User talk:KelleyCook
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
|---|---|---|
| Volume 2, Issue 4 • April 30, 2008 | ||
|
||
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Subscribe | ||
Contents |
[edit] History of iPhone
Please explain why you think this is irrelevant and NPOV. Many in the privacy sphere think this is pretty astounding, that US CURRENCY is not allowed to be used for a purchase. I think it is an extremely relevant point of interest for this secondary iPhone page. Not too mention, I am simply stating fact - not some rumor. IF you would like me to add additional references to this fact I will do so.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.197.70.15 (talk) 19:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
You still have not given any reasons for your constant removal of facts from this article. Apple not accepting US currency is a fact, and its pretty neutral - Apple has acknowledged and defended their practice, and its in accordance with federal law. I don't know why you are so agitated by this addition. This article is the best place for this fact, since the main iPhone article does not mention price whatsoever. This isn't the KelleyCook encyclopedia, anyone is allowed to make changed that are sourced, accurate and neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.197.70.15 (talk) 14:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on History of the iPhone. 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 a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.
[edit] NOTHOWTO removals on XP-SP3
I think you're not being consistent in your XP SP3 not-how-to removals. In particular, it's strange that you allow the "Microsoft Dynamics Retail Management System" note to remain while you remove other notes. See the XP discussion page for more information about this comment. Thanks. --TedPavlic | talk 20:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- Responded at Talk:Windows XP -- KelleyCook (talk) 21:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Cracking program references to iPhone will be added, no matter what you want
Hi. I saw you reverted my edit to the iPhone page about the cracking product ZiPhone. ZiPhone is of course by far the way easiest method to crack the iPhone. I have no affiliation with this product at all, except from using it to crack my brand-new iPhone in about 4 minutes (which is the time the product uses to crack it - it takes about one second to find the button named "Do it all!"). You said "revert link to single product". Well, how do you want it? I can add links to multiple products, I can make a sole page of such products (as with List of Wii modchips) with a link to it from the iPhone page, or whatever you want - Just give me some acceptable-for-you. But do NOT try to come in the way of freedom of information - I suspect you're an Apple-employee trying to hinder such information to be available, and if this is the case, I will make sure it is noticed far and wide. Damn - such editing like you did here pisses me so extremely off: it is so obvious that there is some second agenda WAY besides serving the world's information needs. Stolsvik (talk) 11:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Sometimes the best response is to say nothing at all. -- KelleyCook (talk) 13:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Why?
I would like to ask why you took away my iTunes screen shot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mczack26 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Simply because the infobox was not designed for two screenshots and was breaking the layout. I personally do not care which one is up there. Feel free to switch them, though that might irritate someone else, or integrate it into the article or put it on iTunes version history which doesn't have any pictures at all. -- KelleyCook (talk) 00:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Convert and the 9.2 inch Howitzer
Hi KelleyCook, I reverted your edits to the Artillery article where you tried to fix the link broken by Lightmouse's script. The last two edits to the article before yours were vandalism, I think, so I was going to revert yours as well as the vandalism first and then put your fix back in (note; you left an extra inch there). However, I don't think the name of this weapon was the right place for a conversion so I removed the convert template call altogether. My edit summary says I was reverting the two vandal edits and one good faith edit - yet I got just your edit. Twinkle got the best of me there. Your edit was the good faith one. Just wanted to clear that up. Bleakcomb (talk) 04:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- No offense taken, but thanks for the update. -- KelleyCook (talk) 02:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Please remove Pinouts.ru link spam
Seems that the pinouts.ru website has link-spammed 89 Wikipedia pages.
A quick investigation shows that this site was started in 2004 replicating the content of historical sites such as HardwareBook and Technick.net (now moved to AllPinous.org). But the worse thing is that some pinouts.ru pages are replicating the Wikipedia content, violating the GNU Free Documentation License (i.e.:. http://pinouts.ru/Slots/apple_adb_pinout.shtml). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.203.190.226 (talk) 11:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- pinouts.ru is not link spam, but its information generally should be integrated into the article (and possibly referenced from there) and not in a External Link section. Meanwhile your open proxy has been closed. -- KelleyCook (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] FairPlay
Hi, I found this edit of yours: [1]. When you find an error, why don't you fix it instead of just deleting everything? Don't you think that deleting information others have entered is kind of bad? Paluv (talk) 12:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Reply at User talk:Paluv. -- KelleyCook (talk) 14:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thank you very much for your reply. It would be great if you could add the information yourself, as you suggested. Finding a reference at a regular webserver is difficult, though, as the creator is afraid of repercussions by Apple and so he made his website a freenet host (so the url doesn't start with http, and you need a special program to see it. URL is: [freenet:USK@GSQgFDoeQUG0cSkbUVYYkB-ssqEEavRdo-RDVEAm0jk,rVvV3LjSZq3UNdGJrrup~~ZBPq4ohBhJeKkREXDLULw,AQACAAE/requiem/-1/]). The program really exists, and works, though - I've tried it out. The only other link I have found is at "the pirate bay", and I'm not sure whether we can make links to that place, as there is a lot of illegal software distribution going on there (URL: [2]). Thanks for your help. Paluv (talk) 17:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] April 2008
In my talk page you wrote: Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. I'm sorry, but if you just had bothered to check the iPhone article history you could have noticed that I never added anything to it. At some point I just removed two words that I identified as (and really are) wishful thinking. Next time please check the facts before launching false accusations, personal attacks, groundless and ridicuolus Request for Comments and so forth. Thank you. Femmina (talk) 23:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, well, disregard the above. I'm becoming senile. Forgetting things and all. I already commented to you on the same thing [3] a month ago, but I never received a proper reply (did I?) and so I forgot that I already wrote to you altoghether. I didn't log in for some time after that discussion and I didn't notice the RfC you wrote about me until yesterday or so. Nice thing you made. Femmina (talk) 00:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 802.11a
Hi, after you submitted the 802.11 page another guy (Strength of Nations) added a comparison chart with the speed and range different wifi standards use/have.
The strangest thing however is while 802.11g and 802.11n use the same frequency for transmitting (2,4Ghz) he claims it should have almost twice the range (outdoor 250m vs. 140m).
Do you think he's correct in this assumption or should the page be edited? Thank you. Iberned (talk) 16:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Splitting of The O2
Hi KelleyCook. I noticed that you have started a proposal to split part of the article, The O2. I just thought I should let you know that I have started a discussion regarding this on the article's talk page. Thanks. Tbo 157(talk) 18:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
