Jump to content

User talk:Trusilver/archive13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please don't call my edit unconstructive

[edit]

I changed the date on that page because it was wrong. It's 1988 and it should be 1968. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.137.199 (talk) 17:24, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you are absolutely correct. I dug into the reference material and confirmed the year. Cheers and happy editing. Trusilver 21:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Gracie here. THE KEN Gidge article. I went to the trouble of looking 8 references--- that state the newspaper , date, author edition and so... completely changed the text .. trying to follow wicki guidlines and you did NOT let it stay for 2 minute.... I do mean not two minutes. A more experienced Wicki person was supposed to review this form for me ... I don't know html and that's part of the issue. PleaSSSSSSE... LEAVE this ALONE... for a day or so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gracieinnh (talk • contribs) 19:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]
The Userpage Shield
A small token of appreciation for some minor cleanup on my user talk. Apologies, but there is no cash prize :) Tiderolls 01:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, but how many times do I have to revert vandalism on your page before I get the cash prize? Trusilver 20:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
Hello Trusilver! I hope you enjoy this home-made cookie of mine as a warm greeting from a fellow Wikipedian. Sp33dyphil © • © 07:09, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Still reading that article, should be finished with it in a little while. Trusilver 20:38, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • - Yes, allow me to offer you some hot cocoa to dip your cookie in as a way of thanks for your revert of the attacking type comment edit from my talkpage. I also enjoyed a few minutes reading your userpage and your recall conditions (which I would support) Many thanks to you for your contributions here. Off2riorob (talk) 18:41, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Revert on Bitcoin

[edit]

How is this edit reverting a personal attack, exactly? You seem merely to be removing a link... --bd_ (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it was. I went just a little bit too far down and clicked the wrong box. I mean to give him a warning for adding inappropriate links per WP:EL, as is noted by the warning on that user's talk page.[1]. Trusilver 20:20, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you

[edit]
Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 14:55, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, Good luck. Trusilver 15:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RfA question

[edit]

Thanks for the beer! Just add more...and more...and more, that's how I did it. HurricaneFan25 13:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, no problem :) Trusilver 16:03, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Hence human evolution history: the geology - anthropology of the future life (HG)

[edit]

could you explain why you believe the edit I made to Talk:Hence human evolution history: the geology - anthropology of the future life (HG) is vandalism? The content of the talk page was the article reposted. That is not what talk pages are for. Since the article was already deleted, that content is doubly inappropriate. The talk page should be deleted since the article [age it is attached to has been deleted.

Please assume good faith and please look more deeply at the changes you are making before accusing others of vandalism. I would appreciate it if you could remove the incorrect warning from my talk page. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 05:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please use descriptive edit summaries when blanking a page. It goes a long way to keep you from looking suspicious, especially as a "new editor". "Removed article content" is redundant, I can figure out that just by the fact that you just removed the article content. Trusilver 05:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article content is inappropriate for talk pages. Therefore in the context of an edit to a talk page, the edit summary "remove article content" is descriptive. Again, please remove the inappropriate vandalism warning from my talk page. Thank you, Sparthorse (talk) 05:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Last Airbender

[edit]

Why do you erase the reception of WordGirl or May I Have a Word on The Last Airbender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.26.233.139 (talk) 05:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only because it was critical and failed to have a reference. Please take a look at WP:CITE. If you have a source for this edit, please put it in. If you aren't entirely sure how to do this, then let me know and I will help you to source the edit. Trusilver 05:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy Point, Washington

[edit]

The link #REDIRECT was to the wrong sandy point. The old article was incorrect. Sandy point is near Bellingham or Ferndale, not Langly. I do not know about the rest of the article. How would you handle this?

Ah yeah. I saw that edit and I kept meaning to send you a message, but I've been doing about fifteen things at once. I see that the redirect is wrong, but putting an external website on it is not the correct way to go about it. Let me look into it and get back to you here shortly. Trusilver 19:32, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I looked into it, and the only location that I'm finding for Sandy Point, Washington is a place within a park in Washington next to Langley. If this is incorrect, I suggest you start by putting a note on the talk page and discussing it or, better yet, being bold and writing a new article for the correct location. Trusilver 20:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the reference from the disambiguation page. The original one is probably incorrect / non-notable, but the community near Bellingham does not appear in independent sources, and thus is likely below the threshold for inclusion. Please add it back if you can cite independent sources to show that it is a known geographical location (and not just a collection of housing developments). Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 06:39, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the help. It looks like there are two Sandy Point, Washington locations. One near Bellingham and one near Langley (this got me confused because there is another Langley about 15-20 miles north of Bellingham in British Columbia, Canada). These both appear in various references (tide charts, Google maps, marina references, community links, etc), but I agree still on the threshold for inclusion.96.53.50.82 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]
No problem. Glad I could help :)

A kitten for you!

