs) 00:40, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I ADDED THIS COMMENT TO OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION ON MY PAGE, BUT WAS NOT SURE IF YOU COULD SEE IT SO I ADDED HERE AS WELL. THANKS, ADAM We offer a service like Twitpic -- except we offer a lot more. Anyone from PhotoShare can add his/her Twitter info into the profile page. So when a photo is uploaded to PhotoShare it generates a link posted to his/her Twitter account. I can send you a screen shot of my Twitter page if you'd like. So, while we do not mention Twit. . . in our name we offer services similar to those already posted. On this basis I would like to add the information back onto the Twitter page. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamJGSea (talk • contribs) 19:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Greg, I saw your message on my page and understand that the perspective should be from a user rather than from me in an unbiased fashion. We are already in conversation with our users about using Twitter so it is likely only a matter of time since many of quite tech savvy. Thanks again, Adam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamJGSea (talk • contribs) 22:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
NPWatcher
Hi, Greg Tyler. I have granted you NPWatcher per your request here. After looking over a few of your contributions, your talk page, and your block log, I feel you can be trusted with the tool. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. –Juliancolton | Talk 15:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:TweetDeck logo.png
Thank you for uploading File:TweetDeck logo.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — neuro(talk)(review) 15:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello. When you patrol new pages, acceptable articles or articles which have been tagged for deletion should be marked as "patrolled" using the link at the bottom right of the article. This saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thank you. ∗ Smartse (talk) 16:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Twitter Mobile
Hi Greg,
Why was my Twitter Mobile page deleted, when it contained no blatant advertising when pages such as Twitterrific does nothing but advertise.
Twitter Mobile is a mobile client for Twitter - I do not understnd how I can say that without it being construed as advertising. I did examine many pages of like content and they seem to have no problems.
RandyWine (talk) 09:10, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I was going to revert the same change that you reverted because it was unsourced and unclear on the chronology. However, for comparison's sake, I think it's worth considering that the Facebook article prominently touts Zuckerberg's Harvard credentials. Do you consider that inappropriate? --Notyourbroom (talk) 17:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I removed your speedy deletion tag, as the article has clear claims of significance/importance in my opinion, per my edit summary. decltype (talk) 01:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello
The Cleanup Barnstar | ||
its for that thing you did to the references section in List of Alex Rider characters. I've been trying to do it myself for 5 days but I couldn't. If you want to delete this I won't be offended.--Spongefrog (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thankyou for saying thankyou--Spongefrog (talk) 19:27, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I had that problem too, except I just added the underconstructin tag and let someone else do the hard work. It worked! Except i think its still a stub too.--Spongefrog (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Rollback
I have Tyler granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Tagging for speedy deletion
Hi there. I noticed you tagged Rafford railway station with speedy deletion criterion G11. Please review G11's wording and reasoning: It serves to delete articles which are written to promote its subject, by using blatantly promoting language and tone. Articles like this one, which only consist of the article name in the text can never meet this criterion (unless the article name itself is advertising). The page rather met criterion A3 for not having any real content (although it was mistakenly deleted as A1 by another admin). Please be more careful when tagging articles in the future, because each tag conveys a different message to the page creator. Some are positive (like test page, no content) while others can be perceived as assumptions of bad faith (vandalism, blatant advertising etc.). Regards SoWhy 12:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
NuclearWarfare (Talk) 13:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Green Front
Can you tell me why didn't you tell me that you proposed for deletion the Green Front article I have started? --Checco (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Green Front
Hi, the article Green Front has been proposed for deletion for the second time, I’m sorry, the main autor wasn’t informed about discussion which you attended too--Invitamia (talk) 12:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for the great tip on linking categories! I knew there had to be a way, because I've seen it done before, but I just never figured out how. I had made a note to myself to just click the edit button the next time I saw it, but I always forget. Thanks bunches for the great tip! Greg, I really appreciate it! — Ched : ? 17:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Encyclopaedia Metallum
Please see my reply in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopaedia_Metallum_(2nd_nomination). Evenfiel (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Deprod of Gangstar 2: Kings of L.A
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Gangstar 2: Kings of L.A, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! MuZemike 16:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Prod
Ok then, could you tell me how to do that please? Do I write it after "concern ="
Thank you for informing me Ruyter (talk) 17:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
DYK nomination of CHERUB (organisation)
Hello! Your submission of CHERUB (organisation) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Smallman12q (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of CHERUB (organisation)
I have nominated CHERUB (organisation), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CHERUB (organisation). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SpinningSpark 11:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Twitter GA Nomination
I have reviewed your GA nomination of Twitter and have placed it on hold for fourteen days - it still seems like constructive contributions are made to the article. Please see my comment at Talk:Twitter/GA1. Please feel free to respond there. Cheers, Vicenarian (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Vicenarian (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Dear Greg Tyler,
I have seen your post about American Club (eikaiwa) and responded with comments. There is another person who also responded with a post. Because I'm not sure you saw them I've chosen to write you on this page. You can find the posts at the links below. Thank you very much for your time and thoughtful consideration. Sincerely, Rayjameson (talk) 07:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Club_(eikaiwa)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Club_(eikaiwa)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Exleops
Rayjameson (talk) 07:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Adminship
Yeah I knew I had to do one more stage, how exactly do you add it to the main RfA page? Sought | Knock Knock | Who's There? 20:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank You, I'm 99.9 % sure I did it correctly, I'm here, Thank you for your help Sought | Knock Knock | Who's There? 23:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Typo team
Hi there, I just corrected a small typo on your user page, hope you don't mind. decltype (talk) 22:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: time since last edit
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--Cybercobra (talk) 03:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Straw poll on displaying time since last edit
Hi, you weighed in on the "display time since last edit on article" discussion at the Village pump. I have now started a straw poll on the subject at WP:Village pump (proposals)#Straw poll. Your opinion would be appreciated. --Cybercobra (talk) 04:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Computerjoe's talk 16:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
From Bates
Greg,
I realize I had insufficeint data to support my facts of Wii Sports Resort, and i say facts for a reason. However, one pivotal resource would be Nintendo's demos from this year's E3 in L.A. Also if you had studied my listed Japanese site more closely, you would have easily found all of my information valid. If you still do not believe me, visit http://wii.com/jp/articles/wii-sports-resort/ so you may watch the videos & witness the truth of that I had spent my time typing, only to be deleted. I have spent countless hours researching my topic ever since a preview of it last year at E3 so I find myself very well informed on this topic. When you find that you had falsely accused my data, if possible, could you undo the changes you have made, if it is a simple task.
