Jump to content

User talk:SaltyBoatr: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 87: Line 87:
==Thanks for the serious effort==
==Thanks for the serious effort==
Though we may disagree on specific aspects of how Hillary Clinton's relationship with Media Matters should be handled. I appreciate your fair-minded and thoughtful approach to the subject. Regards. [[User:Badmintonhist|Badmintonhist]] ([[User talk:Badmintonhist|talk]]) 20:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Though we may disagree on specific aspects of how Hillary Clinton's relationship with Media Matters should be handled. I appreciate your fair-minded and thoughtful approach to the subject. Regards. [[User:Badmintonhist|Badmintonhist]] ([[User talk:Badmintonhist|talk]]) 20:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

== I responded to you ==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:81.100.215.14_reported_by_User:The_Four_Deuces_.28Result:_31h.29

I would really appreciate it if you could tell me how to make a proper complaint about these editors.--[[Special:Contributions/81.100.215.14|81.100.215.14]] ([[User talk:81.100.215.14|talk]]) 13:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:29, 17 May 2010

Welcome to the User talkpage of SaltyBoatr

If you email me, be aware that even if I am actively editing, it may be a day or two before you receive a reply.
If you message me on this page, I will probably reply on this page. If I messaged you on your page, please reply there.

*Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
*Comment about the content of a specific article on the Talk: page of that article, and not here.
*Sign your post using four tildes ( ~~~~ )

Rezon8 Living

Am hoping for some clarification of your suggestion for deletion. Information that paints an accurate picture does not in and of itself equal Vanity because it is positive. I would suggest that WIKI being what it is, others will no doubt be able to contribute and that, in doing so, an accurate picture is revealed. You want to talk about vanity? How has the Billy Mann entry been allowed to exist for so long? Also, the IKEA page is not without certain negative aspects that seem a bit unnecessary, yet continue to exist. Thanks, Dean.

TUSC token b2b7c4679cceebaba3eea1f39739e896

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

TUSC token 7aaa90f5dff35780fe0322a027d0a238

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

IP Vandal

Thanks for the notice about the IP-hopping of the vandal. I'll add the other IPs to the list of suspected socks. --4wajzkd02 (talk) 19:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledgment for your long efforts

Rawles

Having looked into this a bit... My call is that Rawles actually is marginally notable. The problem is that Trasel is trying to make him seem far more notable than he actually is. That's his COI influencing his editing. Patience and a lot of re-writing is what is needed. I think Trasel will be more willing to cooperate if he feels that we are not trying to "attack" his friend... but simply trying to produce a tight, well written article about his friend. Blueboar (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you finished editing the article?
OK thanks Blueboar (talk) 04:30, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link requested

This request might get buried in all the other discussion: The link I found for this ratings is MUCH different than the 5 simple categories you provided in the discussion. So please provide me with a specific link you are using that shows the criteria they used to arrive at the rankings shown in the graphic you are wanting to insert. That's not unreasonable to ask, is it? Niteshift36 (talk) 22:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I expected nothing less from you

The ANI trip was completely predictable. You can't even conceed that trying to close a RfC after a couple of hours is hasty, can you? Niteshift36 (talk) 16:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Stalk me if it entertains you, I reminded one of the participants in the discussion that it is still going on (so he already knew about it) and notified an editor with nearly 100 edits to the article (making him a fairly significant recent contributor) that a discussion he may be interested in. It was done in a non-POV manner, thus not a violation of WP:CANVAS. However, I do feel that it is not WP:CIVIL of you to address the subject in the edit summary of an edit not related to the topic, rather then addressing it in the discussion or on my talk page. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found your last response to be encouraging and I think there is still hope that this can be resolved in a way that both of us find acceptable. Niteshift36 (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SaltyBoatr. You have new messages at JPMcGrath's talk page.
Message added 01:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ranchos of California

Thanks for the award, and for all the good work you are doing. Emargie (talk) 01:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WorldNetDaily RS/N

I have recently referenced your comments offered in the RS/N discussion(s) on WorldNetDaily WP:RS considerations within a related issue being discussed in the RS/N "talk" page. This message is to notify you of that reference and to both solicit and encourage any further contributions you might have in this matter. Thanks. --JakeInJoisey (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Side note on hutaree

User Went against consensus again and i Reverted and handed out a warning, i think these are the proper way to continue dialogue if he reverts again. Weaponbb7 (talk) 02:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addition to Hutaree article

Hi SaltyBoatr, I just reinserted the reference to the teachings of the Christian church in the Hutaree article. I think I reworded the reference a little more neutrally from the last reference. I was wondering if you could please review, and if possible, comment on my reversion. Thanks, Scott P. (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second Amendment IP problem

Could you revert our new friend? I'm at three reverts already or I'd do it myself. The admins were kind enough to semiprotect the article for a few hours to help us get him talking. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection

Considering the current edit war, do you want the 2A article locked? If so, I'll make the request as a neutral party. SMP0328. (talk) 21:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SaltyBoatr. You have new messages at Immunize's talk page.
Message added 14:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Regarding the John Burch society Immunize (talk) 14:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the serious effort

Though we may disagree on specific aspects of how Hillary Clinton's relationship with Media Matters should be handled. I appreciate your fair-minded and thoughtful approach to the subject. Regards. Badmintonhist (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:81.100.215.14_reported_by_User:The_Four_Deuces_.28Result:_31h.29

I would really appreciate it if you could tell me how to make a proper complaint about these editors.--81.100.215.14 (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]