[edit]

Sorry about that! :( This kitty is lonely and needs a friend like you.

HurricaneFan25 20:04, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! no problem :) It happens. Trusilver 20:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

[edit]

Why are you warning me? I havent posted anything :( Anonymous: We Are Legion!!! (talk) 16:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of your recent edits have been intentionally disruptive. I suggest that if you want to edit Wikpedia, you do something useful. Further disruptive edits will result in being blocked. Trusilver 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, i have been "griefed" on here as well. I will stop being disruptive. But if im being serious can you answer me? DO you believe anonymous put flashing pictures on the elipsy forum? Anonymous: We Are Legion!!! (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I neither know nor care. All I know is that I'm sure Anonymous has more important things to do than show how awesomely "subversive" they are by vandalizing Wikipedia. Have a good day. Trusilver 16:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trusilver: Please note [2].  Chzz  ►  20:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Tree

[edit]

Re. CSD on John Tree (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views),

Just FYI;

See my edit sum [3] - I hope that's self-explanatory, and hope it's OK with you. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  20:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. This individual is a exceptionally decorated officer, but I don't feel he has any specific attribute that makes him any more notable than hundreds of other officers. I'm not positive I'm going to AfD him yet, I'm in no hurry and still seeing if I can find more on him. also, thanks for the note about the person above. Trusilver 22:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The editor, Milvetdem (talk · contribs), asked for some help on the IRC live-help thingy (here), and said they intended to add refs very soon. So, yes, I think just give it a bit of time. I've no problem if you want to PROD or AfD at some point later though, of course. Thanks for your understanding.  Chzz  ►  13:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm trying to give him a hand with the article, especially with some of the images that are being threatened with deletion on the commons. Trusilver 18:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Got a Excedrin to spare?

[edit]
  • Read WP:OWB#7: "If a user's first and second edits are creations of their user and talk pages, devoid of content, their third edit will be vandalism, a personal attack, or another form of trolling. That people spring up to defend these accounts when they are blocked is neither complicity nor malice, but rather just inexperience." I guess if you were still an Admin, you would have blocked him first and sort it out later, eh? --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 03:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's the new economy for us oldies... where the inexperienced lords over the experienced like us, I think most former service members would feel the same way about how things are being done thesedays instead of relying on the tried and tested common sense that has been imbued on us experienced oldies. Not unlike many year back when the word downsizing appear out of nowhere in the corporate world, but over at McDonald's the meal's are all about upsizing~! Such irony... --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 03:49, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Help regarding valdalism on page

[edit]

You have reverted valdalism on the wiki page of website Serial Killers Ink. Over the last 3 weeks there have been constant vandalism on the page by users thetruthabouteg, lemureye1 and iamtheonezzz. I have attempted to correct these but they continue to harass and list false and abusive info to the page, any help would be appreciated. Donnie777 (talk) 23:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I missed your message. Please put new talk page comments at the bottom of the page rather than the top. It appears that the problem on your page seems to have resolved itself. Please let me know if it continues and happy editing! Trusilver 16:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

[edit]

Among the various rules of grammar are two that are nearly universal. The first is that sentences require a punctuation mark at the end. The second is that an opening parenthesis requires a closing parenthesis. Keeping those in mind, you may wish to reconsider your edit to Battle of the Golden Spurs. While you may prefer to take away the leading parenthesis, that hardly qualifies my contribution as vandalism.

Yeah, you are right. I reverted that by mistake, that was a busy day. Thank you for letting me know. Also, please finish your talk page comments by signing them, which is to say putting ~~~~ at the end. This will identify you and makes it much easier to cross reference edits and such. Have a good day and happy editing. Trusilver 04:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

[edit]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Trusilver! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Will you be willing?

[edit]

27 October 2011. Tarc makes this personal attack.

Somebody deleted it and instead posted "post by User:Tarc deleted".

28 October 2011. I replaced the word "post" with the words "personal attack".

A few hours later The Bushranger reverted me.

29 October 2011 . I asked The Bushranger why did he do it.

In just a few minutes you reverted my post, and threatened to block me because of alleged personal attacks.

What was a personal attack in your opinion? Was it telling an incompetent administrator that he is lacking competence, or was it telling an administrator who lacks judgment that he might be a fool? You have missed on a very real and vicious personal attack, but threatened to block me over "fool"!

