User talk:CanadianLinuxUser/Archives6

Speedy deletion

This is a technicality, but I thought I would point out that the Dylan reynolds page was not an attack page, but rather speedy-able per criterion A7 (no indication of importance). "dylan reynolds goes to higham lane school and is going out with sarahdoughty" was not disparaging. – GorillaWarfare ^{talk • contribs} 17:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Technically, you are correct... unless this Sarah Doughty girl... did not know about it.... then it "could" have been... but I got it. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Shagrebecca

He's been reported at AIV. I doubt he's over the age of 15. Let him put whatever he wants on his Talk page...it's called "selling him enough rope to hang himself." --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Ummm... no... certain things I will not leave on a page. That is one of them. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks to be moot now anyway, he's been indef'd. Depending on how the blocking admin set things up, he might not even have access to his Talk page. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 17:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Sam Abell

I noticed that you just undid my edit at Sam Abell. I'm guessing you were trying to revert the guy who also vandalized Omar Bradley as well (since I just checked his other contributions as well)? Just making sure before I restore it. Kansan (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Fixed it... as well as a link in there. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 17:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

PCACBI Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel‎

hi....i saw you had intervened earlier. would you mind reviewing what is going on there and letting me know what the next step/s should be? it basically (this time) is a question of whether information regarding one of the founders of the organization is relevant to the organizational page or not (the org calls for an academic boycott of israel, yet the founder is enrolled in an israeli university!). thanks, i would appreciate your advice and help. (fyi - if you follow the history of this page and partricular others like Palestinian Christians, you will see that several IPs have been active in various types of inappropriate editing, have been warned, have had the page blocked for a week, etc.) Soosim (talk) 18:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I agree with the removal of this information. It is not relevant to the discussion. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 19:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Arsenic

NO citation is given for publication of "A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus" in the print version of Science. What Source could you want for something that didn't happen? This is NOT controversial. It is a simple fact. 128.210.44.60 (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Quote a publication or reliable source WP:Reliable that states that such an event happened. Just your opinion is not sufficient.That it was not published is fact. That "it was published in the print version of Science, because of the questions about the validity of the data" is your opinion. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 15:07, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

What source do you expect for the fact that something was NOT published in the print version of Science? If you look at the online version of "A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus" already cited in the articles, you can see that there are NO journal issue or page numbers indicated, unlike papers that were published in the print version. It is NOT my opinion that articles that appear in ScienceExpress as previews are generally published later in the print version. This article was NOT published in the print version.

You keep on changing your argument. First, it's opinion you find objectionable (although it is not an opinion--it is a scientific community standard), then you claim that the fact is unsourced despite the fact that the cited source for the information on the article indicates that it did not emerge in the print version. There IS obvious significance to the fact that the article was not published in the print version of Science. Otherwise, why are you so defensive about including this fact? What do you have personally at stake in preventing people from finding out the truth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.44.60 (talk) 18:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Once again, as I mentioned on your talk page. Take this up in the talk page of each article. I personally could not care less about Arsenic and the paper involved. The paper was published. It is cited as a reference in the article. Please discuss its addition, removal or its publication or lack of in the talk page of the article in question. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 18:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not criticizing a reliable source. I am providing the relevant information that the article was not published in the print version. Just because you don't understand the significance of this fact doesn't mean it is not significant. Technically it was NOT published in Science; it was only in ScienceXpress. 128.210.44.60 (talk) 20:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

As I stated these issues are what the talk pages are for. Bring them up there and not in the article itself. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Quick comment

When a new BLP says "hobbies include...potato thieving, fingering lephrechauns" is an attack page (G10), not a page that has no indication of importance (A7). Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Seank100

I'm fed up of 'trying to communicate' with Sean. If you wish comment at this ANI report. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 20:33, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm fed up with him too. In fact, I'm actually just like you and everyone else because I'm trying to stop all the problems he's causing too. Is there anything we can do to stop him? I'd be more than glad to help if I just knew what to do -- I'm still a fairly new user on Wikipedia. (well, on actually using my account anyway)

That comment was just to Lil-unique1, not you CanadianLinuxUser. I'm glad you also agree with us that Seank100 is a troublesome user though. 1Dbad (talk) 09:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Izvoarele; Griviţa

First off, no need to "welcome" me to Wikipedia, as I've been here just shy of 5 years, but thanks anyway. Second, will you please take a closer look at what you're doing here? Izvoarele, Tulcea has featured that unsourced dreck (which it is) since November 2007; if the "anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed" provision means anything, than it means we can excise it all at this point. The dreck recently added to Griviţa, Vaslui is not just unsourced, it's also not in English, or at least nothing resembling standard English. Really, how can we justify keeping any of it? - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Family Weekend

Just letting you know that I declined your speedy request for 'nonsense' because it appears to be a real thing (and was too coherent anyway - nonsense at CSD means total gibberish). I then deleted it anyway as a copyvio of http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1821426/synopsis If you can't get 'em going, get 'em coming back... Peridon (talk) 16:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

trop rapide

Merci ; en fait, je me suis aperçu, après avoir rollbacké, que ce mauvais plaisantin avait utilisé 2 ips différentes (j'avais cru que c'était les 2 mêmes) ; le temps que je repasse à la version de X2fs... tu avais déja fait le ménage ! ++ Alvar☮ 17:52, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Pas de problème :-D CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 17:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a pilot study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes’’’. cooldenny (talk) 18:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)