This is an archive of past discussions about User:TeleComNasSprVen. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

August 2010

Stuff

The IP who edited my userpage was me; I was in a library and discovered my userpage looked a mess in IE, and I couldn't be fecked to log in and/or didn't remember my password. :P It's just weird that you'd give a warning even though the edit was not revert-worthy.

Re this: User_talk:BrightBlackHeaven#Talk:To_Write_Love_on_Her_Arms. Dude. DUDE. I use(d) Twinkle on a regular basis, I obviously know how to restore certain versions of pages AND how to warn users. I couldn't use restoring/rollbacking on the page because of edits that were made AFTER the edits that I wanted reverted; I suppose I could've done my edits in a single edit but apparently I decided that the way I did do it was more convenient. ×××BrightBlackHeaven^(talk)××× 22:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Redirects of merged articles

I honestly think it's unnecessary to redirect those non-mainspace pages. Bearian (talk) 19:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC) I perfomed a couple of redirects that made sense, but not all of them. Bearian (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Name pages and disambiguation

Thanks for tidying up Claire etc. However, please see MOS:DABNAME which explains that lists of people are OK in articles about names, but do not belong on a disambiguation page unless the individuals were known solely by that name. You'll be welcome at WP:WikiProject Anthroponymy if you have more time for this sort of thing! - Fayenatic (talk) 20:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll take a look at the project when I have the time. However, I'm more interested in clearing the backlog here instead. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 23:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, TeleComNasSprVen. You have new messages at Fayenatic london's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your MFD nomination

Your MFD nomination of User:Ge6m 09/monobook.js. is not complete. Please follow the directions on the MFD page. You didn't put the MfD tag on the page or create it's MfD subpage, hence why there is a redlink where your nomination should go. —Train2104 (talk · contribs) 22:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I know. Twinkle messed up horribly. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 23:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for beating me to warning the IP who vandalised my user page! Very much appreciated. Jay-Sebastos (talk) 21:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey, no probs. I was patrolling RC, by the way. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 21:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Have you tried igloo? ℳono 21:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Not yet. But I am using Twinkle occasionally. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 21:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I strongly recommend it. User:Dripping Flame uses it.

ℳono 21:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

You also "strongly recommended" (well, not so much) using Twinkle. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 21:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Start slow and then automate. :) ℳono 22:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Anwar El Sadat

I should leave a commentary before remove information but your reminder message is a little bit offensive for me. I edited again the article and I left a commentary. You should be more polite. I am not an idiot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.228.44.108 (talk) 22:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

The messages are automated, and I AGFed as much as possible. So please use the edit summary next time. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 22:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Nessuna conquista araba della sardegna

Nessuna conquista araba della sardegna vai a studiare! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.234.87.172 (talk • contribs)

In English, please! :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 00:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

No Arab conquest of Sardinia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.234.87.172 (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Please discuss your edits on the talkpage and remember to cite verifiable sources to confirm your edits. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 01:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Blink 182

Hey, I'm sorry I didn't specify the reason of editing that page - it actually had an invalid reference and a dead link, and I thought I might be able to help. Hope it's okay now. :D 188.26.196.236 (talk) 00:21, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

It's nothing. Just remember to use the edit summary next time, or better yet, sign up with an account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 00:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the greeting!

I have my own account already but figured I'd quickly do a revert without logging in before I was beaten to it. Was pleasantly surprised to see even IPs get treated so civilly though. Keep up the friendly welcome! 158.143.182.123 (talk) 00:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, it's nothing. I didn't realize you'd already signed up. Yeah, I see a lot of IPs ~~getting beat up by the cabal~~ not receiving enough friendly welcomes nowadays, so I thought I'd offer some of that welcoming that they so lack. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 00:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

I must thank you for the welcome on my other talk page. It's nice to know that people still take the time to do that. 67.136.117.132 (talk) 15:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Recent "Re-Edit"

Thank you for your message. I would like to bring your attention to the fact that the edit I made was essentially true. You can google it if you like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.144.219 (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

