User talk:Your Radio Enemy

Welcome!

Hello, Your Radio Enemy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Shalom (Hello • Peace) 14:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabet Soup

YRE: Please check alphabetization on each item in OTR category page. I corrected some of those to alphabetize yesterday or day before. Pepso2 (talk) 17:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YRE: Still a problem. Here is the format with pipe: Category:Old-time radio programs|Fat Man, The Pepso2 (talk) 15:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball Card War

I it is Libro0 who started it and has escalated things. He is the one to blame leave me alone! Baseball Card Guy (talk) 16:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New York IRT

I see that you renamed New York IRT to New York IRT (soccer team), and then made the former article a redirect to Interborough Rapid Transit Company.

Actually, every article that linked to New York IRT was looking for the soccer team, so I put back the redirects so that New York IRT would point to the article that those other articles were looking for.

I can't honestly say if people would enter "New York IRT" in the search box when they're looking for the former rapid transit company. It's not really a natural way of referring to it. But in any case, the first sentence of the article about the soccer team has a link to the transit company. Marc Shepherd (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CIVIL and WP:FAITH. The first time, you redirected the page without altering the articles that pointed to it. The second time, you redirected the article without redirecting its talk page. Both edits, in other words, were done incorrectly, even if the idea was defensible.

Your issues were dealt with stop causing problems. To put it differently, both of your edits introduced a problem, rather than solving one. I addressed the problems you had introduced in the way that seemed best.

Since we don't even know how often people enter "New York IRT", much less what they're looking for when they do so, a disambiguation page looks like a better way to handle it, so I have made that change. I hope you're satisfied with that. Marc Shepherd (talk) 20:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Libro0 and BCG

I think they are calming down a little. Give it a chance. --Apoc2400 (talk) 20:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the 1960s edit. First of all the image was said to be a non-issue on the Mediation Cabal. Secondly, the image was declared suitable for use on Non free content review. Thirdly, not only myself but two other users replaced the image after BCG kept taking it down. Why would you involve yourself in this when it was clearly settled? Regarding the 1981 edit. It is not a compromise solution. I explained to BCG that I began putting up the raw data to all the pages and the writeups were to follow. He did not care and went ahead and tableized the data. The compromise was when I left the tables alone on the decade pages. There are no tables needed for the years after that just the writeups. BCG was not a willing participant in any mediation and is fortunate that they have been lenient with him given what he has done. It makes no sense for you to support all his edits and ask for his ban at the same time. There is no need to edit on his behalf. He will be back in a short while and will no doubt completely revert all the corrections I have made along with all other compliance with wikistyle. Libro0 (talk) 21:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Libro0

I can't see anything that would have provoked this edit. What was it in response to? --Snigbrook ^(talk) 21:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just leave Libro0 alone

I know Libro0 said some mean things to you, but it's quite understandable given the amount of harassment from Baseball Card Guy. That was months ago anyway, and I am sure that if stay away from Libro0 he will do the same. Why are you trying so hard to get Libro0 blocked? This whole mess could end now that BCG has finally been blocked, if you would just stop going after Libro0.

Those baseball card articles are quite obscure anyway, so it's really not a big deal if Libro0 makes some mistake while writing them. It will be corrected by somebody else eventually.

I don't know if you are a sock or not. I wouldn't bet money either way. --Apoc2400 (talk) 20:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Your Radio Enemy. You have new messages at Apoc2400's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

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) 13:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]