User talk:Ekologkonsult

Hi, and welcome. It's one of the 3000 pages on my watchlist! Jimfbleak (talk) 11:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don Cherry

The bit about his hatred of the delay of game rule is in the "Broadcasting" section. It doesn't make much sense to have it in the "political views and controversy" section.-Wafulz (talk) 16:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend

I've told him to stay off your talk page. If he posts again, let me or another admin know, and I'd call it harrassment and block the account for a while. In return, to possibly help cool things down, please don't post anything further on his talk page. Thanks. --barneca (talk) 20:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some notes

I've looked into this some more, and have some observations for both of you (posting to both talk pages). In no particular order:

Ekologkonsult (E) sent Jeffason (J) what appears (from the parts quoted by J) to have been a polite email with his concerns about the article in question. I suggest in the future E use talk pages, rather than email, so if questions arise about whether something was appropriate or not, there's full transparency.
Nowhere do I see E harrassing J. He had some concerns, emailed them to J, and J got angry and started reacting (from an outside observer) over the top.
J, when you post 10-20 messages on someone's talk page, that's 10-20 times their work is interrupted. Now that you know this, you'll understand why he's calling it harrassment. He has not done anything to your article, as far as I can see he emailed you once, politely answered your heated questions, and then asked/warned you to stop erasing stuff at his talk page and to leave him alone. I just don't see any harrassment.
addition: I just now see that E actually did tag the userfied sandbox article for speedy deletion; that was a mistake, E.
J, let other people erase stuff from their own user talk pages. You, in return, can handle your own talk page as you see fit.
J, please consider removing your snide comments on your user and user talk pages. We all know it's directed at E, and it isn't helping anything. E, if he decides not to, my own suggestion would be to choose your battles and ignore it.
E, I know you were trying to help, but I suggest you re-think the use of the word "spam". It's really a red flag for a lot of people. You can always use the redirect WP:AD instead of WP:SPAM.
J, you are welcome to continue editing the article in your user space. However, I'm concerned you're spending a lot of time on an article that may not survive when you move it to the main article space. It's harder than you would think to create a new article and have it survive. Please re-read WP:NOTE, and make sure you think it's notable. That said, you're more than welcome to work on it there.
J, I'm going to alter your article to temporarily remove the Categories; those are only for articles already in the mainspace. You can fix them when and if you move it back.
E, if J wants to work on this article in his user space, let him.

The upshot is: please leave each other alone and this will all hopefully blow over. --barneca (talk) 20:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help in this matter, and I appreciate the help on how I better can handle this in the future. --Ekologkonsult (talk) 21:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More

J seems to have taken a break, and Barneca has done all the right things, so for now I'vwe just added this page to my watchlist. jimfbleak (talk) 05:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for help and advice.--Ekologkonsult (talk) 06:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Television Broadcasts Limited

All I did was replace the content that an IP removed. While I agree the 'notable shows' may be a bit advertisement-like, the sections I reverted are not. Please, instead of merely tagging the article with a template, could you explain which part of the article is POV? Perhaps you can offer ideas so I can rewrite it. – Skyezx^message 22:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll se what I can do.--Ekologkonsult (talk) 08:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksander Wolszczan and Służba Bezpieczeństwa

As I wrote in the article - he admitted it publicly - I've seen it live on TV and millions of others in Poland have seen it as well. I can add a reference to one of the Polish news sites, but how are you going to verify that they actually confirm my statement?

You can even read Wolszczan's own statement (http://slimak.onet.pl/_m/TVN/tvn24/rozmowa1(2).pdf), but again: how are you going to tell that it actually supports the claims of my section? Sliwers (talk) 20:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed that you had replied to others on your own talk page - please reply to me on my talk page, because I'm not watching changes here. Thanks! Sliwers (talk) 20:40, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable OCDers

I've added a topic #25 to the OCD talk page- thought you might want to weigh in. OckRaz (talk) 09:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi there. I just sent you an email. Amsaim (talk) 16:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]