User talk:Boothy443/Archive 9

Archives 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 Home

Req for Speedy category renaming

You requested the following speedy category renaming:

Category:Waterford GAA Clubs to Category:Gaelic Athletic Association clubs in Waterford, in line with similar categories under Category:Gaelic Athletic Association clubs. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, this is not a change that can be done under the speedy process; it's an acronym expansion, but not a country one. You'll need to put it through the normal CfD process. Sorry. JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

POV

Some advice from a much older person -- POV is in the eye of the beholder -- do not allow yourself to be manipulated by censors like Demiurge, etc. even with accusations re sockpuppets, which, even if they exist, are expressly not prohibited by Wikipedia, unless they've changed the rules, or "vandal", a subjective term used by Demiurge or whomever to shut someone up that they don't agree with.

And don't waste your time threatening me with 3rr; it won't stop me from telling the truth about the Irish in Scotland, Britain or anywhere else.

Brandubh Blathmac 09:10, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert - try working *with* other editors instead of constantly reverting to your own brand of POV. And quit complaining about censorship; nobody is censoring you - Ali-oops ^✍ 09:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Interwiki lang links

Boothy443- Eamon de Valera is not Eamon de Valera in Spanish (es), Cymraeg/Welsh (cy) and other languages, that's why I deleted them. Aren't accuracy and correctness supposed to count for something??

Brandubh Blathmac 09:58, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No articles existed at the changed links --Boothy443 | trácht ar 09:59, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If no articles existed at the changed links, then why was it necessary to rv??

Also, your calling me a bigot is a badge of honour for me b/c that is what the Irish always call anyone who disagrees with them or who dares to criticize them or show their ugly and brutal history. It's a good tactic, used by the likes of Cardinal Spellman (the American Pope), among others to silence critics, but that is just soooo 20th century. This is the 21st century.

What is more I don't feel like being criticized by someone who was brought up on arbitration and been deemed guilty by his peers of:

a) edit warring b) violations of 3RR. c) alienation with Wikipedia's administrative structure and dispute resolution d) [f] ailure ... to participate in dispute resolution in good faith

I hope we understand each other, trácht ar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.194.0.6 (talk • contribs)

Hi Robert. Got yet another IP address, I see. BTW, isn't there an RfAr open with your name on it? - Ali-oops ^✍ 08:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my trivia?

It was 100% accurate, so why was it deleted??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.24.112.203 (talk • contribs) .

Arbcom

I noticed you made this edit. Would you care to make a statement at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#SqueakBox and Zapatancas, SqueakBox 13:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I don't blame you. Arbcom is not the sort of place I would have chosen to go no matter how much of a case I might have thought I had. Your edits talking to Zapatancas are in there anyway and as I wasn't really involved in your interaction with Zapatancas I won't be commenting on it myself. Cheers, SqueakBox 03:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ashton-Woodenbridge

For Philly neighborhoods, I've been consulting and citing this reference, which seems pretty authoritative: http://www.phila.gov/phils/Docs/otherinfo/pname1.htm Gee, we sure have a lot of neighborhoods! But, it doesn't always give a good definition of the limits of a neighborhood. Here's a site that's good for historical place names (topographical maps c. 1900): http://historical.maptech.com/ That's where I got "Harrisburg" (see SE part of "Germantown" quad). Wooden Bridge Run is unnamed. Sandy Run and most tributaries of the Poquessing (see SW part of "Burlington" quad) do have names. I grew up in Torresdale near Holy Family College, never heard of nearby Ashton-Woodenbridge (Ashton Road, Woodenbridge Apts., OK, but I just considered that part of Torresdale). This site: http://www.philaplanning.org/data/boundaries.pdf just calls it "Ashton Vicinity".--BillFlis 15:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Philadelphia

I know it's been a while, but I've officially thrown my hat into the ring. I'm working on cleaning up the main page before it balloons any further. Also wondering about the Philly Portal: Does anyone formally run this or have say over it? I see a lot of potential here. My job's been killing me enough; this could be a nice distraction in the off hours. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 18:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woodrow Wilson Bridge

