User talk:Bulldog123: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:56, 16 November 2010

Welcome!

Hello, Bulldog123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Angr (tɔk) 13:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:The_angel_size_18.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:The_angel_size_18.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Bulldog123/Archive1

List of X-Americans

I've warned the editors in question that if I see them adding unsourced or poorly sourced material about living people again to the List of X-Americans articles, I will block them. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've started some talk on WP:Lists that you might want to give input on. Frankly there are just some groups on wikipedia that seem incessant on holding on to things in the face of all policy, logic, and good sense. See OS-Tan as an example. 3 attempts, not a reliable source to be found and we can't get the article deleted, because apparently they're just too cute so everyone thinks we should keep them.--Crossmr (talk) 10:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you eliminated most of the people listed on the List of Laotian Americans. You left a bunch of non Lao such as Vang Pao and deleted all of the famous and successful Lao Americans. Why did you do this? I reviewed the old list myself and almost all of those deleted where legitimate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arizona lao (talk • contribs) 00:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your idea on my talk page

Of course, what you did with List of Austrian Americans or List of Brazilian Americans is very acceptable and you will notice I had no problem with them. I do the same thing with other lists what I watch. I do not have the time/resources to do generally do this work, but if you do, good. It was the blanking of articles and asserting that categories could replace articles that I had a problem with. Thanks Hmains (talk) 03:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

X-American_lists

Please comment: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ethnic_groups#Proposal_to_Remove_List_of_X-American_lists. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Italian actors

Um, do you mind explaining why you transcluded the AfD page here? Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 20:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue V - January 2009

It's here at long last! The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is ready, with exciting news about Darwin Day 2009. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse --ragesoss (talk) 03:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

changes to list of Hungarian Americans

Your changes of List of Hungarian Americans to List of Americans of Hungarian descent is not discussed or agreed to by anyone; is disruptive; makes this article different from all the others in Category:Lists of American people by ethnic or national origin and serves no useful WP purpose. You may be confused, but you offer no evidence that anyone else is. 'Hungarian Americans', like all other 'Booian Americans' includes the people who just arrived from Hungary and any of their descentants Your changes are just a repeat of your previous disruptive edits in this general subject area and of no help to WP. Hmains (talk) 01:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish philanthropists

Re: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 20 [1] Your comments that this Category which I created "Serves no purpose except to support the obsessions of certain editors" is inappropriate and unacceptable at Wikipedia. Disagreeing with any edit is fine, but personal attacks are not. I strongly suggest you refrain from any further such statements about anyone at Wikipedia. Thanx. Handicapper (talk) 13:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Hello. Is there a reason you have disabled the link to your user and talk page in your signature? They are provided as a default for a reason. It is important for editors who are working on collaboration and engaging in discussion to be able to contact other editors. By removing these links, you are making this process difficult. In order to contact you, I had to look through the page history for your actual user name. My understanding is that the community frowns upon this type of signature and it could be perceived as "disruptive". Viriditas (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. Please restore the link. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brownhairedgirl, try to focus on the argument on cfds and not fall back on trivialities in an attempt to "win" something. Bulldog 18:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

This does not affect the outcome of the CFD. Please read WP:SIGNATURE#Internal_links, which says "It is common practice to include a link to one or more of your user page, user talk page, and contributions page. At least one of those pages must be linked from your signature to allow other editors simple access to your talk page and contributions log.". Note that phrase "at least one of those pages must be linked from your signature": is any of it unclear to you? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you truly feel the need to annoy your fellow editors by not providing a link to your user or talk page, you must at least sign with your actual full username, i.e. "Bulldog123". Please govern yourself accordingly. See also Wikipedia:AN#User_talk:Bulldog123.23Signature. –xeno (talk) 19:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why make it harder for people to communicate with you? How is that helpful? -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bulldog123's stated reason is "it saves people from leaving me passive-aggressive messages". Disliking the messages received is no reason for disrupting communication in this way. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My comment above indicated that it was OK to not have a user or user talk page link in your signature; I then read the addition by BrownHairedGirl above. Is there a particular reason you are ignoring the generally well-regarded signature guideline? Please consider putting at least one of these links in your signature. –xeno (talk) 23:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the whole thing was brought up by two users who have a grudge against me because of content dispute. Nobody seemed to care before then. Then BrownHairedGirl jumped on the bandwagon, most likely because she's peeved I was questioning her rationale on a recent CfD. Which, frankly, is immature. And had somebody else mentioned it first, perhaps in a less passive-aggressive way (wow - another example), I would have added back the link. But now it just seems like BrownHairedGirl is having a bit of an "authority-complex" issue. The I'm an admin, how dare you not listen to me-type of thing. So, it's sort of gnawing on me to ignore her. Bulldog123 17:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

had I come across you before, all content disputes aside, I would've asked you to add a link. There's no good reason not to have one. –xeno (talk) 17:36, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh* Fine. I'll put it in when I get a chance. Bulldog123 17:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. (I wonder if perhaps you removed the link because you couldn't get the colours right? you can colour links by putting the color code inside the pipe... in case you didn't know) –xeno (talk) 17:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just for the record, there are 339 other users called Bulldog who need diffrentiation! Thanks for agreeing to put the link in, therefore! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 17:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with other complaints. Failing to provide a link is irritating, and (whatever the actual intention) it comes across as some gittish passive-aggressive agenda to disrupt the ethos of communication between users here. Enough people have told you this. Consider. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 00:33, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I've already agreed to add the link back hours ago, who the hell is this^ ? Bulldog123 00:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