Are you becoming one of those " bunch of fakes who like Wikipedia because they have power over others."? If so, you are ready to become Wikipedia's administrator once again.

Tarc used to dislike you, which means you used to be a good administrator

"Yes, I believe it is safe to say that it had been read, and rejected. It appears that Trusilver is, thankfully, about to be desysopped for his out-of-process unblock. What exactly are you still arguing about? Tarc (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)"[reply]

"I had a recent encounter with this Trusilver, and to put it mildly, this admin's ability to assess a situation and made a judgment on it leaves much to be desired. Tarc (talk) 13:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

but looks like now you are ready to satisfy Tarc's taste, or maybe not everything is lost yet?

Will you be willing to ask The Bushranger what did he mean, when he reverted me? I would have asked The Bushranger myself, but see, I am more than sure that no matter how nicely I will ask him, my question would be ignored.

Will you be willing to replace "post by User:Tarc deleted" with "personal attack by User:Tarc deleted" at least in archive?--12.144.167.137 (talk) 18:08, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that you seem to feel you will find success shopping for someone who has had past issues with Tarc who will support you against him. I reverted your edit because you used inflammatory language in your edit that served no purpose other than to escalate a conflict. Wikipedia is not high school. I don't selectively enforce rules only against people I like and look the other way when I see something done to someone who has a grudge against me, or vice versa. My experience with Bushranger is that he's a fair and neutral admin. I suggest you give him the benefit of the doubt and talk to him if you truly feel the need to pursue this. However, simply dropping it would be the more prudent option. There's no way to survive here without getting into conflicts, the test of a good editor is knowing how to use your time wisely and not devote large chunks of it to pissing matches that will ultimately lead nowhere. Trusilver 19:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween!

[edit]
 Sp33dyphil has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!


If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

--Sp33dyphil © • © 05:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, thank you. Happy Halloween to you as well :) Trusilver 16:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

[edit]

<munch munch munch> You're very welcome :) HurricaneFan25 16:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For beating me in Huggle too many times to count. Calabe1992 (talk) 20:39, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kindly. Good to see you haven't missed a beat since your failed RfA. Just keep doing what you are doing, I'm sure you will meet with more success your next time around. Trusilver 21:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unsolicited comment

[edit]

Posting this more out of frustration than any concrete expectation that the comment might lead to any constructive change, but I have limited faith that editing seemingly uncontroversial articles would be an adequate cure for whatever ails User:Dualus. If you look at his edit history, you'll see that he detects signs of gender-based oppression in the deletion of an article about a British roller derby team, and apparently thinks the 99 Percent Declaration should be ranked alongside the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and other statements made by major international organizations, and is willing to spread that opinion by force if necessary. He also dropped by a random article on mathematics and, without so much as a mention on the talk page, restored a link to a webcomic that was apparently briefly discussed over a year and a half ago, by editors who apparently settled on excluding it. Methinks he'll manufacture a controversy, or else become the focus of one, wherever he goes. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS) (talk) (contribs) 21:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm generally inclined to agree with you. I am big on assuming good faith and giving second (and third, fourth, whatever) chances. But at some point, you feel like you are beating your head against a wall. I've already reached the stage where I find this user's tendentiousness to be block-worthy as I just got done saying at WP:ANI. The only way I feel that Dualus is capable of editing without being disruptive is on some article where there is not only no other participants, but zero chance of somehow pushing a point of view. I don't know... how about kneaded eraser? :) Trusilver 21:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This comment made me LOL, and I would have replied at the time, but wanted to make a clever joke of my own. The best I could come up with was, "Those are a classic tool of capitalist oppression, comrade; I guess you're just another one of the brainwashed..." But, while perhaps worth a chuckle, this didn't seem to make the grade. In any event, I think you put your finger on a possible solution, although that particular article might not be the best choice, as there does appear to be at least one ongoing content dispute. Cheers for your comments and the laugh. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS) (talk) (contribs) 15:41, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandaljournolovegate

[edit]

Congratulations, oh sterling defender of the wiki! Any comment for The Signpost? Skomorokh 14:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I can't say I'm happy to see a journalist intentionally vandalizing the encyclopedia, I think it reflects well on the project as a whole. Despite studies repeatedly showing the accuracy of Wikipedia, there are still many professionals and educators that view what we do with derision. Stories like this show our vigilance. They show that despite Wikipedia being the encyclopedia anyone can edit, factual inaccuracies are quickly caught and dealt with. Trusilver 20:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thank you for your resolute and steadfast defence of the project's integrity. Skomorokh 20:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding material to the introduction from the body.