RE:simple:Special:Contributions/SimonKSKSK

I asked some admins to block it, but they said it wasn't necessary. So, I guess it stays. :/ Oh, and thanks for for telling me. Simon^KSK 19:39, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I was just concerned of even the slightest possibility an account might go rogue. But I'm happy you told the admins anyway. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 19:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

RE: Ray Park and reversion bot thingies

I appreciate the fact that it was your bot instead of you yourself that reverted both my edits, but there's a huge whoppin' sentence in there that makes NO sense whatsoever. :/ 69.141.19.143 (talk) 01:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Your signature

I see you use the username TCNSV to link here. You should probably create that account as it is not registered. wiooiw (talk) 04:19, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I only recently inserted that link into my prefs just this afternoon because whenever I tried to add another link into my signature, I would exceed the limit and the mediawiki would stop me. Why would I need to create that account? If I do, it could be placed in Category:Sockpuppets of TeleComNasSprVen and I don't want to be considered much of a sockpuppet! Seriously, though, the page was originally only meant as a redirect, during my first days here, as a shorthand way of reaching me just as User:NSD referred back to User:NerdyScienceDude. P.S. Have you been stalking me? I don't believe I've had any contact with you much today. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 04:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Well creating it wont be against policy, as it is a legitimate alternate account and you are clearly linking it to this account. If someone actually creates the account User:TCNSV, then there might be a little problem. User:NSD was registered by User:NerdyScienceDude to prevent that. no :) I was just checking to see if there was any new sockpuppet cases and I came across this. Regards wiooiw (talk) 04:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I created the userpage for the account, but it still says that I'm not registered to it for some reason. I-20 has some interesting links; I followed one to Jimbo Wales's blocking; then to Robdurbar, and from there to an interesting sockpuppet case you can review. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 05:03, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

If you are going to register it, you just create it like any other account. :) wiooiw (talk) 05:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, but then, there's SUL issues and the block on simple... what if they think it's a block evasion? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 05:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

You can ask them on irc or I can ask on the I dont use irc if it is ok. I don't think they will have a problem. wiooiw (talk) 05:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's fine to create the new SUL doppelgänger acct. fr33k man ^-simpleWP- 05:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Signature

Point well taken: I'll use some other signature. Best, Battleaxe9872 ^Talk 20:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's nothing; I just happened to notice it on my way out. I'm glad I didn't come out like I was attacking you or anything.

:| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 20:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Munch.

Mono has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

 ℳono  22:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Watch it

this edit. The references are fine but the wikification tag was unnecessary. As with SimWP, editing after me and placing frivolous tags can be construed as potentially disruptive Purple backpack89 22:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Nah. Don't concern yourself with that. You shouldn't hold grudges against people. What happened on simple stays on simple, not anywhere else. There are no such editing restrictions here, but if you like, I can even request it for us. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 22:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Not to be a bugaboo, but... Keep in mind I don't necessarily want you blocked, I want you to stop adding and removing tags on articles I've created... Purple backpack89 23:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Right! Let's not continue this issue over to enwiki! They have an even less tolerant attitude! Both of you just leave each other alone! If you see that one have you has made a recent edit to a page, realize that someone else will fix it if needed and just move along! fr33k man ^-simpleWP- 03:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Anime and Manga

No problem; R1 was merged into G8 some time ago. I don't see this as qualifying for R3 either, since the page was at the old title for more than 4½ years. Nyttend (talk) 21:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TeleComNasSprVen. You have new messages at Hazard-SJ's talk page.
Message added 19:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Test transclusion

Why was that on your page? You tried to transclude it, didn't you? ;) Hazard-SJ^Talk 19:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC) You substituted it and removed the notice!!!! I'll do something more to it... Hazard-SJ^Talk 19:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

By the way, where is the rest of the page in that test? Didn't show up? That is what I'll do, and you can retry... WahHAHA! Hazard-SJ^Talk 19:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead, try now..... Hazard-SJ^Talk 19:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

“

Note: I've become more interested in writing Wikipedia policy than I am in writing articles (for the latter, see me on the simple Wiki).

