User talk:Ownage2214

Please, unleash whatever it is on your mind.

I will reply to your comments swiftly on your talk page. Remember to please sign your posts. Thank you.

Monroe Silver

Do a bit more research before you leave a message. I didn't write it I stub sorted and add an uncategorised tag. I don't see that as writing and I don't see that as anything other than neutral. 172.146.30.27 22:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey no problem...... Thanks for apologizing for speaking before you thought.....

The page needs sources. Though your it does not violate Wikipedia policies on neutrality, it is still an unsourced edit. Please find a verifiable source. Ownage2214 23:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey ownage you did it again to me. WTF are you doing when you revert an article I stub sorted and translated? Are you out to be a pain, a vandal, or something else I haven't thought of?

Can you please link me to the page? -- Ownage2214 13:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wtf?

excuse me, but what exactly did i add to the article that was unverifiable? All i did was resize an overly large panorama. 81.79.44.74 22:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird. I don't see anything wrong with your edit. I have no idea how this happened. Sorry. Ownage2214 22:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol, alright. no worries. 81.79.44.74 22:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warwick

Sorry, but I am a bassist myself and many have used the Warwick sweet 15 and complained about it's lack of sounds. It is used widely in my studio as i own one.Those claims don't need verifying, not everything has written referance. So stop complaining about everything you see, your mindset is bordering on complete inanity.

Thank you for leaving a message in my talk. Though it may be that you are a bassist, your personal opinion does not meet Wikipedia standards on providing sources. (See reliable source) If you can find an article/publication in which this guitar is specifically criticized, you can support your edit with evidence. Ownage2214 23:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you just crossed the line punk.

It's on now. My Wikipedia vandalizing crew will be all over you like white on rice and black on Jerry Rice.

I'd like to see how you accomplish this since you've been banned from editing. Ownage2214 23:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'd rather not release what's on my mind; I think way too much and I hope to use some of that for a book someday. Meanwhile, here is a random smile for you. :) -WarthogDemon 04:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate it. Thanks very much. Ownage2214 04:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Veron

I didn't write any articles, so I fail to see how I could be in violation of any policy. I suspect you might be, but I'm too lazy to report you. Ta.

You made an edit to John Veron, containing personal opinion, which is best left for the discussion page. Ownage2214 05:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Ownage2214. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that you have been active for less than a month.

Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. Daniel 10:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roger. I've only been actively editing for about 2 weeks. Will apply later. Thanks. -- Ownage2214 15:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zimbabwe

Invitation

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Zimbabwe, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Part 03:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Ownage2214 03:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your "Super Mario All-Stars" revert

You recently reverted my edit of the Super Mario All-Stars article for the stated reason that the edit did not follow NPOV. I do not see how this is the case. In fact, the reason I placed the edit was to provide a more neutral point of view than was already there. SMB3 does not, objectively speaking, have "very advanced graphics", as it's a 19-year-old game. It does, however, have "very advanced graphics" in comparison to SMB and SMB2. That is why I added "(relatively speaking)" to that phrase.

It upsets me that you say I have not followed NPOV. Please explain how I am mistaken in the above paragraph. Strunkenwhite 05:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for leaving a message. From the context of my Recent Changes patrol software, the edit you made seemed like it was not adhering to a neutral point. However, I see your point, and I apologize. I will revert my edit. -- Ownage2214 13:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously Not the Only One

Apparently you leave incomprehensible messages for others regading their editing, as witness earlier messages here. I read the page on the occult wrier Cheiro (William John Warner) and decided to add a category (occult writer, which he was), to sort out some confusing grammar and inconsistent use of quotation marks left by a previous writer, and to remove a spammy and off-topic promotion for two bookstore chains. But you reverted this and left me a weird message braging about your reverstion of it. Why did you do that? Are you a vandal? A shill for the book store chains? What was your point?

I clearly made an edit to this page (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cheiro&diff=prev&oldid=147787297) since there was a strange letter "b" after a link. I did not revert the other edits you made since they were not against Wikipedia policies. Am I incorrect in trying to correct a typo or error? P.S. please do not go and use false evidence against me, especially before you have heard my reply and explaination. Most of those reverts which you are referring to on Daniel's talk page are simply mistakes of my software. This software, called Mike's Wiki Tool does not have built in filters or any sort of advanced technology found in VandalProof, hence, my application. If you have any more questions or comments, please reply on my talk page. Thanks. -- Ownage2214 13:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you were doing. We had a time-based editing conflict. But do you understand that someone was in the middle of working on the page when you reverted it? Do you understand that my discomfort did not arise from our brief editing conflict but from the tone of the message you left me, to wit: "Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with the page Cheiro on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed"? The tone of this message assumes bad faith on my part. It is rightly labelled a "warning" message. The snideness of referring to my work as "experimenting" and a "test" embodies a form of sarcasm that is difficult to countenance. A look at the editing history will show that my work did not consist of an experiemnt or a test, nor of leaving a stray letter "b" laying about. I spent several hours researching and upgrading the page. I almost doubled its content. And now, continuing your snide smugness, you say you did not revert the page again since the "other edits" made by me "were not against Wikipedia policies"! Right you are. Editing pages and upgrading information is NOT "against Wikipdia policies" -- but assuming bad faith is. And that is what i objected to in your harsh first message. What it comes down to is this: There is no reason to revert a page and leave someone a warning message if you find a typo. Just fix the typo and move on in silence.

Sir, I had not known at the time of my revert that you were in the middle of working on the page. You have to understand that the tool I am using merely brings up a recent edit, and then asks me if it should be reverted or not. If the page is o-k, I merely move on. I saw the typo, reverted it, and decided to leave a message since that is the usual protocol. What you suggest is that if I see a typo, I should just revert it and leave no message. I must ask what you define as a typo, since many 'typos' can be viewed as vandalism or merely as 'tests'. If you harbor such an extreme dislike towards my fist message, you should delete it, as this is your userpage.

I must also add that, I did not know you were in the middle of editing, as I understand it is easy to make typos and save pages which have mistakes on them. Please understand that the message I left you was part of a template given by the tool I am using. If you felt that I was using unjustified smugness, then I apologize. I hope I have resolved this conflict. -- Ownage2214 12:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted, and allow me to apologize for my short fuse as well. Pass in peace.

A little help

I just had reinstall windows and lost all my wiki-tool bookmarks. I was wondering if you can help. I need reference/cite creators and stuff. I am having problems locating them again. Thanks!--Hourick 13:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

House WikiProject

File:Housecane.png

Hello, I noticed that you appear to be interested in House.

A House WikiProject has been started to better format the articles surrounding House. You are hereby invited to join.

Thank you.

Cheers. --Music26/11 12:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]