User talk:ArglebargleIV
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Permanent link archiving :
- Archive 1, through January 31, 2007
- Archive 2, through June 10, 2007
- Archive 3, through September 24, 2007
- Archive 4, through December 17, 2007
Please add new comments at the bottom of this page, and sign them.
Although Wikipedia itself is not censored, I reserve the right to delete offensive obscenity and deliberately disruptive edits. If you're just complaining about me, though, I'll leave it on here, I've nothing to hide. (Except my real name, of course.) -- ArglebargleIV 22:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Super Bowl Winning Head Coaches
Thanks for the heads up. I actually just started the article about 20 minutes ago and used the MVP list as a starting point and just edited the names. It should be almost updated now. Also, it looked like the NBA had a separate list, so I figured the NFL one should be separate. If people decide to add it to the Super Bowl article, that's fine but its pretty long as is so I would advise against it. Jairuscobb (talk) 23:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Btw, just curious, how did you find my article so quickly? It isn't linked to anything yet...
- Jairuscobb (talk) 23:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cars 2 AFD
no problem ... I was going to drop an AFD notification on your talk page, but I won't litter your backyard now that you've noticed it. Regards User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Sony Ericsson S500
An editor has nominated Sony Ericsson S500, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sony Ericsson S500 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 00:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Practise and practice
Hi! Thanks for letting me know about this. I actually changed it because I thought that someone had just got the two confused, I honestly didn't know that it's different in American English. Strikes me as a bit stupid that it didn't even cross my mind. I'll be more careful about it in future. Thanks for letting me know! 172.143.153.74 (talk) 19:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if I'm doing this right but I'm trying to reply to your message about deleting the article submitted. As you can see I'm new to this and apologize if botched the whole article/file uploading process. I added a summary to the file pic thinking that was the actual article. Then I searched for the name and found the Nurit article and saw that it was scarce so I added to it thinking I was adding another article under the guise of the name alone. I will take time out to go through the links you supplied in the message you originally sent when I first signed up.
Thanks and sorry again for the confusion. Sweetpublishing 22:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC) Sweetpublishing
[edit] Thanks for helping in the CIA chaos
IIt's becoming almost impossible to track what is happening in the edit wars over the CIA articles, but it appears you were putting in some stability and helping control massive deletions without discussion. For that, I thank you.
It's a bit saddening that there has been an explosion by some, treating the matter as something that suddenly happened, when there have been requests for sources/source improvement, or disagreement about some allegations assumed true by the fact they have been said, yet people who made massive deletions had not commented on such queries, a month or more old.
It seemed wise and civil for me to touch base with everyone involved in this situation, hoping that some personal contact may calm the storming seas. I can only say that my intention, in working with original CIA articles and those that I spun off when it became impossibly large, is to improve NPOV and reliable sourcing. I would be happy to have any rational discussion on the issues, be they in talk pages or email.
If I have an agenda, it is to introduce, into discussion of "CIA", that it does not always act unilaterally, but is following directions from the White House, and that it does things, such as !surprise! intelligence analysis. That agenda, unfortunately, appears to conflict with some that have a POV that the CIA is the incarnation of evil, any allegation of impropriety must be true, and to question this is "whitewashing". The CIA, and the US government, have, at times, done ugly things, but things of beauty at other times. In other words, I see this area in shades of gray, rather than blackening or whitewashing. TS Eliot's phrase "An Infinity of Mirrors" has been used, more than once, to describe the world of intelligence, which is not always a secret one.
Again, thanks for being bold enough to be involved in this mess. I hope we can get it back to some level of civility and valued content, perhaps with some way to link to the questionable allegations that some people want present, with perhaps less reliable sourcing. You may have noticed that the Military History project has started an Intelligence Task Force, and we are trying to improve the content of quite a few articles, not CIA alone. Unfortunately, some Wikipedia content in this area is more based on Hollywood than reality.
And yes...sometimes I believe reality is a crutch for those who cannot handle science fiction. :-)
Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 23:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thank You
I'm sorry for being a twirp to the other Wikipedia contributors and I hope that you and I can be online buddies. You've been very helpful to me, being new here and all. Thanks a bunch.