”

If I see you there, will you see me? Hazard-SJ^Talk 19:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, maybe not. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 19:42, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, heard you downloaded Qui. Make sure you make the necessary changes, otherwise, nothing comes up. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 19:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive

There are currently
2,505 articles in the backlog.
You can help us! Join the
September 2010 drive today!

The Guild of Copy-Editors – September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive

The Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invite you to participate in the September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 September at 23:59 (UTC). The goals for this drive are to eliminate 2008 from the queue and to reduce the backlog to fewer than 5,000 articles.

Sign-up has already begun at the September drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.

Before you begin copy-editing, please carefully read the instructions on the main drive page. Please make sure that you know how to copy-edit, and be familiar with the Wikipedia Manual of Style.

Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GoCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.

Thank you; we look forward to meeting you on the drive!
— ɳorɑfʈ^Talk! and S Masters (talk).

Access Denied ^talk_contribs editor review 01:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

MFDs

I did them separately because they're in different conditions: some have corresponding "real" articles, others don't. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok. It was just a suggestion, though. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 18:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello. You have a new message at Cymru.lass's talk page.

Hello, TeleComNasSprVen. You have new messages at 58.96.94.12's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WP:HD

Thanks for the message. Actually that already is a template, {{Astray}}. There are a couple of useful collections of HD templates at: {{Help desk templates navbox}} and {{HD}}. – ukexpat (talk) 01:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. No wonder it sounded so much like one! :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 01:14, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Northstar V8. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

You need to avoid editing pages I edit, per what Fr33k said above Purple backpack89 02:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, let's slow down, and think about this carefully. First of all, you made an edit that I reverted, and now we are discussing it per the BRD cycle. Frankly, I didn't even realize that it was you who removed the categories until I checked the history just now. Second, you templated a regular (DTTR) to make a point, and I could easily place that template on anyone else's talkpage. Third, don't invoke Fr33k as if he was taking sides; he said: "If you see that one have you has made a recent edit to a page, realize that someone else will fix it if needed and just move along!" (copied from above) which means that you shouldn't touch the edit that I've made, and let someone else revert it if it was an error. Fourth, the categories are valid, as they qualify under WP:CAT-R:

These categories are only intended to contain redirects, and are helpful in keeping track of redirects and further subcategorizing them as needed. They include both redirects within main namespace and in other namespaces. They are often applied using templates, though such categories can also be created and populated directly. This categorization is intended for Wikipedia editors, not readers. For a list of the templates used to create such categories, see Wikipedia:Template messages/Redirect pages. The templates can also be found in Category:Redirect templates; the categories are subcategories of Category:Redirects.

So in what way have I tried to edit war? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 02:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, here's a solution: instead of creating more wikidrama between us, go focus on articles and leave the redirects to me. How about that? You happy? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 02:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I won't be happy until you stop making edits that smack of hounding me by reading my contributions and seeing how you can one-up them. CAT-R also clearly states that most redirects do not need to be categorized; the vast majority of categories created by other editors are not categorized. And yet you haven't attempted to categorize those; or categorize redirects as they; the only redirects you have categorized are (smacking of hounding). Also, your creation of redirect talk pages is another example of HOUNDing, and in addition creating pages that are unnecessary and possibly a violation of guidelines. All in all, you seem to be replicating some of the things that got you blocked on simple here Purple backpack89 03:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

By the message that you give me "I won't be happy until..." you seem to demonstrate an inability to properly cooperate with other editors, and cooperation and compromise are some things that are necessary in the collaborative spirit of building a far-reaching and open encyclopedia such as this one. Whatever notions of hounding you hold against me are completely mistaken, and your accusatively paranoid words can be demonstrated here: "you haven't attempted to categorize those..." what do you call this then? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 03:26, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

That's ridiculous. You provoke me, and then make a baseless accusation that I can't work with editors. If that were true, I'd have been blocked long ago. As for that edit, it was a very poor use of editing time that should be spent on content. And if your editing patterns here are similar to those on Simple, and if Simple thinks it's hounding... Purple backpack89 03:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