Just to let you know, I reverted to a previous version by the IP Author. He seems to have added a lot of good information, then changed it all for a skewed POV view, which has no basis (the same reason was made months ago and removed for the same reason). So, I'm just giving you a heads up on what I did, and you're right: that last edit didn't sound right. --MPD01605 04:25, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my browser

Yeah, that's a strange one. Dunno what happened, thanks for fixing it anyway Jdorney 09:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

baltimore neighborhoods

Hey Boothy, I don't have any objection to your plan. As long as you don't mind doing the work, go right ahead :). --Jfruh 14:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guinness etc

Hi. I've just picked up a revert on a recent edit in which a beer was moved into a brewery. This is an ongoing (and almost complete) procedure which is taking place on all isolated beers. If you feel there is a case for keeping beers brewed by a brewery apart from the brewery itself it might be worth your while bringing the matter up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer for discussion. SilkTork 18:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. The merging of beer brands into brand holders or breweries is a process that has been taking place for a while now by various members of the Wiki beer project. Your activity is against the trend. Please, if you feel that the process is wrong either in an individual case, or as a general policy, then raise the issue on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer to get consensus. Your revertions at this point might be considered vandalism. I will, again, undo what you have done. Please do not revert again until the matter has been discussed and resolved. If, after discussion, it is felt that your view is the proper one, then there will be no conflict - at the moment we have conflict. I hope you will do the right thing and move toward avoiding conflict rather than getting into a revert war. Cheers. SilkTork 07:31, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First off their is no stated policy of such on the the project page, nor has their been any discussion on the project page in regards to this issue either. Also these article require that a merge tag be placed on the articles in question that that discussion take place, none of which has been done. Their for as long as you continue to force the merge of these pages i will simply have to revert you. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:37, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:William Allen Simpson has tried to bring to your attention that there was discussion on this topic before and during the lengthy procedure involved in Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 April 4. There has been discussion on the project talk page (check the archive), as well as on individual beer pages. But - not a problem. From what I gather, you are not actually against the beers being merged with the breweries, but that a procedure has not been followed. Is that the case? SilkTork 09:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PIRA page

I see you've been reverting Devin79's pov edits. Any chance you could do the same here. I have browser issues etc Jdorney 21:09, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irish American

Had a look at the section. The paragraph seems to concentrate on cartoons, which seems to be a bit trivial to me, although highly visible. Certainly, in the 19th century the Irish in America werre disliked as dirty, violent and Catholic (Protestantism was big part of American identity at the time). The Klu Klux Klan was very anti-Irish at this time, there were also several "nativist" societies who were dedicated to stopping Irish immigration. This might be a more fruitfull area for the paragraph to explore. In the mid 19th century, there was a spate of burnings of Irish Catholic churches in New York, which was stopped when Archbishop John Hughes (archbishop) threatened to burn parts of New York in reprisal! (His exact words were, "to make New York another Moscow" -in reference to the burning of that city in 1812). I think these are the kind of issues the article should really deal with. Jdorney 11:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right. I didn't get that before. The present wording looks ok to me. Arguably the computerised search thing is original research though and should be deleted, but I thinks its ok to say that historians disagree over how much discrimination the Irish faced at that time. My concern wold be that narrow focus of the section. I would suggest that hte nativist v immigrant angle is more important. However I wouldn't claim that any special knowledge on the subject. Jdorney 11:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:BatonRougeLA.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:BatonRougeLA.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:BatonRougeLA.gif

An image that you uploaded, Image:BatonRougeLA.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

David Newton 18:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland

Please read my statement on Maryland's Talk Page, under "Mid Atlantic State?" and give me your opinion on this matter. History21

re shamrock rovers

Robbert Goggins the publisher of the Information that i posted, and the photographer of the Picture has this posted on the shamrock rovers web site: This information is the copyright of Robert Goggins and Shamrock Rovers Football Club and may be freely used so long as the source is credited so in effect its both ok for copyright, and its informative. but you be the judge of its suitability —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blu sonic (talk • contribs) .