So do it. Now. It's not an issue of "when you have a chance". As I'm sure you know, you just switch to signing with four tildes, thus ~~~~. You can elaborate it later. Treat it logically: ignoring emotive issues, a lot of people have told you that providing no link is disruptive to the communication that's a central part of collaboration here. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 01:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to know who you are. You're not an admin, I've never spoken to you before, yet for some reason you've decided to pop in and give your unnecessary two cents - sorry if that makes me suspicious. Bulldog123 15:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - thanks for adding in the three numbers. But as per our policy on signatures, it's ideal to have a link included. There's no reason not to. I know you've said you'll do it "when you have time," but you can do it now, very quickly. If you go to Special:Preferences, and paste the code below into the "signature" box, check the "raw signature" box, and click save. Then it'll look exa ctly the same, colourful, it'll just link too. Thanks! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 08:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[[User talk:Bulldog123|<span style='color: #900009;'>Bull</span><span style='color: #FFA500;'>dog123</span>]]

All right. Done. Jesus, never seen so much fuss over a talk page link. Bulldog123 15:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Badagnani RFC

Hello, Bulldog123. Eugene2x (talk · contribs) files WP:Requests for comment/User conduct on Badagnani (talk · contribs). Since you've known him for a long time, your input on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Badagnani would appreciated. Thanks.--Caspian blue 00:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of images

Could you please stop removing images that people have spent much time and effort searching, uploading, and aligning, such as you have done on French-Americans, Dutch-Americans, Swedish-Americans, etc. It is very time-consuming to replace what you have arbitrarily deleted without consensus. --Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it would make a lot more sense if you discuss BEFORE random replacement of images we can't even verify. I also don't think a reader would benefit in any way just by looking at a few pictures of people who are maybe the 3rd generation from a mix of cultures. GraYoshi2x►^talk 03:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't think one image-of pirate Jean Lafitte sums up the entire representation of French-Americans, ditto for Dutch, Swedes, etc. I pointed out that the editors who had added the images went to a lot of trouble, and Bulldog deleted them sans comment. End of justification.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 05:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please include edit summaries

Just a simple and friendly suggestion - I've looked through your edits for the past few months, and I've noticed that very few of them provide an edit summary. Edit summaries are extremely important on Wikipedia, and it would be helpful to the overall Wikipedia project if you could please remember to provide one with each edit, even if it is only a simple explanatory word or two. Thanks, and happy editing. --Wassermann (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Hello, Bulldog123. You have new messages at Susan118's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Forgot to leave this last night when I replied to your message, so maybe you already saw it by now. Thanks for coming by to discuss it. --Susan118 ^talk 17:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Report

Hello, Bulldog123. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#disruptive_editor_back. Exxolon (talk) 22:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Polish Americans?

You realize you removed the entire template and not the image? If you have a problem with the image, why not take it on on the Template:Polish Americans talk page? Horvat Den (talk) 18:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, Coach K? How is he not a Polish American? Dan Marino, okay, I can't find a good source for that. But Coach K? What about [2]? Horvat Den (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up on WP:AN/I. They formed a virtual shooting squad against you. By the way, why'd you remove Martha Stewart from before? She has dozens of sources calling her Polish American. I'm not even gonna to bother listing them, just google it. Horvat Den (talk) 07:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Content dispute?

It's not a content dispute when you harass everyone who contributes to ethnic articles and try to force them to adhere to your views. Read the talk page of the German American article and its archives. The issue of who constitutes a German American was resolved by consensus long ago. --Sift&Winnow 00:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. this is not a constructive use of editing privileges. Please refrain from such remarks that may be considered trolling by other editors. — Ched : ? 20:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

I sent you email last night to the address you have at your user page. Did you get it? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus, edit-warring

There was a robust talk page conversation at the Andre Geim page. It concerned both the concept and the actual text that you have now -- twice -- deleted. Kindly desist. That is edit warring, and editing against consensus. Please take this as a warning, in lieu of a template warning. Please also note that the page was only unprotected with a warning by the sysop that he was prepared to block anyone who edit-warred over this issue. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 11:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re your comment at Talk:List_of_Jewish_actors

I largely agree with your recent comments. You want to nominate this list for deletion? I'll support you. NickCT (talk) 13:56, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll probably do it, but I gotta prep myself for it first. You can't imagine the (for lack of a better word) sh*tstorm that ensues when these lists are nominated. Bulldog123 00:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I understand. Well keep in touch. I hate hate hate these kind of shinanigans and would be happy to help in anyway I can. NickCT (talk) 04:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! For your information, there is a larger discussion going on at BLP. I am not canvassing you in any way, and since we have discussed the issue at Andre Geim I just wanted to notify you that your efforts may be redundant, as there is a proposal to remove all ethnic/religious/orientation categories in Wiki. Regards, --Therexbanner (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 :I'll probably do it, but I gotta prep myself for it first. You can't imagine the (for lack of a better word) sh*tstorm that ensues when these lists are nominated. [[User talk:Bulldog123|<span style='color: #900009;'>Bull</span><span style='color: #FFA500;'>dog123</span>]] 00:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 ::Yeah.  I understand.  Well keep in touch.  I hate hate hate these kind of shinanigans and would be happy to help in anyway I can. [[User:NickCT|NickCT]] ([[User talk:NickCT|talk]]) 04:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
+Hello! For your information, there is a larger discussion going on at BLP. I am not canvassing you in any way, and since we have discussed the issue at Andre Geim I just wanted to notify you that your efforts may be redundant, as there is a proposal to remove all ethnic/religious/orientation categories in Wiki. Regards, --[[User:Therexbanner|Therexbanner]] ([[User talk:Therexbanner|talk]]) 20:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)