User talk:Teh Rote

Uncyclopedia FA Nom

Raising the status of this article rewards Wikipedia vandals because it shows those who come from Uncyclopedia that their work, on Uncyclopedia and off, will lead to recognition on Wikipedia. My work as a vandal fighter will be ruined because this violates the spirit of WP:DENY, in that we are giving attention and recognition to these vandals. I did not launch an attack against Uncyclopedia editors in general, only those who vandalizes here. Unless you count yourself as a vandal here on Wikipedia (in that case, I will have no choice but to report you), I did not attack you. The example you quoted is an apples and oranges scenario, and I will not answer such a fallacious question.

I have stated my position, and I did not attack you. But you DID attack me, and engaged in uncivil behaviors, so...

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia.

And don't you even dare say I violated AGF. I have exhausted my GF already on those Uncyclopedia editors who vandalize Wikipedia.

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 08:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Warning

This is your only warning.
The next time you make a personal attack, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Your assertions that I have repeatedly nominated Uncyclopedia for deletion is absolutely baseless, in addition to being slanderous. I have nominated it only once. While I agree that that situation could have been handled perfectly, that incident alone does not mean I have nominated it many times. Check the AFD archives if you want to.

Secondly, your assertions that I believe every single Uncyclopedia editors are vandals are libelous. It was very clear I was referring to Uncyclopedia editors who vandalize Wikipedia. I reiterate my position that unless you consider yourself as a vandal here on Wikipedia, I did not attack you.

Finally, I have never, ever, said we should follow the spirit of WP:DENY completely. I follow it on a case-by-case basis, and this is a case where I believe we should follow it.

I hereby seriously warn you that if you continue to travel down this path of slander and lies, I will report you to the proper Wikipedia authorities.

Note

I am not sure exactly which comments there is a dispute over. I would encourage you and Arbiteroftruth to both step back and take a breath. I am going to leave Arbiteroftruth the same basic message encouraging him/her to take relax a little as well. Remember, be civil. KnightLago (talk) 01:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Luck, North Carolina

Luck, North Carolina is a real place. I was able to verify this at http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/ and http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/f?p=gnispq:3:::NO::P3_FID:1021305 --Eastmain (talk) 01:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

My Apology

The incident that occurred earlier today was unfortunate, and for that, I apologize. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 04:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

1809 in France‎

Hi, user IngerAlhao merged the data from that article into 1809, forgot to mention that. Cheers. Mion (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It gets better, the merge was opposed on Talk:1809 and for that correct reverted, didn't see that before. Mion (talk) 15:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Teh Rote - see below:

Opposed to merging all Years by Country into Year

Hi BozMo - no objection to making each year consistent (as per 1850), but do not see why Years by County have to be merged into the year (eg 1809 in France) and the many hundreds of other years by country articles. A lot of us have spent substantial time ensuring we have Years by country articles (eg Ireland is very comprehensive) and these articles form a vital part of History by country.

Support 1850 format, but not merging of Years by country articles which stand very much in their own right. Ardfern (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

1809

Have had to restore 1809 in France as it had been merged befiore any discussion completed. If this goes on many hundreds of articles will be lost that are part of History by country. Ardfern (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Mion - You cannot pull down people's articles without any discussion - this is not what Wikipedia is about. This article is part of a series and should not be destroyed. Ardfern (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Jaja ardfern, i admit my mistake, the situation has been corrected, 1809 is also setback to 3 mar. Mion (talk) 15:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

GA review

I reviewed Astrobiology, but did not feel it met the GA criteria. Please contact me with any questions or comments.Mjamja (talk) 19:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Featured portals

Amusing, certainly, but this is a Wikipedia-space page, not really appropriate for WP:FPOC discussion. Cirt (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No prob. Cirt (talk) 20:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks! These are never too late. KnightLago (talk) 23:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

rhymes

My, what a nasty attitude you have. I don't see you making any contributions. I suggest that if you think we should list every one of the tens of thousands of rhymeless words, you should discuss it on the talk page. I don't see what purpose it would serve, nor how you would generate it such a list. Meanwhile we need some way to control the length of the article, and IMO excluding compound words is a good place to start. (After all, it's easy enough to create nonce words that rhyme with them, which is not the case for the other words on the list.) kwami (talk) 00:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Checking undo work

Please be more careful in not undoing the removal of multiple instances of vandalism, as in the article Northwood High School (North Carolina), a change which has been reverted. I assume this was a mistake. -- Michael Devore (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

V Tech Massacre review

I have reverted your addition to Wikipedia:Article alerts/News. Items must be of interest to more than just a few wikiprojects, per the first bullet of Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/News. Feel free to contact individual WikiProjects however. If they are already subscribed to the Article Alerts, and have tagged Talk:Virginia Tech Massacre with their banners, they will be notified through the daily reports. Thanks. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 15:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:RUN

You have made valuable contributions to Wikiproject Running in the past, and we would appreciate you re-engaging. We've made a number of improvements lately including adopting assessment and importance parameters on the template that we place on the talk page of our articles. The project page has been updated to automatically chart the number of articles that have been assessed, and to use bots to provide us with alerts regarding project articles. We are also experimenting with bots that tag articles in project-related categories. However, bots can never replace skilled editors such as you. Please check in and lend a hand. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 18:59, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedia has a userbox available for you, Teh Rote

	This user is a member of WikiProject Wikipedia dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of itself.

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/userbox/UserWikiProjectWikipedia}}

Pandelver (talk) 15:19, 12 March 2011 (UTC)