Yeah your right about the seperate pages for players but i was too lazy, not an excuse a reason. I'll see if i can get some clarification on the photo and bios but i think that little programme sellers note is as good as they'll go. They usually try to promote the club in every way possible though. (they refers to Shamrock Rovers) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blu sonic (talk • contribs) .

A favor please

Hello, do you remember me? You had spared few moments during my RfA and opposed the same. I could become an administrator, and sometimes I had talked with you. I would request you to please spare fem moments for me, and favor me with your comments and suggestions (here please) on my performance as a wikipedian. Let us continue to build the Better than the Best global encyclopedia. Thank you and regards. --Bhadani 10:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Pardon me, but I was attempting to make a comment on the Category:Northern States dispute page but cannot seem to do so. When I opened the page and selected "edit," the only thing available for editing was a list of the different categories of disputed articles. I would appreciate your assistance. User:Joan53

Maryland site

I have tried in good faith to steer the MD to sourced info and NPOV statements. My edits have been repeatedly reverted by newbies User:Joan53 and User:History21 among others. WHAT CAN BE DONE? I don't want to be 3RR'ed. WillC 00:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest. BTW, did you note the NPOV changes I made that they instantly reverted? WillC 10:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that no citations have been made....go ahead and work your NPOV magic. WillC 20:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I thank you for your "NO COMMENT". --Bhadani 09:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Naval Service

My pleasure. I am hunting for some more info so hopefully can expand the stubs soon. But I have a WIP on the go and I was silly enough to signup for SuggestBot last week so I wouldn't hold your breath. I'm sure I'll see you around. Frelke 06:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page vandalism

Take a look at how User:History21 has mocked you by editing your comments to me on my talk page under Maryland....he went back and corrected your typos....isn't this considered vandalism? WillC 00:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Maryland

That section does seem to be heavily biased and full of assumption. I would say that it should either be properly sourced and reworded, or just heavily trimmed. --tomf688 (talk) 00:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV and OMG negativity

Ever so sorry for offending your sense of Civic Pride in Your Country's Equally Proud and Also Upstanding Metrorail System by suggesting there may be an alternate viewpoint towards the practice of arresting 12 year olds for eating french fries. However, might I point out that "reference" is spelled as such, and "refrence" hardly contributes to a sense of academic well-being on your part? --Nugneant 09:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Irish University

Hey Boothy,

I noticed that you reverted me at the above template. You may want to read some of the talk at Template talk:Infobox University, where there has been extensive discussion about the country based infoboxes. There have been two separate TFD on the country specific infoboxes Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 28 and Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_April_25#Template:UC_taxobox. I have added back in the deprecated. Please leave me a message if you think it should be retained, or leave a comment at Template:Infobox University Thanks! --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 17:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boothy, thanks for leaving your comments. I understand your complaint and I will not mark the Irish university infobox as depricated without further discussion at specific noticeboards and will personally notify you about before any depopulating/delisting or listing at TFD. However you should know that many of the individuals involved with creating the country specific pages were aware of the issue and some were involved with standardizing the template. Discussion did occur and the reasons for creating country specific infoboxes has been eliminated with the new standard template. Hope you are doing well. It's been a while since I've seen you around. Guess we've been doing different stuff. Take care! --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 03:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland

Isn't it about time some participants got blocked for their constant reverts without any explanations whatsoever? Over and over it is stressed that they need to be NPOV and unbiased and they will not follow Wikipedia policy. This is beyond content dispute; this is utter disregard for our rules. I have tried to be as civil was possible, gently explaining policy to these noobs and noting how they need to argue to make their point. It is like arguing with a stump. WillC 03:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, take a look at User:History21's contributions log. It is a concerted effort to have his way on the page; he is recruiting members to argue his side. WillC 03:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not too far behind? I legitimately thought I was editing in good faith and protecting the page from POV edits. BOTH SIDES NEED TO BE REPRESENTED and I am making sure of that. I have deleted nothing that is relevant; in fact, most of what these partisans originally added - things like education and wealth, etc - have been moved to more relevant sections of the article. Please tell me where I have erred in my judgment. WillC 03:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Irish University

You might have right the there have been no discussion in it's talk page, this is because all univerity boxes have been handled as a whole, the reality is that it is deprecated, there is no reason to not mark it as such. If you have any objection to deprecate this template, please voice your conserns on Template talk:Infobox University (edit | template | history | links | watch | logs) _→AzaToth 05:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland

I took a look at the Maryland article, and twiddled with the "Cultural Identity" section a bit. I mainly did a little rewording, some Wikifying, and added a {{fact}} tag regarding Lincoln during the Civil War, as I think a reference point there would be helpful. That would at least partly eliminate the claim of original research in that article.

