User talk:NLOleson

Uhhh, yeah. Lets see, you registered yesterday and have less than a single page of minor edits only. Yet you feel comfortable admonishing me, although I've been here for four years and have started or rewritten about 2,000 articles and have about 20,000 edits.

Mattisse was in the wrong here. He did damage to the AppleSearch article with his drive-by tagging (check the historical versions if you don't believe me). When I removed the damage he got pissy and suggested the article be deleted. When I pressed him about it he ran away. This sort of behavior should not be rewarded.

Maury 14:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"What makes you think I could possibly be interested in your preoccupations and ramblings?"

Oh I don't know, perhaps it was the two different posts on my talk page over a period of several days? Maury 14:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

When placing a POV tag, you need to indicate on the talk page why you think the page is POV, and how to fix it. -- Jeff3000 00:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's one thing to be bold, but it's another thing to try to improve the articles. Placing a POV tag without indicating the problem or how to fix it is definitely not constructive, and let me also note that calling people names is uncivil. Please assume good faith. -- Jeff3000 00:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please indicate which of my edits did not assume good faith? Have I taken down the tag. No, in fact I am just making you aware of how to improve Wikipedia. I must again stress that regardless of other people don't assume good faith, assume good faith is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia. At this point, however, if you are not willing to be constructive, and give information about how th earticle can be improved or is POV, I will remove the tag. -- Jeff3000 01:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome to wikipedia! If you need any help, just ask. Wjhonson 03:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Message

I haven't sent you a message in a couple days, but they were related to the Religious pluralism page you tagged. You already responded to those. -- Jeff3000 17:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmic Trigger I verification tag

Please indicate on the talk page of Cosmic Trigger I: Final Secret of the Illuminati what elements of the article you dispute. Since the article is about a primary source it doesn't need extensive citation unless it goes beyond the book; as it stands the article appears to be little more than an overview of the book's contents. It would be helpful to the editors of that article as right now there's really no way to tell what you're asking for here. This also goes for the Robert Anton Wilson article I just noticed you also tagged similarly (although this at least isn't based upon a primary source-- still if you could indicate what elements of this article fail WP:V in your opinion it would save a lot of guesswork. As with the POV notification (per the discussion above) it's good form to always leave on the talk page a rationale for placement of the Verify tag. 23skidoo 13:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Burning Man Citations Tag

Please indicate on the talk page of Burning Man which elements you think need citations. Thanks Trapper 14:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware that the page needs cite's it says so right at the top in the tag somebody else added - I just think that 'drive by tagging' while within the policy is simply not good manners. Trapper 04:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Church of the subgenius Verifiability tag

Hi, welcome to wikipedia! It is common practice here to explain major edits and other suchs thing as tagging an article with WP:V as you have done for the church of the subgenius.

I've already started the discussion on the Talk:Church_of_the_SubGenius page. I look forward to your contributions.

...

NLOleson = Nenslo?

Defraggler 14:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning

I don't think I knew that exactly about Maury being linked to 999. Wouldn't be surprised though. If you want to see something interesting, look on TomTheHand talk page re Maury. Also look on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip H. Farber re 999.

I've been chilling out. That's why I didn't get back to you sooner. But, to tell you the truth, now I know it's all just a game. Mattisse (talk) 23:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism warning

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Patricia Telesco. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -999 (Talk) 18:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]