User:Creamy3 (talk) 9 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:EBL team
A tag has been placed on Template:EBL team requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Four colour theorem
Exclaves have to be surrounded by alien territory, which is why I didn't think of Hawaii. Of course, Alaska is as correct as Kaliningrad is, though I suspect neither is technically correct. Relata refero (talk) 17:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Creamy Army
Hi ArglebargleIV. Would you like to join the Creamy Army WikiProject? If so send me a message and just add your name to the list of participants. The only requirements to be in this fantastic group is that you have to change your username to something with the word, "Creamy" in it. If you do join, you'll find yourself with a high ranking position within the group. All the best to you and yours. Creamy3 (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] How dare you
My information was not bogus, maybe if you made a trip to your local library you could find the book Murder in Kazachestan. Please check the validity of such things before you go attacking me next time.Creamy4 (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Your allegations make me sad.Creamy4 (talk) 23:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] copyrights
Oh my god, I'm so sorry. I will be completely original from now on. Creamy3 (talk) 19:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ISM Boston
I have just removed the Executives listed on our page. I am trying to use the exact same tone as Avenue A/Razorfish, which is a similar type of company and has a page here on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismboston (talk • contribs) 13:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] (Refactored to new section)
Hey! I used quotes and citations. I had references. You deleted them. I intentionally began the site and it was still under construction when you deleted it. It was less than 12 hours old! You need to not be so quick to the draw and I do not appreciate you leaving that ticky note on my page. If you are going to edit other people's work, you need to do it with care and tact. I do not appreciate working on other sites to update information only to get my brand-new stub slammed. I worked several hours to finish other work on desegregation. It was not for you to delete the three references and multiple quotes that I wanted to keep. As I am in the middle of something, I find it very annoying to have to spend time recreating that little bit. Legal may not be your cup of tea, but obviously you can quote things. I obviously used quotations and references. Do NOT get in an editing war and delete others' work in such a heavy-handed fashion. If I did not have History on my pc undeleted, I would be very annoyed. As it is, I am reporting you. Behave. This is open-season, but be kind. Compassion can go a long way. Slm1202000 (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Response on your talk page. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 03:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I have looked over your very heavy-handed deletions of my Introduction and your poor editing style in quotations on the rest. If you are going to change something, do not leave fragments, improper citations, and nasty messages. I am glad you went back and corrected somethings, but this is highly irregular. Do not add more to my messaging over this, as I stated. It needs to go to dispute resolution. I did not take original research as you have incorrectly assumed. You did not do your research before you began hammering at me, and I find that inappropriate. Thank you for spending several hours editing for Wikipedia. I am sure you can do nice things. If you look at my history, I tend to add to others sites, usually references. You can clean up someone's work without becoming contentious as you did on my site. If you had simply edited appropriately without the need for further drama this would have been resolved better. I feel very upset by what you said. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slm1202000@yahoo.com (talk • contribs) 04:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Also, I removed your new introduction, as it was wrong. Coit v. Green was not hinged on the compunction that private schools resulted in segregation as much as it was about taxes. What I summarized in three paragraphs took a host of U.S. Supreme Court Justices multiple pages to write. If you do not believe me, check out Supreme Court Opinions. Cornell Law School has a fabulous Internet library. While you are at it, please check on the other legal cases that you might want to edit, BEFORE you edit. Giving inappropriate information is silly. If you are willing to edit, be willing to read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slm1202000@yahoo.com (talk • contribs) 04:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't write that new introduction. It was what was left over after I removed non-original material. --- ArglebargleIV (talk) 04:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
The original material was written by me, as I had read over the case information. The paragraph that is left NOW is still part of the original material. YOU left a paragraph that was completely misguiding readers as to what the entire work was about. You need to read the case law before you edit cases. Legal work that is many pages in length is not easy to summarize, and although these hits probably help its notability, Coit v. Green is important but not as long as other works. I cannot say that the three-to-four paragraphs were direct copies. Those were what I wrote trying to summarize for my own notes. The IRS information that you completely removed was dry, but quick to the point. If someone else has happened to pull data together similarly in order to say in short verse what the case was about, that is hardly that remarkable. It involved the IRS. IRS should be written somewhere on the page. It was about taxing purposes, and not that difficult to summarize shortly. You did not read any of it before you edited it to suit your own purposes, which is not the point of a quality Wikipedia article. The work was concise but it did not need to be wordy. I spent a lot of time taking the effort to clean up that site. I would have been irked by its being completing erroneous after you got through, but I would not have made any comment on your site had you not left a ticky note. It was NOT my "original research" or my record. It was public record. It is usable. It was quoted, referenced, and researched, albeit still under construction. I will fix it at some point if you do not get a chance to read the full texts. This is a great page to go to if you have any more editing to do on legal sites: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slm1202000@yahoo.com (talk • contribs) 04:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] REASONS TO KEEP AND A QUESTION
I find, that after I corrected mistakes, why you think it should be deleted. I am open to suggestions and edits, but I think it should still be kept. This page shows the inportance of who made it, what it represents, the website in general, it shows how Jack Zhang was involved, the game,and the content. It was written to the wishes of many people from different websites to explain the generals about www.smashbros.com. Howver, it should be added to, but not deleted. PLEASE. Well, that concludes my reasons. This is a helpful to people. Please comment. Thanks! (I wish you didn't judge so quickly)
[edit] Your NPWatcher application
Dear ArglebargleIV,
Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.