Oh! and one more thing, on the Japanese official website their is a picture of Wuhu Island, I implore you to compare it to the picture given in the Wii Fit manual of the unnamed island that you jog on. The resemblance is incontrovertible. They are exact duplicates of one another. If you still to not find my data adequate, maybe you should do some research yourself, as I have spent my entire previous year doing such. Remember to observe the links and videos attached to the websites carefully, as anyone should do, and may I be proven right and restore my hard work.
-Edgar Allen Bates —Preceding unsigned comment added by E. A. Bates (talk • contribs) 18:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Greg,
Thank you very much for looking into this subject. However, if you cannot find much information, for it was hard even for myself, I shall just simply wait until the game nears launch and scout out all of the information I can locate. Thank you for understanding.
-Bates —Preceding unsigned comment added by E. A. Bates (talk • contribs) 12:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Wii Sports Resort
Woops sorry! This is a bit embarrassing, aha. I should have been more careful. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 00:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks, it is surprisingly easy to make. :) \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 06:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
UBX
I see what you mean and I understand you concern, feel free to edit the box whenever you want, however you want. Although I don't understand your theory, please see User:Scarce/box. I removed the feature that pulls up the subpage name. It only mutates with templates. ---Scarce |||| You shouldn't have buried me, I'm not dead--- 09:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Like I said, "feel free to edit the box whenever you want, however you want" ---Scarce |||| You shouldn't have buried me, I'm not dead--- 09:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
The WPVG Newsletter (Q2 2009)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 2, No. 4 — 2nd Quarter, 2009
Previous issue | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2009, the project has:
|
|
Content
|
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 15:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Ost (talk) 22:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
- News and notes: Commons grant, license change, new chapters, usability and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia and kidnapping, new comedy series
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Food and Drink
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Cheers!
~~~ has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!
You were right. My gravest mistake this week was to assume there was a case to weaken where obviously none was stated. This most definitely deserves at least one pint of your favourite festive beverage.
That being said, careful about overfeeding, it is said that the bridges become a real mess if they go for the last wafer-thin mint. :)
MLauba (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Big Brother in Wiki
Greg, this reminds me of George Orwell, if you know what I mean. "...There is some fairly substantial evidence here, where I suggest that Witizen might be preparing to "rally support" and Rich church mouse replies...". Compare signatures! What's next, DNA? I can save your time for further investigations and tell I share computer with Witizen. Maybe you need more detail about our relationship? No problem, I can tell. I deleted his remark, because I do not want any further fighting. But I agree that editors only talk about formal rules, investigate ridiculous "crimes", but do nothing to improve article. You may kill the article, but the bigger problem of competence will remain, no matter how you hate us for our criticism, call me sock or whatever. And I will talk about it aloud, because I want to make Wikipedia better. Rich church mouse (talk) 22:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)Rich Church Mouse
- Thanks for your answer. Sounds like you are enjoying what you're saying. Very sad, if someone knows about flaws, does nothing to improve, or to help others people who care. Rich church mouse (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Rich Church Mouse
- In that case perhaps you kindly do something to stop this shameful SPI? At least undo your part. I don't particularly publicizing my intimate life details, especially sharing them with Wiki editors (many of whom seem teenagers, or behave like ones). Rich church mouse (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Rich church mouse.
- Ah... Well, go ahead. Just throw me out. Bravo, amigo. Rich church mouse (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Rich church mouse.
- In that case perhaps you kindly do something to stop this shameful SPI? At least undo your part. I don't particularly publicizing my intimate life details, especially sharing them with Wiki editors (many of whom seem teenagers, or behave like ones). Rich church mouse (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Rich church mouse.
- Thanks for your answer. Sounds like you are enjoying what you're saying. Very sad, if someone knows about flaws, does nothing to improve, or to help others people who care. Rich church mouse (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Rich Church Mouse
Real life
I'm bemused by your comments on the AEE talk page. What do you do in RL that explains this? Peter Damian (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- [edit] Oh you write about Twitter [1]. Actually what is Twitter? Peter Damian (talk) 21:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm a v old person. Nearly all my professional life has been based on the premiss that you succeed based on your expertise. In turn, the difficult task of choosing and paying experts to do a job is best done by reference or by consulting other experts, as well as checking people out yourself - but the problem is how to decide whether someone else is an expert, when you are not yourself an expert on the subject. My experience over 40 years has been mostly that when people choose experts at a particular job, they choose on the basis of expertise, rather than being 'nice' or good-looking or something like that. So I was quite surprised that an association of experts should be so viciously attacked like this.
My background is 6 years of editing Wikipedia and increasing frustration in battling vested interests and points of view. Hope that explains things - I was really upset by the attacks. Peter Damian (talk) 08:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)