For the last time, stop spamming my talkpage and giving me the new messages banner. Go write an article like in the solution I proposed. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 03:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Quite a few of the admins on simplewiki are admins here on enwiki also. They would be more than happy to block the both of you. You guys are just dying to prove your point to each other aren't you? LET IT GO! It's just a website for crying out loud! Don't let this get worse! fr33k man ^-simpleWP- 04:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Advice

Let me give you some advice; check the history of any page you want to edit and if PBP is one of the recent editors, move along. You hear me? MOVE ALONG!!!! You are continuing this feud over from simplewiki and that is not good. Do not interact with him AT ALL! There are well over a million articles and more than that other pages. Find another place to hang out; somewhere PBP does not! If not, I can promise you will get yourself blocked here on enwiki! Is it worth it? You can always talk to me or vent via email, okay?! Wise up! fr33k man ^-simpleWP- 06:00, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

WTF

Apparently, you don't understand CSD G2 or how to read a source. Thanks, —fetch ·comms 21:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I thought that the sandbox was meant for that, not a talkpage. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 22:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

User talk:212.74.97.211

You warned this editor about vandalistic editing on Tibetan Blue Bear, but, in fact, the spurious information was added by another IP. The IP you warned removed the bad info. I have corrected the talk page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 22:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

MfD observation

As I've noted on a couple MfD page, I think we ought to approach editors who have been active contributors to the encyclopedia differently than editors who mistakenly think WP is a place for games. In cases where they may have a subpage that is a technical violation of the rules, I'd prefer a personal note, to give them a chance to rectify it themselves. In many cases, I think the answer will be that they simply forgot they had created it, and will happily request immediate removal, thereby reducing the need for a dozen of so participants to review the page and make a recommendation, then expect a sysop to review the consensus and make sure it is the right call. Do you disagree?--SPhilbrick T 15:43, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

To address the differing cases between experienced and noclued editors is one of the reasons that I try to MfD only those secret pages whose creator has 1000 or less contributions and that those contributions are mainly to userspace, while those whose creators have higher contributions I generally disregard, for fear that they won't be deleted at an MfD with as much ease. As to a friendly note on their talkpage, I would agree only if it could be accomplished; I'm more worried about "how" your idea is going to work rather than whether it would work at all. Would you friendly post a note on some experienced user's talkpage saying "Can you please U1 this, this, and this?" It doesn't seem right, and more like an intrusion to userspace more than anything. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 18:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure we are completely on the same page. An MfD of a secret page? I'm in favor of deletion. You proposed deletion of Wikipedia:Mfd#User:RatonBat.2FWhat_can_i_do.3F (who happens to have just over 1000 edits), and I support the deletion.

If I am reading you right, you are saying you would stay away from proposing an MfD for someone with over 1000 edits. My notes was prompted by Wikipedia:Mfd#User:WillowW.2FUniverse, where you propose an MfD for someone with almost 30,000 edits. Yes, I think someone who has amassed 30K edits deserves a personalized note. (I am not arguing that contributions from low edit count editors are not valuable.) --SPhilbrick T 19:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Generally, yes, an MfD of a secret page whose user has more than 1000 edits and that those edits are primarily to articlespace—that MfD would more likely result in keep than delete. For User:RatonBat, it is probably an exception to the rule. As to User:WillowW, I considered the MfD because the user seemed inactive at the time, and can request deletion at any time; I stumbled upon the page whilst doing some other work of interest. I've no objection to a personalized note to the editor, only to the nature of said personalized note, and how it would be brought about. As I showed in my previous example, constructing such a personalized note would be rather difficult; there's a balance between intruding into userspace to request your sandbox be deleted and reminding you of the rules of said sandbox. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 19:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with your first comment. If an editor has thousands of edits to article space, but had a secret page, I would expect it would get deleted. (I do think editors with lots of edits to article space get some dispensation on close calls, but secret pages aren't close calls, they are mindlessly lame.) As to the difficulty of constructing a personal message, it isn't hard. "Hey, I was poking around and ran across a page you created years ago, I bet you forgot you created it. Any reason it shouldn't go away? Would you be willing to requests deletion to avoid having to list it at MfD?" In 99% of the cases, I think the answer would be, "yeah, forgot I had that, I'll get rid of it". The alternative is templating a regular, and expecting a dozen or so editors to review what should be a simple exercise.

