User talk:Rrburke

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Caraharrison01 (talk • contribs) 06:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I did not attack anyone personally.

I don't know a thing about these people. I would advise you to tell your people to wield the stick in a more thoughtful manner and not accuse people of things they are not doing. Maybe calling them assholes was a bit too much, but they certainly were acting like assholes. You must agree.

Thanks

Hello Rrburke, HappyInGeneral (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for fixing Twilight (novel) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), now it is semi-protected. --HappyInGeneral (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Warning

Please explain why it is inappropriate to add an external link about the subject at add?

There is nothing in the article reference about the nickname of the bomber (lap bomber and underwear bomber). I was trying to update these facts. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpbmp (talk • contribs) 18:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Blogs and other self-published content do not meet Wikipedia's standard for reliable sources. Wikipedia's guideline on external links lists blogs under Links normally to be avoided. Adding external links to one's own blog or website is considered linkspamming and repeat offenders may be blocked from editing. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 18:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

i wasnt its fact —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.168.181.119 (talk) 15:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - Generation Z page

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on the Generation Z page. Your contributions are much appreciated. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 02:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the revert on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Mark Birnbaum

Greetings. I have nominated the above article for deletion. I welcome your input on the articles for deletion page.THD3 (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Hi Rrburke,

Thanks for your help in editing and removing some of the quotes from Christian Scott's wiki page. I realize now that the removed quotes came from blog sites which are not in compliance with wikipedia guidelines.

Please help me with how I can have the warning at the top of the page removed. Are there any other citations that are not good? I used Esperanza Spalding's wiki page as a guide and that page has no such citation warning although the artist's myspace page is used as a reference. Please, if you can, advise me on how to improve Christian Scott's page to get rid of the warning.

Thanks a million, C. Harrison

Sorry

Hi, just wanted to apologise for the warning before. That was done in genuine error, I think we edited at the same time and Huggle accidentally sent the warning to the wrong person! Sorry :) --5 albert square (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers! --Rrburke^ekrubrR 23:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandal on my page. BigDunc 15:31, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy to help. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 15:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Frank Conroy edit...

Good morning. I am an instructor at a public high school and was using this page as a teaching example. The changes that were made were only used to demonstrate the potential problems of using Wikipedia as a reliable, reputable source of information (given the changes that can be made to most entries). There was no intent to present false information on a long term basis and had started the undoing of the change as soon as it had posted.

My apologies for any perceived intent on our part to deceive any reader.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.90.182.96 (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Christian Eriksen

In what way do you find the adding of place of birth unconstructive? If you had taken the time to click on Middelfart, you would have seen that it leads you to the page about this Danish town. Funny as the name may sound in English, it doesn't make the fact that Christian Eriksen was born there less right - or unconstructive. 80.198.105.120 (talk) 19:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

You're right: that was my mistake. There is so much childish vandalism on Wikipedia, it's easy to be misled. But I should have been more careful. Thanks for the notice. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 19:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

That's OK. I understand. 80.198.105.120 (talk) 19:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Rrburke. You have new messages at Nancy's talk page.
Message added 17:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nancy ^talk 17:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Changes to Special Election for Massachusetts.

In regards to the change I submitted, it is a FACT that a business can hire independent contractors to do work for them - this includes candidates running for political office. I have looked over the code on multiple occasions being an independent contractor in another business area - and have never found anything even eluding to this practice as being illegal in any way shape or form.

Due to the temporary nature of a campaign, the use of Independent Contractors is not only solid business judgment as no promise of permanency can be made to a person seeking permanent placement, but also prudent because no such promises can be made - whether expressed nor implied - because if the candidate should not be victorious, then the need for a contractor ceases to exist.

I am appalled that my post was termed as being unconstructive as it is based on fact not some personal biasness.

While I have been warned of this site is slanted and not always representing fact before but I never really put much stock into what I thought was rumor. Now, I can discount Wikipedia as a viable source for information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.237.169 (talk) 20:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Your additions were unconstructive because you were adding your own comments and analysis, as well as questions about the article's accuracy, to the body of the article. If you have a concern about accuracy, you can either correct it with material drawn from reliable sources or else express your concern on the article's talk page. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 02:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the revert you did yesterday.—Sandahl (♀) 21:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy to help. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 02:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Whitegate vandalism

Hi Rrburke - thanks for fixing the vandalism on the Whitegate, Cheshire page. How can we stop this guy (I'm assuming it is the same guy) who loves his own sense of humour so much? Can I help in any way (it's on my watchlist)? Best Witchwooder (talk) 09:20, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

There's probably not much you can do besides what you've been doing: revert it when you find it. It appears to be kids. One of the IPs is from a school, and the other two are from the same ISP in Oldham. They were doing similar things Utkinton & Audlem, if you wanted to add those to our watchlist. Cheers! --Rrburke^ekrubrR 02:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks I'll add 'em. Best Witchwooder (talk) 07:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Inglourious Basterds

Hey, thank you for reverting all that vandalism that occurred on the Inglourious... article. I was editing the page and didn't notice that user, you were very quick!. Thanks for hanging around as well to remove that users follow up edits. Sorry to see they decided to vandalize your page. I think you deserve this; - JuneGloom07 Talk? 16:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your great work on reverting vandalism! JuneGloom07 Talk? 16:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --Rrburke^ekrubrR 16:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that...