MBisanz talk 19:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Request for Mediation?
Hello - I am alerting you that we are preparing a Request for Mediation regarding Gavin.collins. BOZ (talk) 04:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- I am alerting you that we are now considering a Request for Arbitration regarding him as an alternative to mediation, and would like your opinion on the matter. BOZ (talk) 13:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] changes you made
One thing that you fail to realize is that the Canadian idol singing talent show is a lot more American than you realise, CTV is simply the broadcaster. Actually its a company in the UK who owns the rights to the talent show. This is why i feel it has no business being included in the Music of Canada page. It should be deleted. The artists do however belong there, but in your writing it sometime seems that your writing for an advertisement. Also please refrain from being so agressive. Be nice. The information you are writing is wrong, my point of view is right and correct. Please remove or change the article so its more acceptable to be on that page. Perhaps you think Walmart is Canadian too ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theblackwatch (talk • contribs) 08:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Spammed article for your watchlist
Noting your interest in keeping Canterbury University of the Seychelles on the straight & narrow, might I invite you to add Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument to it as well. It's the same MO - a COI snake oil saleswoman appended what amounted to spam; I've turned it around by adding input from a couple of academic papers which debunk the whole thing. I anticipate the last has not been heard of the original poster...thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Frosty, Heidi & Frank
Maybe I'm confused, but how is the addition of material like "One couple claimed that both men where at the verge of complete intoxication and could not seem to keep their hands of each other..." a reversion of vandalism? - Jmabel | Talk 17:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Responded to at User talk:Jmabel. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 20:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:FICT archival
There was only one topic I archived which had any comments from less than 5 days ago. If you want to pull it back out of the archive, then go ahead. The talk page was nearly half a megabyte, however, so I consider that 75% size trim the minimum we needed to do. --erachima talk 19:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] User:ArglebargleIV
I see this page has been a pretty frequent target of vandalism. Would you like me to semi-protect it? Toddst1 (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Australian Idol
Oh! Lol! Sorry I didn't notice that earlier... I didn't realize that the move tab was there LOL! Thanks for the advice! Smiley Miley Disney (talk) 18:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] American Idol
This time a simple undo to the redirect does the job, and the person who made the mistake gets to go and remake their subsequent edits on the correct title (their problem, and a far easier solution that 14 (un)deletes). However, clearly there's going to be repeated problems with this c/p move at present, and so I've taken the unusual step of fully protecting the (season X) articles as redirects to the by-year articles for now until things are worked out in a settled fashion. At that point, I will unprotect all the titles to allow editorial things to happen in the normal manner, or standard requests can be made. Note that this revert+protect is solely to prevent repeated c/p moves in the interregnum and not because I am choosing one title over the other. I would invite, however, suggestions as to why 2 brand new accounts (ie non-autoconfirmed and so unable to do proper moves) have done exactly the same thing in a matter of days. Splash - tk 19:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] HOW DARE YOU SPELL JAMES MATHIESON'S NAME WRONGLY!
HOW DARE YOU CHANGE IT BACK YOU FREAK! LOOK AT THE "OFFICIAL" WEBSITE YOU DUMBASS: http://www.ten.com.au/ten/people_jamesmathieson.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.240.136 (talk) 05:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- My response is on your talk page. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 11:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from WPVI-TV. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 193.174.33.200 (talk) 03:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Charice Pempengco
Please don't remove her Paul O'Grady performance because that is as significant as her Ellen and Oprah appearance. Thanks a lot, buddy. Thanks also for accommodating my entries. Coolwhiz
[edit] Clay Aiken
I didn't intentionally put any reference to Britishcampaignfurniture. If I did so, it was entirely a mistake. I was researching it at the same time.Kitchawan (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