Also, I'm actually not from DC - I'm from Stuarts Draft, Virginia, in the western part of the state. However, I do spend a LOT of time in the Washington area, and am looking to move up that way. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay...

Look, don't take the whole typo thing personally; it's not as if I dislike you or anything, it's just that grammar is a particular sticking point for me. I was glad to see that even you have recognized that WillC is not conducting himself in a responsible manner. You have repeatedly accused me of vandalism, but I just don't think that what I've done could be described as vandalism.

I mean, honestly, all of my information was cited. I would sincerely like you to write on my talk page and tell me why you think I've vandalized the Maryland article. We may disagree, but we can still be professional. And any differences aside, we both know that what WillC is doing is contrary to Wikipedia values by reverting whole sections of cited facts even as debate is ongoing. Please contact me soon.

History21 21:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)History21[reply]

Your "facts" don't mean anything if they are irrelevant to the topic....I'll put 2 + 2 = 4 in my next edit and condemn anyone who dares remove it. WillC 12:03, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of speech

What ever happened to freedom of speech? If people want to predict the future, let them! For more info on freedom of speeech, see First Amendment to the United States Constitution and freedom of speech. CoolKatt number 99999 05:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to butt in on Boothy's talk page, but do you not realize that WP is

A facts-only encyclopedia
Not a crystal ball for predictions and speculation
Not a soapbox for freedom of speech and possibly outlandish predictions
And not bound by the US Constitution

--CFIF (talk to me) 14:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irish-American

Please don't delete comments from the talk page. It is considered vandalism. IrishGuy 06:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right here [1]. For what it is worth, I am not judging you opinions. This article is becoming quite heated. IrishGuy 06:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did give him a warning about personal attacks. Check his talk page. That is how it works. Deleting it doesn't help. Leave it. Warn him. If he does it again, then act upon it. Removing it doesn't assist at all. I am not trying to offend. Honestly, I am trying to help you. IrishGuy 06:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:::What is your problem? I simply warned you about protocol? Why are you making this an issue? IrishGuy 06:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That, actually, I was just going to explain. If you look at the edit history you will see that I actually wrote those lines. I accidentally edited the wrong thing. You can't possibly be upset with me for removing a line that I clarified?! IrishGuy 06:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable Poll

The poll you put back in is unreliable. It only has data from presidential elections. It also has no information as whether the people polled were 100% Irish Catholics, or people who just claimed some Irish ancestry.

In say that Irish Catholics vote 50-50 is POV because the only source is for a presidential election. You need to have sources from local political elections. That is more important than national politics in determing if someone is republican or democrat. The poll Richard Jensen is promoting has no data from any local elections. It is unreliable and does not belong on wikipedia because it does not have all the facts.

Also, Ed Gillispie is the former RNC chairman, and why should he be mentioned and not the 13 or so Irish Catholic DNC chairmen? 75.3.4.54 18:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Idea of Reliable?

You think that one poll from one election of people from California and Texas that claim Irish heritage can determine how a group has voted in every election in 36 years? You can't seriously think that is a reliable source. 75.3.4.54 18:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redneck

Would you consider "redneck" to be an example of Wikipedia policy-violating name calling? WillC 20:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NO FACTS

Why do you allow stuff that is obviously untrue into the Irish American article. How can one poll from the 2004 presidential election determine how all Irish Catholics have voted in every election since 1968. If you read what you keep reverting to you should see that is what it says and if you checked the source, you would see it was only from one election. The only reason for you wanting to keep that in is because you would have to have an anti-Irish Catholic bias. 75.3.4.54 22:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Sense

