User talk:Teh Rote~enwiki

Uncyclopedia FA Nom

Raising the status of this article rewards Wikipedia vandals because it shows those who come from Uncyclopedia that their work, on Uncyclopedia and off, will lead to recognition on Wikipedia. My work as a vandal fighter will be ruined because this violates the spirit of WP:DENY, in that we are giving attention and recognition to these vandals. I did not launch an attack against Uncyclopedia editors in general, only those who vandalizes here. Unless you count yourself as a vandal here on Wikipedia (in that case, I will have no choice but to report you), I did not attack you. The example you quoted is an apples and oranges scenario, and I will not answer such a fallacious question.

I have stated my position, and I did not attack you. But you DID attack me, and engaged in uncivil behaviors, so...

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.

And don't you even dare say I violated AGF. I have exhausted my GF already on those Uncyclopedia editors who vandalize Wikipedia.

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 08:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

This is your only warning.
The next time you make a personal attack, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your assertions that I have repeatedly nominated Uncyclopedia for deletion is absolutely baseless, in addition to being slanderous. I have nominated it only once. While I agree that that situation could have been handled perfectly, that incident alone does not mean I have nominated it many times. Check the AFD archives if you want to.

Secondly, your assertions that I believe every single Uncyclopedia editors are vandals are libelous. It was very clear I was referring to Uncyclopedia editors who vandalize Wikipedia. I reiterate my position that unless you consider yourself as a vandal here on Wikipedia, I did not attack you.

Finally, I have never, ever, said we should follow the spirit of WP:DENY completely. I follow it on a case-by-case basis, and this is a case where I believe we should follow it.

I hereby seriously warn you that if you continue to travel down this path of slander and lies, I will report you to the proper Wikipedia authorities.

Note

I am not sure exactly which comments there is a dispute over. I would encourage you and Arbiteroftruth to both step back and take a breath. I am going to leave Arbiteroftruth the same basic message encouraging him/her to take relax a little as well. Remember, be civil. KnightLago (talk) 01:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Luck, North Carolina

Luck, North Carolina is a real place. I was able to verify this at http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/ and http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/f?p=gnispq:3:::NO::P3_FID:1021305 --Eastmain (talk) 01:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Apology

The incident that occurred earlier today was unfortunate, and for that, I apologize. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 04:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1809 in France‎

Hi, user IngerAlhao merged the data from that article into 1809, forgot to mention that. Cheers. Mion (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It gets better, the merge was opposed on Talk:1809 and for that correct reverted, didn't see that before. Mion (talk) 15:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teh Rote - see below:

Opposed to merging all Years by Country into Year

Hi BozMo - no objection to making each year consistent (as per 1850), but do not see why Years by County have to be merged into the year (eg 1809 in France) and the many hundreds of other years by country articles. A lot of us have spent substantial time ensuring we have Years by country articles (eg Ireland is very comprehensive) and these articles form a vital part of History by country.

Support 1850 format, but not merging of Years by country articles which stand very much in their own right. Ardfern (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1809

Have had to restore 1809 in France as it had been merged befiore any discussion completed. If this goes on many hundreds of articles will be lost that are part of History by country. Ardfern (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mion - You cannot pull down people's articles without any discussion - this is not what Wikipedia is about. This article is part of a series and should not be destroyed. Ardfern (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jaja ardfern, i admit my mistake, the situation has been corrected, 1809 is also setback to 3 mar. Mion (talk) 15:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

I reviewed Astrobiology, but did not feel it met the GA criteria. Please contact me with any questions or comments.Mjamja (talk) 19:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Featured portals

Amusing, certainly, but this is a Wikipedia-space page, not really appropriate for WP:FPOC discussion. Cirt (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. Cirt (talk) 20:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks! These are never too late. KnightLago (talk) 23:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rhymes

My, what a nasty attitude you have. I don't see you making any contributions. I suggest that if you think we should list every one of the tens of thousands of rhymeless words, you should discuss it on the talk page. I don't see what purpose it would serve, nor how you would generate it such a list. Meanwhile we need some way to control the length of the article, and IMO excluding compound words is a good place to start. (After all, it's easy enough to create nonce words that rhyme with them, which is not the case for the other words on the list.) kwami (talk) 00:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checking undo work

Please be more careful in not undoing the removal of multiple instances of vandalism, as in the article Northwood High School (North Carolina), a change which has been reverted. I assume this was a mistake. -- Michael Devore (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

V Tech Massacre review

I have reverted your addition to Wikipedia:Article alerts/News. Items must be of interest to more than just a few wikiprojects, per the first bullet of Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/News. Feel free to contact individual WikiProjects however. If they are already subscribed to the Article Alerts, and have tagged Talk:Virginia Tech Massacre with their banners, they will be notified through the daily reports. Thanks. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 15:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RUN

You have made valuable contributions to Wikiproject Running in the past, and we would appreciate you re-engaging. We've made a number of improvements lately including adopting assessment and importance parameters on the template that we place on the talk page of our articles. The project page has been updated to automatically chart the number of articles that have been assessed, and to use bots to provide us with alerts regarding project articles. We are also experimenting with bots that tag articles in project-related categories. However, bots can never replace skilled editors such as you. Please check in and lend a hand. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 18:59, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Wikipedia has a userbox available for you, Teh Rote

This user is a member of WikiProject Wikipedia dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of itself.

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/userbox/UserWikiProjectWikipedia}}

Pandelver (talk) 15:19, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lonelyplanetpbcover1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Lonelyplanetpbcover1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Watley Review

The article The Watley Review has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable. Lack of third party RS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:21, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Teh Rote. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Teh Rote~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

03:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

19:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

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) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

UnTunes listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect UnTunes. Since you had some involvement with the UnTunes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 03:04, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Samogitian Wikipedia

Please check the article. Perhaps it would be better. -- P (talk) 20:27, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User category proposed deletion

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 21#Category:Wikipedians who know where their towel is. It is proposed to delete this category. SpinningSpark 16:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Shalane Flanagan.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Shalane Flanagan.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]