User talk:Oore

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Oore, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Joe 19:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Image.

The image was deleted earlier today by Nat, for being "complete nonsense". If you think an image/page should be deleted, but aren't sure why, you can check the criteria for speedy deletion (speedy deletion = deletion of obviously bad articles/images, without needing a discussion in order to delete). Hope you find that helpful. · AndonicO ^Hail! 09:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help; if you need anything else feel free to ask me. · AndonicO ^Hail! 10:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply to your message...

Well... this is my first message... so sorry if i do it wrong way.

Well... I think so it would be better if an opportunity is provided to other side too, to express its comments. Its not fair to give one opinion and stop the other.

Its contrary to right to say. If one guy has that, why not others?

If one guy has created a page based on false things, then why give it protection?

And if given protection, why don't give the others a right to say in the similar way (you may give right only by saying that it is Muslims opionion and that non-Muslims).

Waiting for your reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Umer87 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Referencing to our Basic Books of beliefs is not a problem. I am a Muslim residing in a Muslim state and that thing I can do very easily. If edited with proves and references, would this page be edited / moved (in the manner as proposed)? Pls reply—Preceding unsigned comment added by Umer87 (talk • contribs)

Sorry because I was not able to reply at that time... It was too late night and I had to get early in the morning.

Well... I just only wanted to say that is there any way to show 2 seperate pages. one by Muslims and other by non-Muslims. So that it may be known to user that what's Muslims point of view.

I don't say that it is necessary to label 'by Muslims' and 'by non-Muslims'. It's just one way to achieve that. There may be different ways

The may reason behind this is that the matter there is totlally wrong. There it is done by saying that Shittes supports this. But you may see the opinion of the Shiite Muslims majority country, I mean Iran. As regard Sunni Muslims, It's mentioned there too, that it's not permitted. So, how can way say lie in the name of independence?

Would someone like someone else abusing Holocast in the name of independence of speach? Or what would be you opinion (I won't be doing this nor any Muslim, because Islam does not permits us) if some one starts saying bad about Prophet Christ? (I won't at all tolerate this).

If there's no independence there, so how can here be?

Here first of all its lie. And secondly, if it would have been permitted by Islam, we don't think, that the personality of our Prophet Muhammad (Sallalao Allaihi Wasalam) is as such to make pictures. We would have rather saved His real picture. Not let peoples, worth pennies, make Pictures.

Pls reply.

Umer87 (talk) 16:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

What else can I say but to thank you for supporting our point of view. It's a pleasure that you although, due to some reasons, unable to help us, but still you support our point of view.

ThankyouUmer87 (talk) 23:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hello I recently saw your anti-vandalism work and just thought that I would welcome you and direct you to Wp:Vand and WP:CVU as you seem to be interested. If you ever have any questions about being a recent changes partoller or anything to do with Wikipedia in general please do not hesitate to ask. Thanks --St.daniel ^Talk 01:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

It's no problem--St.daniel ^Talk 01:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Deletions

User:Joturner has been indefinitely blocked.

02:38, 21 July 2006 Deckiller (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Joturner (Talk | contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (user request; changed names)

--MZMcBride (talk) 05:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

AIV

You beat me reporting User talk:76.118.140.67 at the AIV. I'm glad to see people reverting at night. Keep it up.--RyRy5 (talk) 05:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

help restore the last version Otto Eugene Adams

--Teda13 (talk) 06:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

i was under the impression you had that ability from an entry under the Otto Eugene Adams portion of my talk page--Teda13 (talk) 06:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Carla Körbes

Thank you for catching the typo. I should not have missed it as I made — and detected — the exact same mistake on the entry I created for Miranda Weese. — Robert Greer (talk) 12:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Antivandal

You're welcome! Although it looks like I should have kept a better watch on your page...but I see the vandal got blocked. Hope that's the end of it. Dreadstar † 20:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The Falco Spartans

Hi,Did you delete my "The Falco Spartans" page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phaji (talk • contribs) 02:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The Boar

Hi, My self and some friends of mine agreed that a wikipedia page should be created about The Boar for a number of reasons. First, it is a new undergraduate organization at Yale that is increasingly being discussed and yet very few people know more than bits put together from various sources. In the true spirit of Wikipedia, an open source entry would enable people to bring different bits of knowledge together and paint an accurate picture of the organization. Moreover, it is a fact that it exists. The Yale Daily News is a highly reputable and well-respected publication that consistently wins awards every year... this is not some campus tabloid. Moreover, i personally find it absurd if the post were to be deleted because it is believed that the entry is not significant enough. It is significant for two reasons. First, people are aware of its existence, discussing it, and want to know more. In my mind, that is criteria enough. However, the organization itself sits amidst a much larger trend at yale regarding the prevalence of student-organized beer brewing. In this regard, the organization seems to speak to a larger shift in campus culture, one that interests people and one that is worthy of entry. The value of wikipedia is that it is something more than Encyclopedia Brittanica... that it allows individuals to determine significance, not just stodgy editors in some office building. Although i certainly understand the need to keep false posts out of wikipedia as well as to prevent people posting an individual biography, my post is intended to inform people about a real organization that exists, is growing in popularity, has sparked a genuine interest, and is part of a larger campus trend. That is more than enough for a college paper and, in my opinion, a wikipedia entry as well. Significance is not numerical, but inherently subjective, and the fact that i have taken the time to write the entry, and this response (when i actually should be doing real work) indicates that i believe it warrants an entry (as do numerous other people with whom i have discussed the organization and the creation of this page). Any deletion based on significance would be folly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcricthon (talk • contribs) 06:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI...

About the welcome you left for User:Squantorox22, I noticed you included a link to the article that he created in the template. I ended up deleting that article because it was nonsense and some kind of joke edit. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto IV Delay

I removed the {{db-vandalism}} you added to the article because it is not a vandalism article. It's not sourced and probably wrong, but that does not make it vandalism. I would recommend you either PROD or AfD the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Re your message: It's not obvious misinformation. Maybe it's true (though I doubt it), but the source is just lacking. I AGF'ed the original author, though his behavior post you tagging the article is not stellar. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)