User talk:Nakon/arc1

:O

Why the rename? Though your name will be incredibly easier to search for now. You have no idea. :P Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 00:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to synchronise all of my online accounts. I do agree that this one is much easier to remember and find. Nakon 00:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is with great enthusiasm that I remove your name from WP:MW [1]. Welcome back. hbdragon88 (talk) 06:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back. :) Glad to see you're active here too. :) Acalamari 00:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also ditto the welcoming back. 哦，是吗？(O-person) 00:53, 10 January 2008 (GMT)

Yes, better name. Welcome back (and thanks for reverting vandalism on my page today) -- Alexf^{(Talk/Contribs)} 17:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin?

Hi Nakon, are you an admin? No one seems to be checking Administrator intervention against vandalism, where can I find someone who'll check it and block users? Thanks. :) Somno (talk) 01:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it. Nakon 01:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have also discovered WP:AN as a way to get the attention of administrators. Somno (talk) 01:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns

I addressed your concerns but a bot wiped them out to the archive. -- ALLSTARecho 01:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd check with User:Viridae and see but given your response, I don't have a problem with adding +rollbacker. Nakon 01:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- ALLSTARecho 01:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFR

I cannot beat you to giving rollback! :) jj137 ^♠ 02:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section

Excuse Me?!?!

Who gives you the right to delete my page on WHYPIQUE. FOR YOUR INFORMATION we are trying to spread the word so it catches on which is the only way to get it into the dictionary, and we can't do that if you delete our page. i find this extremely rude of you to decide what i can and cannot put on wikipedia. it is a violation of freedom of speech which is a right I INTEND ON KEEPING.

The page falls under the "Patent Nonsense" (G1) part of the speedy deletion policy. Articles that are utter nonsense are deleted immediately. If you continue to recreate the article, you will be blocked from editing. Nakon 05:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your orange signature

I didn't notice your signature at the end of your message on my talk page, being in orange and my eyes are not good, I thought it was from Homologeo but I reverted myself and have commented. Thanks, SqueakBox 06:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me about my signature. I'll try and make it more readable. Nakon 06:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback-cat

Awwww. But the Rollback-cat was awesome!! --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 06:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was so awesome it jumped to the Wikipedia Talk: namespace. Nakon 06:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw. I had to say something though for removing it. Granted I fully understand why you did. Long live Rollback-Cat! --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 06:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Your Note Concerning Editing of Adult-Child Sex

I responded to your comment and warning on my Talk Page. ~ Homologeo (talk) 06:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adult-child sex

You might as well lock the page again. The first thing that happened was somebody rewrote large sections inserting POV, without any discussion on the talk page, followed by 3 reverts. <sigh> I find it rather frustrating when people aren't willing to admit that they might have some POV problems. Pairadox (talk) 06:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will be watching the page closely. If I detect that it is getting out of hand, a few people are going to take some time off from this site. I really don't like locking page for extended periods of time but if I have to, so be it. Nakon 06:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do you recommend that we proceed? Considering that the users insisting on the new intro and definition are not addressing the concerns expressed by others? If there's no response to legitimate comments and reverting is no longer allowed, how are we supposed to bring this article back up to shape? ~ Homologeo (talk) 06:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Is there any way to get it back to the form it was in when it was unlocked, before the unilateral changes made without discussion or consensus? I feel really strongly that any changes after the unlock need to be discussed and agreed upon. Otherwise SqueakBox "wins" just for being the first to make changes. Pairadox (talk) 06:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to User:Homologeo, perhaps you could try Wikipedia:Neutrality Project. That wikiproject may be able to help rewrite the intro into something neutral. In response to User:Pairadox, I'll compare the differences and see if it needs to be reverted. Nakon 06:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever your decision, thank you for giving it consideration. Pairadox (talk) 07:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why the delete?

Hi you just deleted an article I was working on, just wondered why? In my opinion Sleepy Town Manufacture are worthy of a wikipedia entry and I think the rules about band entries are a little vague and open to objective decisions about who is worthy and who is not of having an entry. Let me know, I would like to be able to write the page up to a quality standard. Thanks (User Talk: Lowflyingowl)

Hi, I removed the page as it did not contain an assertion of notability. For more information, please see the Speedy Deletion policy (A7).

Comment

I originally posted this on the page where the discussion was taking place, but ran into an edit conflict.

I'm not sure if I can present some clarification here and if not I apologize. TTN has been vandal editing (see the 3RR rfc, ani, and I believe an rfar, cases against him), and because of this I have stepped back from many of the issues surrounding him. I went and read the rules pertaining to the privilege of this feature before I used the few times I had, and I want to state that I would not use it on an established editor. The TTN issue goes way back and probably requires more time than you all have to review it. However, if you all deem it necessary to revoke this privilege, I will (not because I have to) accept that. Please reconsider my edits overall and not just the issue of TTN. --Maniwar (talk) 23:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it was fair to just base the decision on this one case. The issues surrounding TTN are vast, but again, I would not use it on him or another user. And my history will show that to be the case. I have made mistakes early on in my editing, but like any editor, I have grown and will continue to do so. Please reconsider if you will the decision. Cheers! ----Maniwar (talk) 23:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd recommend discussing the removal with the admin that did so. Nakon 23:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who was it? Thanks --Maniwar (talk) 23:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move

How bout instead of undoing my obviously constructive edits, just moving the pages yourself? Now I'm not going to do anything else to this page, because your actions are discouraging and pointlessCosprings (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've been warned before against moving pages via copying and pasting. Please do not do so in the future. If you would like help moving a page, please see Help:Moving a page. Nakon 23:33, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:68.114.62.96

I believe you did not leave a message to this IP for vandalizing; I thought you suppose to leave a message that s/he were blocked.[link] --Antonio Lopez ^(talk) 00:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They'll receive a message when they try to edit. Nakon 00:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK --Antonio Lopez ^(talk) 00:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Doczilla (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe you need to check your reversions a bit closer in the future. Nakon 01:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you need to read what you're reverting. I doubt a man who was in Congress in the 1980s invented peanut butter. Doczilla (talk) 01:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you check here, you will see that I am removing the content. Nakon 01:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol. I see what happened. You and I had tried to fix the same vandalism at about the same time. You fixed it but the program I'm using undid your edit, and then I just kept misinterpreting what I was looking at. Sorry about that, chief. Doczilla (talk) 01:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]