User talk:Ke5crz/Archive/Archive Feb

MCI and Verizon Communications merge

I have reverted your merger of these two articles because both of the comments that have been made on Talk:MCI regarding the merger have been in opposition to the merger, and your comment on Talk:Verizon Communications is the only indication that the article merge has any support. If you still feel the articles need to be merged please provide an explanation of why the articles are better off into one entry instead of split into two separate entities. It should also be noted that just because the corporate entities have merged that is not sufficient reason to merge the articles on the corporations, otherwise the articles for MCI Communications (the company the helped break up Ma Bell) and Worldcom would have been merged a long time ago. --Allen3 ^talk 22:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree that the articles should be updated to show the current status of the corporate enterprises. This does not mean that the histories of separate organizations should necessarily be merged together. There is a lot of interesting history about Worldcom that has little to nothing to do with Verizon. Likewise, a complete merger of articles to match the current corporate structures would include MCI Communications into the Verizon article due to the 1998 acquisition by Worldcom. This would create an article that has a company created from the merger of several Baby Bells also being responsible for the split of Ma Bell, a logical paradox at the very least. I also see little reason to saddle Verizon with all the baggage related to the Worldcom accounting scandal. With any luck, Verizon will create enough of its own history. --Allen3 ^talk 23:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

4kids Entertainment page

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you. --293.xx.xxx.xx 10:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Please also see Wikipedia:NPOV dispute for further information on how you can help contribute to Wikipedia. --293.xx.xxx.xx 05:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

If your gonna remove large portions of text in the future from any article, please setup some form of discussion on the talk page in order to see how other contributors feel about the situtation. The section you seem to want to "delete" is called Critisism and Controversy for a valid reason. It addresses Critisism and Controversy, not "Praises and Awards." --293.xx.xxx.xx 08:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Again, I'm going to have to request that you not revert, or delete, large portions of an article without discussing it on the talk page - especially when there is a specific request for comment on there. It's deleterious to the quality of the article of the whole, and quite frankly, added nothing of any substantive merit. --Haemo 04:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Funbuild.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Funbuild.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Funbuild.jpg)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Funbuild.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kevin 00:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

VandalSniper

First off, I want to apologize for the long wait on this response. Your patience and understanding are much appreciated.

Thanks for applying to use VandalSniper. Unfortunately, I have the burden of telling you "sorry, not quite yet". You haven't been added to the approved users list yet because we would like to wait and see more edits from you. Although the requirements to use VS are not set in stone, VandalSniper is a fast, fully-featured reversion tool with the potential for a sizable amount of edits in a short period of time, so this decision must sometimes be meticulous; I hope you understand. Your interest in VS is greatly appreciated, and you are invited to apply after you've made a few more edits. The reason you have not been approved yet says nothing about your value as a contributor – only that we'd like to see a little more of your work on Wikipedia before giving access to the tool.

Again, thanks so much for your interest. If you have any questions or concerns about this decision, feel free to contact me and I will be more than happy to discuss it with you. Again, thank you for helping "keep Wikipedia clean". Good luck, and happy editing! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Split this article?...

This pages really should be split into either 3 (Pacific Telesis, Pacific Bell, and Nevada Bell), or 2 (Pacific Telesis and Pacific Bell/Nevada Bell as Nevada Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Bell). Pacific Bell redirects to this page, which then shows in the info box as being 'defunct' while Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell are still very much alive as subsidiaries of AT&T. X570 04:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Please, take my advice, I'm not trying to be mean. When I first started on WikiPedia I did some stuff similar to what you are doing (but not on such a large scale!) and I really got an earful from other members. Just like I said, take it easy and make smaller, much more constructive contributions. The Bell System articles were already very well organized.

Bell System Template

Hi, I was just wondering, since you put the Bell System Template on the Bell Labs page, if you could somehow find a way to incorporate Bell Labs into the template, that way it would lead be a lead-in template as well as a lead-out. Thanks. NcSchu 04:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

You're obviously a newcomer. Relax awhile and read the articles, learn more on the topic, read published books on the topic, and then make constructive contributions. Coming here and completely turning all these articles upside down, for no reason, and making a nuisance of yourself is helping no one. Before making major changes always first discuss it on the discussion page! See this example from when I proposed that the Pacific Telesis article, which once also covered Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell all on the same page be split:

WatchlistBot

I'm working on something else right now which might take a few days to a week or even more. But I'll add this to my to do list. I'm a little unclear on exactly which articles to tag though. Is it just the ones in Category:Bell System? The easiest way for the bot to tag articles is by tagging the relevant categories first, then tagging all articles in those categories. So, if you could give me a list of the categories, that would help. Ingrid 02:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Something is holding me up in the other project I was working on, so I went ahead and tagged your articles for you. It wasn't very many. If there are any more that you'd like tagged, let me know. I'm about to create a watchlist page for your project too, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bell System/Articles. That page will be updated irregularly by my bot whenever I think to run it. Ingrid 17:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Ke5crz! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Cingular Wireless

Bring it up at the article's talk page. I am not going to rename the article based on the complaint of one user. You need to establish consensus with the others involved in the discussion before coming to me with such a request. Nishkid64 01:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)