User talk:Dpark
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Chandler's Dad
I hope you didn't think any of my displeasure over this issue was directed at you. I was irritated by that other bloke who, it seemed to me, was just trying to assert some non-existant authority without actually contributing anything. Basically being a prat for the sake of talking. But I felt we were having a fair discussion over something we disagree over. I'm happy to leave it, because neither of us seem capable of proving their point to the other. Hope ypu don't take all that the wrong way.--Crestville 01:26, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
No. I understood your point, even though I disagreed. I didn't take anything you said in a bad way. As for the other guy, I just completely ignored him, because he didn't seem to have anything to say about the actual topic of discussion. Dpark 05:52, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thanks for the edit. from one jazz to another.
Thanks for your support in the USA wiki.
I added some text there, hope you get a chance to revew it...
--Cuimalo 03:49, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] recent USA edit...
hope you dont mind the most recent edit i made, aboutthe ladn itself... Gabrielsimon 04:31, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I thought the comment was fine, but I did change "relativly useless" to "unused". I think the lands they recieved were useful, but they weren't really used at the time. Sound good? -- Dpark 04:50, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
can we change it to barren then mayhaps? Gabrielsimon 05:02, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Was is actually barren then? The dust bowl didn't actually happen until the 1930s, as a result of improper farming and a drought. I'm not sure what the land was like when the Native Americans were relocated there. -- Dpark 05:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
they were sent to a desert region quite simmilar if not exactly the badlands. more or less lands thath e US governent didnt want. Gabrielsimon 05:21, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Image doesn't comply with Wikipedia's policy
About the image on the anal sex page, take a look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Profanity . It's a page about the Profanity policy in Wikipedia. --Alberto msr 00:54, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Template:StargateTopics
I don't think yours is as pretty as mine. 
Tomertalk 23:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- Heh, I agree, but I think it just makes the whole thing readable (which is the end point). Staxringold 23:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think you, Stax and I were all editing it at the same time. If you guys think the color scheme is worth discussing further, perhaps we should take it to Template talk:StargateTopics. Like I said, I'm not particularly attached to mine, and like you said, I don't think it's worth fighting over, but if it is going to be a matter of wider discussion, we should probably let the wider community know the discussion is going on... That said, the wikiquette for where to reply to comments on your talk page is to reply somewhere. I prefer replies to my posts to be made to my talkpage, since I don't check my talk page nearly as frequently as I do my watchlist, and I get a notification whenever I receive a new msg. That said, my watchlist includes all the usertalk pages I've left messages on, so I see whenever anyone, including the user to whom I've left the message, edits their talk page...so, either way, I eventually find replies to my posts...I just find them faster if you leave them on my talkpage. :-) Tomertalk 00:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- Something bizarre is going on...please see Template talk:StargateTopics#Colors... You might also be interested in {{User WPStargate}}... Tomertalk 00:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think you, Stax and I were all editing it at the same time. If you guys think the color scheme is worth discussing further, perhaps we should take it to Template talk:StargateTopics. Like I said, I'm not particularly attached to mine, and like you said, I don't think it's worth fighting over, but if it is going to be a matter of wider discussion, we should probably let the wider community know the discussion is going on... That said, the wikiquette for where to reply to comments on your talk page is to reply somewhere. I prefer replies to my posts to be made to my talkpage, since I don't check my talk page nearly as frequently as I do my watchlist, and I get a notification whenever I receive a new msg. That said, my watchlist includes all the usertalk pages I've left messages on, so I see whenever anyone, including the user to whom I've left the message, edits their talk page...so, either way, I eventually find replies to my posts...I just find them faster if you leave them on my talkpage. :-) Tomertalk 00:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Eggstone
Yeah, I saw that the article had reappeared, but left it alone bcz it was actually legitimate this time. Good job on keeping your eyes peeled tho :-) Tomertalk 21:47, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Weasel words
The redirect sounds like a sensible compromise. Go ahead and do that. Crotalus horridus 20:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Impressive
Thanks! I do what I can :).--Sean|Black 00:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Opening MB photo
I just added a group of MBs in the opening of Merit badge collecting (BSA). Let me know what you think on the article's talk page. Thanks. Rlevse 01:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] United States of America
Hi, I rolled back your rvv of the United States of America article. Someone is monkeying around with the redirects and I'm not sure what's going on with it. If you think you were right, just put it back, but the USA links were all linking in a circle and the text was in limbo. I think. --DanielCD 22:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Giving it a second look, I think I got it right. Vandals can make messes with those redirects (good thing most don't know how). --DanielCD 22:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- I guess I missed all this yesterday. In any event, it's correct now. United States is the main article, and has been for quite some time. Occassionally someone does a cut-and-paste move to United States of America, but that one's supposed to be a redirect. That was decided some time ago (before I even started editing, I believe). -- Dpark 15:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Cool. I noticed it when I was on my way out the door yesterday and didn't have time to look closely. I noticed "United States" as a red link in one article, and, puzzled, I couldn't find the US page. I thought the text should be somewhere, so I just left it at "US of A" as a temp and left you the message thinking you might be able to double check. But glad it's all fixed. --DanielCD 16:06, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Oceania
Thanks for removing the "browser bar" template on the Oceania page. I thought it was obnoxious but worried it might have been the result of some "official" policy direction, so I left it alone. rodii 17:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
- No problem. And nope, it's apparently not any kind of concensus or policy. It looks like the guy who created it has decided to spread it all over the place. I probably removed it from 20 pages. (It's still on a ton of other portals and category pages, though.) -- Dpark 17:54, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] America vs. Americas
Greetings, Dpark,
Seems you've been around a bit and probably have the answers.
1) I saw in the history of the America disambiguation page you had put the USA reference before the continent reference. It's since been changed. I agree with your order; what happened?
When you have a chance, I'd appreciate your help. Dblomgren 02:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re : Steve Pavlina article
I suggest that going to deletion review would be a better idea. You may or may not have a case here - IMO Alexa rankings aren't as solid proof as they used to be, it would be good if you can provide further reliable, independent sources on the article in question. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 12:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