I still feel like we aren't communicating. Do you think it is less work to do an MfD instead of a simple, polite note? The actual creation of the MfD is a piece of cake, push a Twinkle button and it's done, but that puts the bureaucratic machinery into place - when I don't think it is needed.--SPhilbrick T 00:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I suppose, but the personalized note has to be something more than a "DELETE YOUR PAGE NOW OR ELSE I'LL MFD IT!" albeit a little more subtle than that, but it gives the same message nonetheless. And what'll you do if he decides to keep it? In an MfD, the owner would probably be more inclined to give good faith, due to the large number of nominations. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 01:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

We aren't communicating, so I'll drop it. No problem, but the arbcom CC proposal is out, so my attention will be elsewhere--SPhilbrick T 13:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Urban Eye's Editor Review

I added the Editor review for Urban Eye at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Editor review/urbaneyeorg, as the two are as you know two different processes. -Marcusmax(speak) 22:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, but some of these processes have the same application, and that's why I chose to include it in the AfD nonetheless. Sometimes, it's better to place all nominations in one place, and that's not just saving server space. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5600 (Hebrew year) for example. But thanks for opening another venue. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 22:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DBZ power levels/Sandbox

Hello, TeleComNasSprVen. You have new messages at 69.181.249.92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New Messages

Now I will. ;) --Chemicalinterest (talk) 10:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for leaving me a review at Wikipedia:Editor review. I'll keep your suggestion about using personal messages instead of warning templates in mind! On a side note, your username puzzles me. I'm guessing the first bit, "TeleCom," has something to do with telecommunications? Other than that, I'm puzzled. Care to elaborate? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 17:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)The username is a shortened version of "Telecommunications of Nasal Sprays from Venus". Access Denied ^talk_contribs editor review 17:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! And Access Denied is right; that's what it is. Maybe he could give you a review, too! :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 17:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

"Telecommunications of Nasal Sprays from Venus".... now that is what I call original! --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 18:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I did NOT break the three revert rule

I did NOT make 3 reverts in 24 hours, nor more than that. Yellow Evan has made 3 in 24 hours and obviously false reported me, after I warned him about it. Please review that and restore the edit as I last made it, and remove my warning, and the false threat to ban me. Otherwise I will take it up with other mods. Thank you74.194.176.82 (talk) 20:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I tied to discuss on the talkpage, put no one responded till now. Y E ^Tropical ^Cyclone

OK, fine. I only found the page after patrolling recent changes anyway, so it doesn't really matter to me. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 21:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Since you asked

...could you look into what Jeff G. has been doing and stop him from doing more of it? I think his reverts lately are beyond disruptive. 64.105.65.28 (talk) 02:50, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry? I don't recall asking anything; I just wanted to welcome you to the team. But now that you mention it, Jeff G. has been reverting a lot lately. I think a friendly warning or two will disengage him. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 02:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

How - and sleeping?

You're currently sleepwalking edit? Change your status!

How can I edit that MRTV article? And your page that is suggested (Manual of Style) will take lots of time for me. Can you tell me what to change in MRTV article?--125.25.209.11 (talk) 16:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

The Manual of Style says that a disambiguation page is not necessary; therefore it is best to leave it as a redirect. Thanks for contacting me on my talkpage. You can read about it on WP:2DAB. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 16:43, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

St Colman's College, Claremorris (revert vandalism)

We both reverted (different) vandalisms to St Colman's College. However, you sent a note to the same user that I reverted (86.45.49.141), while in fact you revert vandalism committed by 109.77.0.54. I think it would be best if you removed your comment to user 86.45.49.141, and placed this on 109.77.0.54's user page, as I think it might be tacky for me to do this. Thanks! Settlet (talk) 17:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused. I reverted to the revision made by 109.77.0.54 because I thought it was vandalism, and placed it on 86.45.49.141's talkpage. Isn't that appropriate? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 17:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

