User talk:BWD/Archive01

Welcome

Hey, I see that you're new here. Welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for your your contributions and corrections to the Savannah, Georgia article.

Though, I think you already doing a good job, here are some helpful links:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ---Aude 22:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sons of Confederate Veterans entry

I haven't vandalized anything, YET! It is my understanding from the National News that Wikipedia is a place to voice opinions. I'm here to do just that. Do I hate the "New SCV"? I hate it with a passion! It is my personal goal to get the "New SCV"; KKK, Aryan Nations, League of the South, Council of Conservative Citizens, Neo-Nazi's, Militia Movement and other such organizations made Illegal to Exist in these United States of America. The Army of Northern Virginia Battle Flag aka Confederate Flag could only be viewed for historical purposes in museums. However it would be illegal for ANY to own one, fly, wave, march etc with it anywhere in the USA. So take this and use it as you see fit. I've only gotten started! -Bumpusmills1

This is not a place to voice opinions, but rather a place to record facts. That is the fundamental misunderstanding. --BWD 16:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How can I be a Fundamentalist when I fight Fundamentalism with every ounce of blood and every breathe I take? I have a bumper sticker on my car and it reads:

"Fundamentalism Stops A Thinking Mind"

I believe it to be true and I will not be called a Fundamentalist without a brawl. -Bumpusmills1

Reread what I wrote. --BWD 16:35, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So you are not calling me a Fundamentalist? Okay. I'll play along with this train of thought. So the National Media has been lying that we cannot voice opinions of Wikipedia. Is this what you are trying to say? -Bumpusmills1

Please read Wikipedia:Contributing_FAQ. Wikipedia is a place to express facts, not to voice opinions in articles. You are free to do that on talk pages, not in the articles. --BWD 16:41, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've read it and point is well taken. I was just taking the media's word for the situation. My apologizes on speaking out in the inappropriate part of the site. However, my views remain the same. -Bumpusmills1

Savannah nickname

Hi. I don't know for sure about "Creative Coast" that an anon. editor just added, but it turned up in some google searches. Though, I think you're right and it should be "Coastal Empire" [1]. As for, "The Hostess City" [2], it was there before the anon. editor changed it. Thanks for questioning the nickname, as I'm not by any means an expert; Just have the article on my watchlist and doing what fact-checking I can. ---Aude 22:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cherokee society vandalism

I'm not 100% sure what the procedure is when you're dealing with someone who's clearly the same person but keeps changing IPs. My only idea is that you should head over and list the page itself at Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress and maybe they can protect it until he grows bored. - dharmabum (talk) 00:28, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --BWD 00:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PAIN

A quick heads up: This board's response might be slow right now. - brenneman ^(t)^(c) 01:52, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just reported it on WP:AN. --BWD 02:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I could check myself, but I've been pretty busy and I'm lazy so I'll just ask: did you get any action on this?
brenneman ^(t)^(c) 21:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get any action, but action is no longer needed. I think the problem solved itself. Thanks! --BWD 22:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Costal Pet Rescue

Hi, in regards to your comment "please do research ..." there is no reason for you to be so harsh in your comments, you should Assume Good Faith on the part of other contibutors. - I go by the External links guideline when it comes to such links. Links don't have to be commercial or filled with ads in order to be excluded. This link does not provide a source for, or provide any reference to any information that is in the article at all. As it stands, this link meets none of the critera in the "what should be linked to" section of the External links guidelines, and meets criteria 2 and 3 of "what should not be linked to" - therefore I removed it. If there was a section in the article about why the CPR is important to Savannah, I could see having a link to the wikipedia article (but not the web site) in a See Also section. Internal links are always better than external links. The only reason I can see to put this link there is to promote the web site. Can you think of any reason that it should be included? - Trysha ^(talk) 08:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's relevant. Look at all the other links in the "personal" or "commercial" sections. Most of those links aren't used as a reference for any one particular piece of information in the article. Rather, they give context to the culture and the community of Savannah. If we applied your standard, we'd have no external links in that article. An external link doesn't have to be a footnote in order to be helpful to people. This article isn't written for people in Savannah, but rather for people who know nothing about it.

If you want to remove it, I don't really care. But also remove all of the other ones which fit your criteria. It's clear that External links is quite open-ended and vague about what is and isn't allowed. Further, it's a guide and not a policy. I do apologize for being abrasive in my entry on your talk page though. Take care! --BWD 09:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