[edit]

Dear Trusilver,

I appreciate your attention to detail, however you rejected a minor update I made to the CS Lewis article introduction - a point that has already been cited within the body of the article - due to no citation. How is one meant to update an introduction? Shall I re-link to the same footnoted citation (is that even possible?) or shall I write a new footnote with the identical information?

Many thanks for all you do! CVW — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.229.228.214 (talk) 17:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit was completely correct and cited. Sorry about that! Go ahead and restore it, and I'm striking the warning from your talk page. If you have any other questions about anything, please feel free to let me know. Have a good day and happy editing. Trusilver 20:14, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi :)

[edit]

Like always, great to see you around. Wifione Message

Enjoy a cup from me!

[edit]
Since I couldn't find a way to let Terri Psiakis know my thoughts about her, I thought I'd instead let you know my thoughts about you; bravo on being such a defender of Wikipedia! You deserve a sit down and a cup of tea I'd say... MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 00:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:FrancescaGagnon1.jpg

[edit]

Hi there - this file has been given a "missing evidence of permission tag". The file is eligible to be moved to Wikimedia Commons, but requires you to email OTRS with your correspondence with the copyright holder and for OTRS to confirm it before the file can be moved. If evidence of permission is not confirmed within a week the file could be deleted. Thanks for your help. Mato (talk) 00:27, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Isotope

[edit]

Which isotope was it that you said would dramatically increase a fission reaction when the control rods are removed? Was is Iodine 131?--v/r - TP 16:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's Xenon-135, and it's not that they increase the reaction, they actually slow the reaction. It's a little complicated, I will explain it on IRC when I get on. I will tonight. Trusilver 22:09, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

[edit]

I just thought I'd say... ♥ I LOVE YOU!!! ♥ Hugs and kisses, good work on a good encyclopedia. --89.242.173.67 (talk) 21:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Grand Theft Auto characters

[edit]

Onimusha

[edit]

File permission problem with File:Cirque du Soleil in Sao Paulo.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Cirque du Soleil in Sao Paulo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 in|article name}} 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fly back...

[edit]

To this planet :) It's about time. Wifione Message 17:27, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... I'm around. The travel season always results in very little time for me to be on Wikipedia. Should be getting back to normal, though :) Trusilver 22:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merry X'mas~!

[edit]

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.


Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You've got mail!

[edit]
Hello, Trusilver. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

SarahStierch (talk) 22:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Romania

[edit]
Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in contributing to WikiProject Romania. It is a project aimed at organizing and improving the quality and accuracy of articles related to Romania. Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 06:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Input request

[edit]

You have contributed to article The Really Big Show (formerly Rizzo on the Radio). This article is currently being considered for deletion. Please consider providing input at the article's discussion page: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Really_Big_Show.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 22:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From a vandal.

[edit]

I messed with the article on Steve Jobs' daughter one time, as she doesn't deserve an article, and you reprimanded me. I just wanted to let you know I stopped vandalizing, even though I still disagree with the stance that she deserves an article. I thought you might want to know. 166.248.35.88 (talk) 23:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trusilver isn't active at the moment, but I am sure glad to hear that. Cheers, Amalthea 00:02, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

[edit]

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyes@wikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

[edit]
--TheJJJunk (talk) 04:54, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little late to the party, but I will fly the flag proudly :) Trusilver 03:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP adress 72.185.61.209

[edit]

Vandalism warnings

[edit]

A warning, Silver. I'm not the one responsible for the vandalism attacks: I'm just a student using a school computer. I've never even vandalized Wikipedia before; it must be an IP from other country. Just a heads-up. --200.75.13.34 (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


New Section

[edit]

Gracie here. THE KEN Gidge article. I went to the trouble of looking 8 references--- that state the newspaper , date, author edition and so... completely changed the text .. trying to follow wicki guidlines and you did NOT let it stay for 2 minute.... I do mean not two minutes. A more experienced Wicki person was supposed to review this form for me ... I don't know html and that's part of the issue. PleaSSSSSSE... LEAVE this ALONE... for a day or so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gracieinnh (talk • contribs) 19:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly refactored your comment to standard talk page format, but because you are a new user, I will be replying on your talk page to make things easier for you. Trusilver 19:46, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you back

[edit]

Hi Trusilver. It's always nice to see you around. Take care. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 21:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly! Always like to be around when I have time to be around. Work has been picking up a lot more than I would like to to, lately. My oldest daughter is getting ready to go to college, and my youngest has discovered boys. It's sad when Wikipedia has become my stress reducer. Trusilver 21:56, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you. Stress is a relative concept and sometimes RL and kids don't help in reducing it.  :) Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 22:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
↑ What he said. Just got a bit more active myself and was glad to stumble across your sig once more. :) Amalthea 22:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And you too Amalthea :) Stalking your talk page, I had noticed you weren't around as much. Glad to see it's changing for you as well. Trusilver 00:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boogie On Reggae Woman

[edit]

I've requested for semi protection. I came across the same problem back in January. -CTS talk 07:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was just in the process of doing the same, but you beat me to it :) Trusilver 07:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

[edit]

Could you please make you signature darker? It's kind of hard to read when it's that colour.