It's entirely appropriate! You can leave your message for 86.45.49.141 for all I care, I just mostly think that 109.77.0.54 is just as deserving... <grin> Settlet (talk) 18:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Micah P. Hinson

please explain how i, and not the other editors, am attacking or vadalizing? i see these people putting false information on Hinson's page, and constantly erasing other members new and cited information. how can cited information be replaced by POV's constantly? i am confused. please explain how my vandalism is different that their vandalism? this is supposed to be a place where truth lies, and it seems to me that they want it to be a place of POV's. in a world of LOGIC, i am correct, and in the LAND OF OZ, where you can post false information and uncited information, then accuse others of posting vandalism, is apparently where most wikipedia editors live, or at least the ones posting on Mr. Hinson's site. but someone writing and asking for constructive information as to how cited sources and direct quotes are considered vandalism only get erased, threatened, and belittled, with no constructive criticism and replaced by un-cited sources with no explanation as to why, it becomes difficult to respect editors who place false information. that is vandalism and inappropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.26.160.156 (talk) 17:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for retracting your comments. In the future, please do not accuse others of committing vandalism. However, you removed this ref: <ref name=being4/> for the page, without giving a proper explanation of why, and that is why I reverted your edit. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 18:19, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

You did not explain how this is vandalism and how there are personal attacks on specific editors. The attacks were initiated by the specific editors and are continued by their insistence to continue to post critical remarks in regards to Hinson's political views that are not properly cited and do not appear anywhere in the article that is cited. Please stop reverting edits that are properly cited and found word for word in the cited documentation. These are not attacks and should not be removed. Why is falsified information allowed to be left on a wikipedia page and the truth removed? Please respond appropriately to constructive questions and criticism instead of posting your opinion as to what is vandalism. The only vandalism that has occurred on the page are the falsifications that are not properly cited. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.26.160.156 (talk) 20:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

You speak of truth and falsehood as if they were black and white; I recommend you read the Wikipedia essay WP:Truth. If you click on the link, you will see why we need you (WP:BURDEN) to supply whatever information you have about the article. If you plan to remove information from the article, please discuss first to gain consensus on the article's talkpage. For example, this most recent edit that you have committed could be mistaken for vandalism, since it removed the specific quote highlighted in red <ref>[http://thequietus.com/articles/04439-micah-p-hinson-interview-obama-bush Hissing Obama, Are You The Destroyer? Micah P. Hinson Interviewed]</ref> so please in the future discuss the changes on the talkpage rather than removing it yourself and getting blocked for edit warring. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 20:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Perry D Cox

I removed the prod tag you placed on Perry D Cox, as per WP:CONTESTED, a prod tag removed by anyone, even if in bad faith, should not be replaced. Additionally, the article creator has explicitly objected to deletion on the article talk page, thereby making deletion not uncontroversial. Please take to AfD. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:18, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Done And thanks for pointing out the policy. I'll remember next time. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 21:19, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy tag on World Championship Basketball

Hi TeleCom. I saw your A1 tag there; the article does in fact have enough context. I'm going to delete it under A7, however. Thanks for new page patrolling, and happy editing. Airplaneman ✈ 00:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. Sure, go ahead and delete it under whatever criteria you feel is right. And yes, I was in the neighborhood.

:| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 00:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

S/he's basing it all on a couple of edits to Jacques Dutronc, where I backed up the previous removal of non-free images. Apparently anybody who disagrees with them MUST be in cahoots with others who disagree. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 03:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about sockpuppets, but clearly an editor who has been here for as long as you have can't be one. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 04:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

The statement made by 69.181.249.92 above is objectively false.

You can see from User_talk:Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz and User talk:Sugar-Baby-Love that two users acted as if they share the same brain. I speak with one, the other responds. I speak with another, the counterpart responds. I wasn't really sure if there was any problems at first, until they committed this highly suspicious behavior. I'm still not convinced that they're sockpuppets. But if they aren't, then they are sure looking like that in their comments.