Is it than only websites hold copyrights that need to be respected? In any case, the template is headed "Possible" copyright violations, is it not? The authors only have to cite sources and remove the copyvio tag. That genealogical table cannot have sprung from nowhere, and if it did, would that not be "original research"? Some Indian have a fondness for glorious and fictitious genealogy and we need to have sources. I am on the verge of giving up on the "what do I care" count, but if you can educate me on the point on why it is not copyvio, that would be something gained. ImpuMozhi 03:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The copyvio template exists for copyright violations which can be documented. That is why it provides a space for the source URL of the information. If something needs sourcing, state that. Do not delete the information and place the copyvio template over it. --BWD^(talk) 04:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the source, and indeed, it turns out to be a website!! -- Do I blank out the whole page or only the suspected section? ImpuMozhi 04:28, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it is a copyvio! You only blank out the portion that was copied. Thanks for your research into this! --BWD^(talk) 04:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry again, but do I put "copyvio|the URL" within curly brackets -- is that the procedure or is something else to be done? Do please help. ImpuMozhi 04:36, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, you put the URL just like you typed it. You also need to put the Rathore page violation here

Done. Thank you very much for the help. Regards, ImpuMozhi 04:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any time. --BWD^(talk) 04:56, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia Ports Authority

Hi - you wrote: I see that you changed the stub type to 'US government'. Georgia Ports Authority isn't a US government agency; it's a state agency responsible for state ports. Is there any other stub that would make sense?

US-gov-stub is for federal and state governments and their agencies. Given that it's a state governmental agency, it's the correct stub type to add to it. There isn't currently a GeorgiaUS-stub (as there's no WikiProject for Georgia), though if there was that would be the one to add. There is talk at the moment of separating out the federal agency stubs from the state agency ones - if that happens it might clarify matters a bit. Grutness...wha? 14:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for the clarification. When I get some free time, I'll start a wikiproject for Georgia. I'm surprised one doesn't exist. --BWD^(talk) 14:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not banned

Regrettably, User:Gadugi was merely balocked, not banned, so until there is a decision to ban Jeffrey Merkey, debates about User:Waya sahoni are moot. Personally, whatever his protests, I know who we are dealing with, but I believe that the best way to deal with this is by keeping focused on the WP goal of creating a great and factual encyclopedia, and by following the WP guidelines closely. Let's not give out any ammo, shall we? :) --MJ^(☎|@|C) 14:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that he wasn't "banned." Doesn't matter to me anyway. I just had some spare time and looked into it. Thanks for the information! --BWD^(talk) 14:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ask me about this in the future before posting WP:NPA on my talk page. Thanks. Waya sahoni 17:51, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a difference between a personal attack and established fact. --BWD^(talk) 18:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't vandalize my talk page again with your accusations. This whole discussion was already reviewed and closed. Also, please be reminded that attempting to expose another user to danger or social or political reprisal through accusations is a serious matter. Please Don't do it again, and please stay off my talk page unless its content related. Thanks. Waya sahoni 21:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That threat violates WP:NPA. Further, all of my information is made public by me. If you wish to threaten me, you may do so personally. Perhaps over coffee, Mr. Merkey? --BWD^(talk) 21:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the issue was never "closed." Arbcom decided not to take the issue. --BWD^(talk) 21:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The issue has been closed by Wikipedia. Have a great day. Waya sahoni 21:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The issue can only be closed by the Arbcom or Jimbo Wales himself, neither of which have ruled on your case. We all know you're a sockpuppet, Mr. Merkey. I've also taken the liberty of correcting your spelling. --BWD^(talk) 21:09, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize my talk page again. I really dont want to report you for stalking and vandalism. Waya sahoni 21:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing has been vandalized. And I really don't want to have to report you for being a sockpuppet since we have conclusive proof that you are. Namely, you made the mistake of posting under your IP and then resigned under your account. You are evading a ban, Mr. Merkey. --BWD^(talk) 21:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you missed it. This whole sockpuppet debate already went to mediation and was resolved. The result was the accounts making the accusations and vandlizing my user and talk pages were indefinitely blocked for stalking and harassment. Have a great day. Waya sahoni 21:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Merkey, it never went through mediation. It went through RfC. Is that what you are referring to? RfC isn't binding and I've read your request for comments. It proved nothing. --BWD^(talk) 21:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I am not Jeff, though I am related to him. Please stop calling me Jeff. Thanks. Waya sahoni 21:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure, Mr. Merkey. --BWD^(talk) 21:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Savannah, Consolidation, et al.

As I said, BWD: please do what you like with the Savannah article. Regarding consolidation: delete it, shorten it, move it, or remove it. The Sons of Confederate Veterans--very interesting.Mason.Jones 20:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am just trying to keep within wikipedia's policies of sticking to facts and not deal with speculation. I understand that some people have discussed city-county consolidation. But that fact is, it is not a real issue here. Nobody seriously discusses it. What is an issue was the consolidation of the police force, and issues like that. I hope you see my point of view. Thanks. --BWD^(talk) 20:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your point of view (POV) is the problem, BWD. Your replacement article is overzealous and the grammar and syntax a bit off (it's "fewer crimes," not "less crimes," and there are other errors).Mason.Jones 21:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please edit it then. Perhaps if you edit my comments and I edit yours, we can reach some kind of consensus. I view your POV as way too Savannah-centric as it relates to Chatham County, and you probably view mine as Savannah-exclusive. We can reach some kind of middle-ground as long as we keep it civil. Thanks! :-) --BWD^(talk) 23:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I went ahead and reverted your edits back in. Although I believe that speculation is beyond the scope of the article, hopefully we can reach consensus. --BWD^(talk) 23:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your civil reply. I think we can include different viewpoints rather than one POV (mine included). Thanks for the reversion. Consolidation may never pass, but the issue has been brought up by local pols 5 or 6 times since 1969. (The last time, it went all the way to the state legislature, where it was killed. After the controversial Augusta-Richmond merger, Chatham's will surely come back to haunt us.) I think your contribs about merger's real disadvantages (the cops' merger as well as any eventual city-county merger) are honest and show the opposing side.Mason.Jones 19:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re.: Shortcuts