What non-sense did I add? 75.3.4.54 03:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WSDL

Could you care to add the purpose of your revert next time. --MinorEdits 05:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming that you actually reviewed this page that you reverted twice recently and followed the link, Web Services Description Language, and took notice that there is already disambig on top of the Web Services Description Language article. What are you trying to emphasize, what is the purpose of your reverts? What is there to be gained by having a disambig page instead? It remains a mystery to me. --MinorEdits 06:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project

Sorry i forgot to reply just slipped my mind . As for the project i've been trying to do a few things myself mainly with relating to the dubs . Give us a shout when your availible to give more time too the project (Gnevin 22:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

About the county grounds and finding better pictures for them, the Ulster Council website has some new ones of Casement with the floodlights that were added recently. I don't know if we can use them (copyright and all that bollix) but I thought I'd show them to you first. Tiocfaídh Ár Lá! 14:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright abuses

Hello, this message is because of your comments opossing Ta bu shi da yu admin here. Because of the abuse of authority of Ta bu shi da yu, Tens of thousands of images have been deleted by a small handful of wikipedians, citing "fair use".

Would you be interested in joining a group on wikipedia which counters the heavy handed tactics of the copyright police. We can't fight them on my own. User talk:Ed g2s has began deleting fair use image on every person's user page and on several other pages, inspired by WP:FUC which was written by another paternal copyright policeman with absolutly no legal training and little understanding of copyright law. Ta bu shi da yu created the WP:FUC page and was responsible for deleting hundreds of Time magazine covers and refused to stop even after Time magazine sent an e-mail allowing wikipedia to use the images.

We stared this page, with this purpose: User:Travb/Misguided and heavy handed tactics of some admins regarding copyright

Please tell others about this project. The paternal copyright police are well organized and are intoxicated with their own trival power here on wikipedia. Like most authoritarian personalities, these misguided copyright fanatics have finally have overstepped the bounds of good sense and restraint, when they began deleting tens of thousands images from wikiusers' pages. Only a large number of wikipedians will stop this abuse. Travb 13:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

71.253.57.234

just FYI: User talk:71.253.57.234 Sock puppet alert. Brimba 15:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up FYI Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Panem. Brimba 16:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:TallahasseeFL.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TallahasseeFL.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell 13:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Place names in Philadelphia

FYI. Etymologies of place names in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania --evrik 15:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Louis Rukeyser

Sorry, but if any text copied from another website appears in a Wikipedia article—no matter how slight—and the original writer of that text has not given his/her permission for that text to be on Wikipedia under the GFDL, it is a copyright violation and it must be removed. Simply removing the offending text in a regular edit does not fix the problem, as the copyright violation would still be in the page history. Denelson 83 19:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WTAE-TV

WTAE-TV has specifically stated that they ARE the ABC affiliate in Wheeling. Read the article. CoolKatt number 99999 23:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You Got It Wrong

You made a false claim against me. If you actually checked you could see that I was not the one to remove that line about British and German ancestry, it was done by someone else, you can clearly see that here: [2] 75.3.15.49 04:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Umm no your wrong again, as if i should be supprised, first of i never said what txt that you removed, just that you did remove txt. And second you still did remove txt, [3],

"The Irish had many humorists of their own but were scathingly attacked in German American cartoons, especially those in Puck magazine from the 1870s to 1900. In addition the cartoons of"

, that txt was added by jensen and then removed by your edit, so you can not say that you didnt remove any txt. and Finally you fasely accsued jensen of removing txt, when his edits [4] clearl show that he removed nothing but added txt to the article, txt that you then removed then put up a fasle edit summary "adding back in what RJensen took out for no explained reason" [5], then added a false explnation [6], and then remopved m comments, which is an act of vandalism, along with our various personal attacks. I am still waiting for when you plan to add anthing to the article or discussion then you hot air and lies. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 04:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to come here to remove this message, replace it with an apology and then remove that. But the truth is I have added to the article, and in the past, not in this cast, I have seen situations where RJensen would remove one line for an unexplained reason, and I would have to add it back in. You'll see this in last changes, but I will remove all of this from your talk page. Thank you. 75.3.15.49 05:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but no, dont remove txt from my talk page, and dont remove txt from an discussion page as you did, they are both no less in bad taste. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CoolKatt number 99999

