Jump to content

User talk:The Bushranger: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Ramy A330 (talk | contribs)
Line 58: Line 58:
<small>Delivered by [[User:MessageDeliveryBot|MessageDeliveryBot]] on behalf of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR|WikiProject NASCAR]] at 07:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC).</small>
<small>Delivered by [[User:MessageDeliveryBot|MessageDeliveryBot]] on behalf of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR|WikiProject NASCAR]] at 07:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC).</small>
<!-- Delivery requested and approved by [[User:Nascar1996]]. -->
<!-- Delivery requested and approved by [[User:Nascar1996]]. -->

== February 2012 "This is your only warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice." ==

Excuse me? I apologize for that but if I see any one of you just deleting my edit, I will destroy the edit. But since i didn't know that i will be [[blocked from editing]], then I will use a better way. I will [['''block the person from editing''']] who was removing my edit including you. Is that clear?

Revision as of 09:53, 26 February 2012

This editor is an Illustrious Looshpah and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge.

Might you assist with sourcing

...to THIS article? With hope that this is not the case, it seems the AFD nominator may not have not done as thorough a search for sources as WP:BEFORE encourages. Thanks, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • A quick Google turns up [1] and [2] among quite a few others. Looks like WP:BEFORE wasn't followed. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:08, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am inclined to agree. As the nominator has now been indef-blocked for pushing his POV and personal agenda even after being repeatedly instructed to not do so, would it be proper to procedurally close the remaining open AFDs he created as a disruptive abuse of process? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:21, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not sure about that one, to be honest. I'd be inclined to say "yes" though. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I believe the continued existance of poorly thought and rather WP:POINTY nominations of GLBT articles would act to continue disvision and animus where none should exist. And more, thay all seem to fail WP:DEL#REASON. Since he is now indef-blocked for pushing a personal agenda through his editing, it could be seen that the negative effect of his nominations could actually hurt any chances of having the block lifted anytime soon. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quack

Does this remind you of someone, perhaps that or more precisely the other? LeadSongDog come howl! 23:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, yes it does. I pinged MilborneOne about him earlier - we're keeping an eye on him, if he starts with the "a aircraft" stuff that'll be that, for now just with the cat edits there's not quite enough I think to come down like a ton of bricks just yet. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to hop over IPs between .26 and .61, since April last, w. interests in a/c and terrorism. Only .30 .39 and .40 recently. LeadSongDog come howl! 22:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, aircraft, terrorism, and disasters are Ryan's interests - he keeps coming back and back and back ever after blocks and bans and rangeblocks. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revisions to deleted page

Hi Bushranger, I have made revisions to the page you posted to my userspace for Jack Bergstrand. I believe it's ready for a review. I rolled in the pertinent information from his book page (so that one will go away) as recommended, scrubbed the marketing speak, and really scrubbed the references. Can you take a look at it or advise as to next steps? I appreciate your guidance throughout on this. Thanks! Bgarofallou (talk) 14:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks much better now; however, the 'Author and Speaker' section has, I think too much information from the book. I've trimmed it to what I believe to be a more suitable size; I'd suggest asking one more admin to take a look as well - The ed17 (talk · contribs) or Drmies (talk · contribs) might be willing to take a look - before moving it back to mainspace. It looks good though! - The Bushranger One ping only 20:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Koozie

I have to admit I never heard that term before, but I'm not into beer. Random looks at google suggest the term was in the public domain a long time ago. Here's one site with a history of sorts:[3]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not into beer either, but I have heard the term (likely due to hanging round race fans!). Looks like their leg to stand on was even more wooden than I thought - I'll get the hacksaw! - The Bushranger One ping only 01:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't rule out that someone might have tried to trademark it. Look at the Frisbee, for example, which supposedly was named for a pie tin made by the Frisbie Bakery or some such. But it's fairly clear that the term koozie is in pretty wide use. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Champ Car driver

Hi The Bushranger. Regarding the changes you made to some of the parameter names in {{Infobox Champ Car driver}} (e.g. "Wins" --> "Champ_Wins") - the reason that {{Infobox NASCAR driver}} includes the series name as part of the parameter names is that that infobox can contain data for mutiple different series (Cup, Busch, Truck, Corona, etc). Since the Champ Car driver infobox only contains data for one series, it's not really necessary to include the series name as part of the parameter name (unless you have a plan to expand the infobox in the future to cover multiple series?) My suggestion would be to remove "Champ" from the parameter names - yes it means you will have to go and re-update the 4(?) infoboxes you have already updated, but it would (mostly) "unbreak" all the ones you haven't updated yet (and would decrease the amount of effort required to update them when you do update them). Since you have undertaken to update all the existing transclusions of the template, it's your call, but that's what I would suggest. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 03:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's a good point...I'll give that a whirl. Thanks for the suggestion. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 03:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I tried simplifying the params, but they didn't "unbreak" on the ones I hadn't modified yet. Also, now that I think about it more, it might be handy to add additional series later - specifically, the IndyCar series instead of creating a seperate infobox? I think for now I'll change it back - but thanks again for the suggestion. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 03:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (February 2012)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject NASCAR at 07:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

February 2012 "This is your only warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice."

Excuse me? I apologize for that but if I see any one of you just deleting my edit, I will destroy the edit. But since i didn't know that i will be blocked from editing, then I will use a better way. I will '''block the person from editing''' who was removing my edit including you. Is that clear?