And Apparently anybody who disagrees with them MUST be in cahoots with others who disagree. is pretentious nonsense, without any evidence to back it up. You can see from my edit history that I also have done many different things. Sugar-Baby-Love (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: All Me

Hello again. I've declined your A7 tag on All Me, an album article. WP:CSD#A7 says "This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works." (my emphasis on "albums"). I do think the article needs work, though, and feel free to AFD, tag, or PROD and whatnot. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 17:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me again. Yes, I didn't think I'd read the policy carefully enough, so thanks for pointing that out to me. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 17:54, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Religion link

Why do you have a link to [1] anbd say this is dangerous??? Anyway, what is that? It seems to have some more or less good articles, but anyway many (including on Vedas) are still not very good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.239.216 (talk) 18:09, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Don't template the regulars

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review the essay Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. User:TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 02:35, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I clearly know how to sign posts with four tildes. You don't need to template me because I forgot once. SnottyWong ^soliloquize 16:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. It was a bad joke, I suppose. I didn't have enough tea this morning. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 16:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

No worries. SnottyWong ^communicate 16:48, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia

You may be interested in the comments here. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 14:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

CSD again

I've had to decline your A7 tag of Watashi ni xx shinasai. It doesn't apply to books; AfD or PROD would be a better course of action. Although I've gone ahead and deleted many of the articles you have tagged the past few days, I've also had to decline more than one. Please be more careful. WP:WIHS may also be a good thing to read. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 04:15, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry, I didn't know about that page, but I'll keep it in mind next time, now that you've pointed it out. Thanks again, :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 04:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Warning

Implying someone is a troll is uncivil and unacceptable. Please refrain from commenting about editors and/or making personal attacks. Check someone's user contributions before making the assumption they are a troll, trolls do not make good contributions and create as many articles or impact policy as much as I do. So if you have a problem with a discussion that gets of topic I suggest in the future you simply ignore the conversation and do not join. I made it clear in my post I was willing to take the discussion elsewhere. Do not lose your cool like that and act like that towards other users we are all equal, we are not children and you are certainly not an authority figure. I will be monitoring and watching your interaction with others.Camelbinky (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I will retract the part of you calling me a troll, though it certainly looked as though you were calling me a troll since that sentence was right after you saying "Camelbinky, stop! Now!". I'm sorry, but that is uncivil and way out of line with your tone. You are not an authority to be treating me as some sort of child. You retract that from Jimbo and I will delete my entire post here if you so wish. To keep this discussion in one place I will be deleting your thread on my talk page. I actually have no wish to continue this discussion but am watching your talk page if you really want to continue this. I for one dont want the drama of continuing this. I just hope you learn not to talk to people in such a tone.Camelbinky (talk) 23:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead and delete the entire section if you wish; I don't want to touch Jimbo's talkpage anymore, because, after all, it is his talkpage to do with as he wants. As such, any comments that I have made now belong to the talkpage, and I don't want to be a part of it anymore. So now, I leave up to you what you will; I don't really care much about my comments. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 23:52, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

sand: tnx+

Thanks for straightening out my mess. Still learning.

I clipped and pasted ur template re: backlog drive. Copy editing is one of the few things on WP I know a little about, so i hope 2 help, and in the process learn a lot more. I'm sure there are better ways 2 handle templates, but it seemed 2 work ok.

Is there a reason that ur header "ut:Rag:sandbox," above, has a space at each end inside the "==" ? Prob generated automatically when u selected "new section." Just wondered, in case i'm doing it wrong when i hand-type them.

Also, i wonder if u are aware that on some browsers, mine 4 example, it's not possible 2 click on ur sig to reach ur talkpage. I had to take it to "edit" mode, handcopy "user:TeleComNasSprVen," and type it into the "search" box manually. I'm sure there're easier ways of doing that, also. I'll learn. Cool-looking sig, though.

Ragityman (talk) 11:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I like ur B. Pascal quotation, also.

~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ragityman (talk • contribs) 11:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Rebekah Boyd

Hello TeleComNasSprVen. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Rebekah Boyd, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This is not promotional: user is properly declaring a COI, and needs pointing to relevant policies, but this should not be deleted. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC) '

I put that feature in to place a few minutes ago. lol. ʄlame 00:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Wow, ok! I didn't realize that it was created by you! No wonder, I had a hard time finding it on either the doc page or the editnotice for reporting at WP:UAA. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 00:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)