I was expecting some sort of retaliation, but you caught it first. Cheers! Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 17:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I did any thing wrong. Please tell me which fact or figure that I changed without citing it, so that I can fix it.

Not a big problem: it was just a friendly reminder to cite sources. In particular, it was the claim that "These casinos are quite rare, and are always avoided by serious players." This is not a criticism of the accuracy of the claim, because I don't claim to have any knowledge about whether it's true or not. The issue is simply that when adding material to articles, it's important to cite a reliable source: things editors know from their own experience -- even when they're true -- run counter to Wikipedia's policy against original research. Happy editing! --Rrburke^ekrubrR 19:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, now I see what it was. Where then is the sourcing for the original comment. I dont see one. I can assure you that it is quite rare. And I can assure you that serious players would not play in a casino like that. i also noticed that it was YOUR first edit to that page; at least in some time. Instead of blindly editing my work, here's an idea: Look into the situation and get the information in question. I'll get a source, but why would you demand a source from me, and not the person who put bad information up there in the first place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mk5384 (talk • contribs) 19:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

You're quite right: a great many Wikipedia articles including this one already contain original research. However, that's not a rationale for adding more. I review recent changes to Wikipedia articles to remove things like original research as soon as possible after they're added. It's quite possible that if original research gets added to one of Wikipedia's several million articles while I am working, sleeping, eating or in general doing something more enjoyable than reviewing recent changes to Wikipedia articles, I may miss it. On the other hand, when I do notice original research being added, I don't feel obliged to search out references for an editor who's failed to provide them, because that's really their job.

Incidentally, in light of you knowledge in this area, have you considered participating in WikiProject Gambling --Rrburke^ekrubrR 20:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Northport Elementary School

what on earth of a reason do you have to delete my page i worked very hard on it and you just delete it you better have a good reason rrburke you wanna have an edit war fine youre on —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohata2008 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Blackjack

I would like to apologise if I was a bit curt in my response to you yesterday. I am relatively new to editing and do not wish to violate any protocol. Let me try to explain a bit better my position. I have logged close to 5000 hours playing blackjack in both casino and underground games in Atlantic City, Nevada, the islands, and Europe, among other places. I have never seen an instance of the variation mentioned in the blackjack article. As I felt it may have been inappropriate to delete the entire section, I added a line stating that this variation of blackjack was very rare. My gripe was that you deleted my edit for being unsourced, whilst allowing the original unsourced claim to stand. I am not sure how to get a source to show that something dosen't exist. As I have said, the original claim is unsourced, and not surprisingly. It is my view that the burden of proof should be on the person who made the claim to source his information. In any case, I'm sure that we can get this worked out. As far as your suggestion that I join the gambling project, I appreciate the compliment. However, whilst I do consider myself to be an expert on blackjack, I have only cursory knoweledge of other gambling games. Happy day!Mk5384 (talk) 12:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I understand your point. However, the changes I made were minor and the context I used explains in the article itself, proof of what I have contended to be true. Furthermore, I went to the talkpage of my counterpart and extended an olive branch. I explained the differences between our two versions, and suggested we collaborate to improve the article, rather than have an edit war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mk5384 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

That's commendable. You mentioned earlier that much of the article appears unsourced. Are there published materials you own or have access to that could be used to rectify that? Since you have expertise in the area, adding sources to the article would be a good way to help it along toward receiving good article status. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 16:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, it's been a while since I've been blanked or abused, I can't be trying hard enough (: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

why

I have just deleted the information on airport express (http://www.airportexpress.ru/) from this section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulkovo_Airport and I have written an explaination why I did this.

Why did you place this information back - it's outdated! 77.241.45.133 (talk) 16:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

My intention was to remove the commercial link you added. Please see:

• Wikipedia:ELNO#Links normally to be avoided, #5
• Wikipedia:Linkspam
• Wikipedia:NOTADVERTISING

--Rrburke^ekrubrR 16:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree now that you had to delete the commercial link, but why did you replace that information about these shuttles which stopped operating almost a year ago? 77.241.45.133 (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I have now removed the outdated entry. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 16:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks 77.241.45.133 (talk) 16:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)