It looks like we're in the same boat as far as reverting his stupid edits. Can I get a holla back and let me know your take on this? Rollosmokes 05:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I though you were in the know about the Coolkatt problem. I'm going to report him to Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment and see how that turns out. I'll get back to you in detail later. Rollosmokes 03:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WCAU-TV

You reverted back to a previous version right after I completed a mild revision of the article. Please explain your reasons for doing so, especially since you obviously didn't read my revisions fully before you reverted. Rollosmokes 08:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

When will you learn? These stations need to be mentioned in the template, I know they aren't part of the market yet they serve the market, in the templates they even state they are not part of the market. Now, stop removing this factual info or don't bother editing here at all, please. CoolKatt number 99999 08:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GAA help

Hey i was wondering if you could help me with Template:Infobox GAA player. What i want to have is to deal with dual players so where it currently has sport should have maybe {{{sport1}}} {{{sport2}}} and when the second sport is picked sport changes to sports .

Also i was wondering if i would be possible to have links based on the sport(s) Shane_Ryan is the only articial using it atm . What i'd like to see is Provincial titles to change to Leinster titles and link to Leinster Senior Football Championship. And all-ireland to link to All-Ireland Senior Football Championship.

Is this too many if's in the code would it be better to change it to Infobox gaelic footballer and create Infobox hurler ? (Gnevin 15:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Train Station Templates

Please fix the following template that someone vandalized. I can't seem to get it back to the way you put it. Now Israel Railways station articles don't display it right. It is supposed to be like it is in SEPTA station articles.

You originally created it for Jerusalem Malcha Train Station.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Israel_Railways_line

Slander

I would appreciate it if you didn't insist on dragging RJensen's good name through the mud. 75.3.36.133 20:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfPP template protections

I am not going to protect a boatload of templates over two users, stop the edit warring and discuss, I'll have to block any edit warriors.Voice-of-All^Talk 22:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's one vote against. Now, listen, those stations belong in those templates. They serve the areas one way or another. It is also removal of fact, templates should reflect certain facts -- like cable carraige, if a station is widely carried on cable within a market (Pittsburgh stations in Johnstown/Altoona), then it should be listed. But if it is on cable with a certain part of the DMA (NY stations and Philly stations in market border areas), then it should not be listed. Get my drift? CoolKatt number 99999 22:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template usage in Baltimore, Maryland

Is there anything close to any sort of consensus anywhere at all about which City infobox template to use? DMacks 05:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Howcheng

I reverted your edit. You have been around a long time, so I guess you know that personal attacks aren't allowed. Thanks, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please do not attack other users

Please do not insert profanity on Howcheng's talk page. Remeber there are no W:NPA allowed on Wikipedia. Thetruthbelow^(talk) 06:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Master of Puppets ^{FREE BIRD!} 06:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT ATTACK ME ON MY USER PAGE. All I did was to tell you not to attack others, and then you carried one out on me. I have never met you before, and do not wish to become enemies. Please do not repeat your actions in the future. Thank you, Thetruthbelow^(talk) 06:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Is your Problem?

Why are you attacking me? I merely warned you about personal attacks, and you wrote on my talk page,

"Thats nice, now go find some one else to bother, or like improve an article or someting, we have enough thought police around here as it is. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)" and ":Thats wonderful, and if i wanted your opinion on the matter, i would have asked you for it, do i but into your business, umm no, so do i want you to but into mine, umm no, wow thats a concept, but as usuall for wikipedia, lot of cops, NO cheif. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)"[reply]

What is your problem? I see you have been around for a while, but the above comments make you seem like an immature 3rd grader. Don't leave any more messages on my talk page, unless it is an apology. Thetruthbelow^(talk) 06:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you think someone is engaged in a personal attack then please report it on WP:PAIN. Its simpler, easier and leads to less talk page squabbles. Frelke 06:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archives 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 Home