Also, and this is more just a stylistic concern, the <font> html tag is deprecated. More proper would be to do something like 

[[User:Trusilver|<span style="font-family:papyrus; color:#ADA96E;">Trusilver</span>]]

for the effect of your current signature. Just swap the colour for something that stands out more and it'd be lovely. -— Isarra ༆ 00:37, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One helpful complaint in years of using the signature does not show a problem. Thank you for your concern, but I think I like it fine the way it is. Trusilver 16:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Signatures are more for the benefit of others than for ourselves, mon, but not being able to easily read something is relatively easily ignored; people generally only complain when things are outright disruptive. Regardless, thank you for what you did fix. -— Isarra ༆ 17:45, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

[edit]

Thank you for participating in my my RfA, I really appreciate the confidence you vested in me. I hope I can live up to it in the months to come.

Speaking of adminship, it still sucks to think that you got desysopped for something so silly as an unblock. Nevertheless, I gotta hand it to you for being ever the optimist; losing the bit for being "too principled" is an ironic twist of fate to be proud of. Kudos to you!

Take care. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 01:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep working toward being an Admin. There were valid reason that you were opposed that need to be addressed, and I feel pretty confident that you will succeed six months down the road. As for me? I'm actually much happier NOT being an administrator. I've told several people that have asked to nominate me again that I will accept a nomination the day that I feel the slightest bit of regret at the way things played out... after 2 1/2 years, I'm still not there yet :) Best of luck to you, and I will be watching for your next RfA. Trusilver 02:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's great! And I can't speak for you or anything, but I think they'll be holding their breath 'til they're blue in the face if they're looking to nominate you on that basis. I've seen you around, you're someone with principles. I like that. Master&Expert (Talk) 12:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

[edit]

Your signature is almost unreadable. My eyesight is poor, but there are thousands of editors with worse eyesight---presumably a few dozen who must be even more frustrated trying to read your name. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I find it odd that in three years nobody has said the slightest thing, and now I'm suddenly getting multiple comments on the light color of the signature. Take a look at this one, see if this is an improvement. Trusilver 21:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... looking at the contrast between the two, the second one is definitely much easier to read. Trusilver 21:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald Reagan

[edit]
Read what I've put on the talk page of the article. You are/Wikipedia is using a non-neutral source in the editing of the article. Seriously! How 'neutral' is it to quote a poll that reckons 8 out of 10 of the greatest speeches are by Americans? that's laughable, if it wasn't so sad. 86.133.208.88 (talk) 16:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are you not capable of critical thought? How can 8 out of 10 of the greatest speeches in human history be by Americans? The poll, by an Amwrican publication, is clearly biased, and so needs a caveat adding. If no caveat is added to point the fault with the Time poll out, that is serious bias on Wikipedia's part. 86.133.208.88 (talk) 16:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A article from Time Magazine fulfills the qualifications of WP:V. If you continue to insert your editorializations into the article, you will be blocked from editing. At Wikipedia, we write based on verifiable information, we don't put our own agenda into the writing. If you had a source that passes WP:V that stated the ten best speeches ever were made by some guy standing on a street corner in Yemen, then it would merit inclusion. Your opinion, however, does not. Please ready the relevant policy that I linked before making any further edits. Trusilver 16:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It might be verifiable in that it is published in a reliable source, but it is quite clearly not neutral. That is the point I am making and you are failing to understand. 86.133.208.88 (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have to discuss this on the talk page or you will be blocked. Ryan Vesey 16:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

740boyz and Fulanito article text

[edit]

Greetings! I see you've noticed the talk page vandalism by 740boyz (talk · contribs). What do you think about his last round of changes to the article Fulanito? They're not vandalism per se (which is why I'm not reverting a fourth time), but they have made a mess of the page formatting. —C.Fred (talk) 16:50, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching that too. I don't think that this person is a malicious vandal. I think instead that they just need a little help with WP:N and WP:V, the most recent edit DOES appear to be constructive. Trusilver 16:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Trusilver. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 01:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Trusilver/archive13&oldid=1182125764"