User talk:Igorberger: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:15, 9 April 2008

Vandalism information
Severe
High
Elevated
Guarded
Low
3.70 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot
edit

Talk Archives

SandBox

User:Igorberger/MyPage

CfD nomination of Category:WikiCommonSense

I have nominated Category:WikiCommonSense (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. ZimZalaBim ^talk 22:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am banned from Wikipedia namespace so I cannot come to participate in the discussion. I guess there is no WikiCommonSense, so you might as well delete the category! Igor Berger (talk) 22:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Igor - as El_C clearly indicates above ... feel free to edit Wikipedia space if it involves yourself. That is a common sense extension of your current topic ban. In this case Category:WikiCommonSense clearly involves your previous edits and does not look as if you have convoluted the situation to become involved - so you should feel free to comment as requested.--VS ^talk 22:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the offer. I will come over to add a few pithy words. Igor Berger (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel63

While based on their editing history Rachel63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) may be a sock of Bsharvy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) this is not confirmed by checkuser, although they do edit from the same country. Squatt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), on the other hand is the same editor as Bsharvy as confirmed by checkuser. Fred Talk 23:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Fred, I knew that Squatt is Bsharvy from the edit style. Rachel could be his other account work vs. home that he uses to proxy himself. Igor Berger (talk) 23:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Israel

See Talk:Israel#BBS News link. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autoconfirmed edits

Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed Proposal has been made already and, although I think it would be an excellent idea, it was sadly rejected by the community. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need to get commonsense editors on board. Talk to this guy User:Equazcion and see what he says. I think before running a proposal through, enough people need to support it. There is such a thing as consensus shopping and canvasing, but there is also IAR. So we have to evolve, same like evolution..:) Igor Berger (talk) 17:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to comment on article quoting you

I have decided to write, in my own good time, an article about certain "recent experiences" related to Wikipedia.

I shall assume that your true name is Igor Berger.

In the above-referenced article, I shall quote, in whole or in part, your post to the "User talk" page of Tim Vickers, under the heading "evolution," dated "2 April 2008."

In the interest of fairness, and in accordance with journalistic ethics, I shall provide you with a copy of this article, prior to publication, for the purpose of feedback. I shall provide this copy through any channel that you wish (e-mail; surface post); however, I shall not provide this copy via Wikipedia "User talk." Should you choose to decline this invitation, then I shall simply report this as fact: e.g. "Igor Berger declined the author's invitation to comment." However, I shall consider the fact of your "non-response" to this invitation as subject for "fair comment" in the article.

Leroy W. Demery, Jr.

Ldemery (talk) 19:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem commenting on your article. What I wrote about vandalism still stands. Wikipedia should not be abused by users who want to push their POV in making articles against consensus. With regurds to evolution I do believe we are God's children and there is parrelel relationship between evolution and genesis. But if Wikipedia by consensus does not see that as relevent to the article, an editor does not need to play hide and seek, using sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry to elude and deceive the community. You are not here to edit war each other. Please write your article off Wikipedia and let me know when you are ready and I will be more than glad to comment. While you are at it, you may want to read this article Level of support for evolution Regards, Igor Berger (talk) 22:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Branded Asset Management

The original CSD nom wasn't mine, but I agree that the article has potential.--Deadly∀ssassin^(talk) 06:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I did some wikifying on it. If you find any online resources add them in. Igor Berger (talk) 07:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I googled it, and unfortunately I can only come up with some corporate sites. --Deadly∀ssassin^(talk) 07:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we do not want to taint the article with some corporate Spam. The area is relatively new. Big corps still think supply and demand not customer service. So better leave it as is. I found this Brand management, which we may want to link from to this article and vise versa. Also searching for "brand management" you may find a bit more resources. Igor Berger (talk) 07:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop Edit Warring on Anti-Americanism

I don't understand you. You complain about large edits made without dicussion or consensus, then you participate in an edit war over a large edit made without discussion or consensus. The article has focussed on anti-Americanism as a form of prejudice for as far back as I can research. It stated its topic was prejudice well over a year ago, as I pointed out to you on the Talk page. The longstanding consensus has been that it is primarily about a kind of bias against American policies/culture/people. So why are you suddenly insisting, with very little discussion, that the paragraph be hacked in the name of consensus? Life.temp (talk) 03:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep the discussion on article's talk page. I reverted your edits per discussion on Talk:Anti-Americanism‎ Igor Berger (talk) 04:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My topic is your behavior, so it seems better not to clutter the Talk page of the article. You did not revert "per discussion" because the discussion has not reached an agreement yet. Please wait for (or contribute to) consensus. Life.temp (talk) 00:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The love

Just doing my part And thanks for the acknowledgment. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George W. Bush

Rolling Stone is probably not a good source for evaluating US presidencies.JackWilliams (talk) 23:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think it is just Rolling Stones opinion. In the article it states, "In early 2004, an informal survey of 415 historians conducted by the nonpartisan History News Network found that eighty-one percent considered the Bush administration a "failure."" But I do understand your consern about the source. Can we find another source, because it is true that he is the worse president. Igor Berger (talk) 23:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is Washingtonpost says the same. Igor Berger (talk) 23:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the worst President is a matter of opinion, not fact. Are you suggesting that anyone who doesn't think that President Bush is the worst President ever is simply wrong? --SMP0328. (talk) 23:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to history, it is not an opinion. If you do not feal comfortable with my edit, bring it to the article talk page and let's get a consensus. Igor Berger (talk) 23:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another link by a Ph.D. in American history Just do a Google search "Bush the worst president in us history" You going to get tons of sources per WP:V, WP:N, and WP:RS. Igor Berger (talk) 00:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have clarified your wording to make it clear that those two people feel that President Bush is the worst President ever. That's the fact. Please don't POV push anymore. --SMP0328. (talk) 00:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm pretty sure you can't use fair use images on your userpage —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.12.159 (talk) 01:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trolls

Hello. Feel free to bring this up on the article's talk page. --McGeddon (talk) 12:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will repost the text to the article's talk page. Igor Berger (talk) 12:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nijongo do deska?

Umaku narimashta? Moshi shitsuya areba, boku ni kite kudasai. Oshiyete ageru. Mata Ne! Igor Berger (talk) 01:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Konninchi wa. Watashi ni ha wakarimasen. -- Cat ^chi? 15:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Daijobu, ima kara! Shiro neko - white cat gambate, Nijongo benkio shte. Soshtara, Nijon ni kuru toki wa, omoshiroy ni naru..:) Igor Berger (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Star Trek image

Hello, Igorberger. You have new messages at Voyagerfan5761's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 17:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Testing maybe...

I see your point. I didn't understand at first, but...he's looking for a block. Cheers, Lindsay 22:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was blocked for a month. I would have indefed him, but the blocking admin only gave him a month. Terable case of vandalism. Igor Berger (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

its been on the talk page all day, buddy.

@@ Line 93: / Line 93: @@
 I see your point.  I didn't understand at first, but...he's looking for a block.  Cheers, '''[[User:LindsayH|Lindsay]]''' 22:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 :Was blocked for a month. I would have indefed him, but the blocking admin only gave him a month. Terable case of vandalism. [[User:Igorberger|Igor Berger]] ([[User talk:Igorberger#top|talk]]) 22:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
+its been on the talk page all day, buddy.