You like shortcuts ? I have a list that you should find useful. Hope this was of assisstance to you. Martial Law 23:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

All of these that I had found are similar to what you have. Only that I have nearly 20, maybe 30 of these Wiki-links on my user page. Martial Law 23:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

By the way, go ahead and make a copy of the links that I do have. Martial Law 00:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Vandalism of my User Page at User_Talk:Waya sahoni, WP:NPA, and Stalking Behavior

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Please stop vandalizing my talk page and stalking me on this site. I have reported you for stalking, harassment, and vandalism. Waya sahoni 04:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Merkey, you're the one removing content, not me. You're welcome to report any edits I've made. None of them have violated any policy. Exposing sockpuppets of blocked users is not a violation of anything. --BWD^(talk) 04:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent and sustained vandalism and defacement of user page at User:Waya sahoni. Waya sahoni 05:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Using the testX templates is laughable, Mr. Merkey. You're a suspected sockpuppet of a user who has been blocked indefinitely for massive disruption of wikipedia, and you are continuing to do so. Instead of using the testX templates, why not report this to WP:AN and have them look into the allegations of sockpuppetry? --BWD^(talk) 05:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me vs Hawny

Actually, I thought my proof of Jeff's ownership of the Waya Sahoni sockpuppet was pretty good too. Well, I got the hint from someone else, but I wrote it up, on my pages and elsewhere --Vryl 05:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, your proof is conclusive. I just didn't see it before I posted it. Thanks! --BWD^(talk) 13:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rfa

He was commenting on some horrid experiences I had while I was a kid living in Texas. I still have CE-1s from time to time, found about the US Govt. program that is designed to make all who has had these, other encounters, interested in these "forbidden" matters look like fools and idiots. These are the Robertson Panel, which is a CIA program initiated to "reduce",if not eliminate interest in UFOs, related paranormal matters, as is the Brookings Report. While travelling "Out West" (the Western US), people had (polite) flat out told me that the people will revolt in reaction to alien contact, some, for religious reasons, such as "The Devil is here to eat our souls and the Government is helping this monster!", some, out of revenge for being ridiculed, worse as persuant to the Robertson Panel and/or the Brookings Report protocol. "Out West", disputes like that are settled by a shot in the dark or being gutted by a knife. One guy said that if he seen something like that, he'll (polite) shoot the person who ridicules him. I am no longer in that area of the US. No violation of WP:NPA has happened at all. Martial Law 21:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

By the way, while getting a $60,000 RV fixed in Phoenix, I had shot a pix of a UFO as it was flying over a car dealership. Martial Law 21:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Roe vs. Wade

OK, no problem. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 22:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are named in an ARBCOM Proceeding regarding Jeffrey Vernon Merkey Article

See WP:ARBCOM for the details. Waya sahoni 04:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You meant to link here. Beside the fact that your request is malformed, it's going to be rejected on the basis of vindictiveness. Further, I've never edited the article for content, so naming me as a party to your dispute is absurd. But good luck in your dispute resolution even though you're harming your cause with this spurious arbcom request. --BWD^(talk) 04:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message on my talk, couldyou come on IRC? NSL E _(T+C) at 14:01 UTC (2006-03-14)

Being a new editor, I am not familiar with which IRC channels are used for wikipedia. Could you enlighten me please? Vigilant 20:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

Don't do that on RFAR, users have the right in policy to appeal the actions of admins. (This comment was added by User:70.114.234.81, currently blocked for vandalism).

You are vandalizing arbcom's page. You've been reverted by two other users, one of which is an admin. --BWD^(talk) 06:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia Flag - Thanks

Thanks for making the flag on Georgia (U.S. state) look much, much better and more correct. There's just no comparison between the former image and the current one. Good job! --SuperNova |T|C| 07:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd definitely be interested in joining your Wikiproject. It sounds like a good idea. Let me know how I can help! --SuperNova |T|C| 06:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SCPS

Ummm... Why is that notable? --Vryl 18:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answering my own Q. These people think they are:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Inclusionist_Wikipedians/Schools --Vryl 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religion articles

Thanks for your support and the barnstar! There's lots more to do on those articles, though. Sunray 01:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]