User talk:Nakon/arc2: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:36, 18 April 2008

Archives: 1

To add a new message, click HERE

Why did I get this message?

However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others.

I have never edited any articles on Wikipedia so don't understand the meaning. Please explain. Maybe this is a lame joke?

You were modifying the comments of another editor, which is not allowed. Nakon 21:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I wasn't I was adding my comments to a talk page and went back in because I forgot to sign the comment.

This edit shows that you added the content "Living in Sheffield I have been observing the progress of Wicker Riverside which is a real landmark on the banks of the Don." to the comment by User:SheffieldHoop Nakon 21:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear! my apologies. I am on a laptop and sometimes my wrist brushes the touchpad. I must have accidentally moved the cursor while typing. It was totally unintentional. I had better recheck my comment. Half of it must be missing!!

I still think the message is a bit harsh! —Preceding unsigned comment added by BuildingFreak (talk • contribs) 21:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Learning organization community at NRCan

Hi, Spent some time editing this page yesterday and it was still deleted. Is there anyway I can at least get the text back so that I can find another site to share this information with? Thank you

--Egagne (talk) 12:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link for Jon Stewart Canadian audiences

Why would a link to the man's actually tv show be inappropriate? http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/full-episodes/february-28-2008/ http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=163255&title=recap-week-of-2/26/08&byDate=true They should all be available for people to know where they can watch online. Memoemoe (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Memoemoe[reply]

Also the link posted in external links under 'Official site for The Daily Show on Comedy Central' is only available to Americans therefore I believe the link http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/full-episodes/february-28-2008/ should be available for Canadian audiences. Same content. 16:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Memoemoe

Homegain.com

I've reverted your edit here as most of the article was filled with unsubstantiated claims and name calling. Please feel free to re-add the tags you wanted to the clean version. Thanks, Nakon 01:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had added a lot of {{fact}} tags to the older version in hopes that we would be able to present the editor(s) who added those claims with a choice: either source them or withdraw them. It had been my intention to remove the chat-like comments on the next edit. Dethme0w (talk) 02:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Homegain-- do not delete

Nakon--

This is notable article because it is the first successful class action lawsuit against a web based company in the bay area. It is known that certain core members of the management team is removing facts, vandalizing the page and remove information that they would prefer be hidden. (The BBB findings, lawsuit and related references).

also, you should keep this article up because you have competitors (Zillow.com, Trulia, Zip Realty & redfin) have reference pages. Thank you Tweedlebugb (talk) 18:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Tweedlebugb[reply]

I am not going to be closing the deletion debate on the article. For the second part of your message, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Nakon 19:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nakon

It's good to see you! I didn't realize you had returned, it is nice to have you around again. Let me know if you ever need anything. Prodego ^talk 04:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppetry

Although checkuser has confirmed that the following users are sockpuppets of banned User:NisarKand:

Both accounts are still not banned. These accounts were created in July 2007, 4 months after NisarKand was banned, and have been used to not only evade the ban, but also to edit articles that are semi-protected against IP/New user-vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.140.191 (talk) 11:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above statement was posted by the controversial banned editor User:Tajik. His actions indicate that of a teen, his IP should be blocked and his message ignored because these sockpuppets are not used in distruptive activities. Besides, NisarKand is an honest person at least who doesn't hide like Tajik does. NisarKand is in his 30s and revealed himself to admin Alison for help in unblocking his primary account name due to excessive punishment and unlawful block. Please see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/NisarKand and leave a comment if you want on weather or not NisarKand should be unblocked. Thanks!--Ghulam Farook (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are also banned. Therefore you have been blocked as well. Nakon 03:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Range block from yesterday

At ANI yesterday, you said you range blocked 151.49.0.0/16 for 3 hours. That worked perfectly... until the block expired. Now, User:151.49.22.121 is doing the same thing; blanking all Templates X1 to X9. Is there a way to see how much collateral damage that range block would do if it was extended? IP seems to be from Italy. --barneca (talk) 13:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

I have asked for a deletion review of Richard Denner. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Michael Snow (talk) 18:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brooke Skye

I'm torn on how to handle this, and would like your opinion since you deleted and salted the page Brooke Skye.

Brooke Skye was created and deleted a number of times as an A7. Recently, someone created a new article under "Brooke Skye", presumably because the correct name is protected. The new article doesn't assert notability well, but it does have a halfway decent reference which makes me hesitate to delete it out of hand. It could well be that the article needs to go, but if it does stay, it should get moved to the correct name.

I originally asked User:TexasAndroid for his opinion here, as TexasAndroid was the last to touch the deleted article. TA suggested WP:DRV, but I wanted to give you a chance to weigh in first.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest DRV as well.. Nakon 00:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Here's your notification: ==Deletion Review for Brooke Skye==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Brooke Skye. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Fabrictramp (talk) 01:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revisiting deletion of Outcomes Research Consortium

Last January I posted the article, "Outcomes Research Consortium," which was immediately deleted - apparently for non-notability. I posted 2 responses countering the critique and offering to amend the article. Neither posting elicited a response. I remain interested in seeing the article in Wikipedia, since it describes a world class clinical research organization. Such an article would especially benefit the lay (non-medical) community, because it would provide a link to recent medical research and potential changes in clinical practice. Your comment and guidance are appreciated. Thank you. Dsessler 14:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

sProt

Well, it was significant in that a bunch of Orange IPs, all used by the same guy, were systematically attacking articles I've created or improved, and are listed on my User page; and temporary in that prior to protection, he could do this. He seems to have stopped now, but probably only because there's nothing left of mine that he can vandalise. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 02:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend looking into a temporary rangeblock. Nakon 02:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 02:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Michael David Garcia

Pretty old block (set twice, so will ask both blocking admins). Seems to have something to do with the username. Currently requesting unblocking. Any insight would be appreciated. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that it was some kind of vandal meme. I'd recommend not unblocking. Nakon 21:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And they've tipped their hand. Thanks for taking a look. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 01:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of For Better or For Worse

I honestly think you made a call that isn't justified by either the AfD or the deletion review. Is there a next step? Hobit (talk) 00:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I see, no. Nakon 01:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Hobit (talk) 01:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert and block

here. I got an ec on WP:AIV while trying to find the links to the previous ANI. Note also the AfD that started the drama was blanked earlier this evening rather suspiciously. Do you think that's enough to get a RFCU on (it traces to Florida, don't know where the user is) in case he decides to use an IP to evade the block? TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 03:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert this edit?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Photosensitive_epilepsy&diff=202176940&oldid=202175561

You readded it after the previous one was reverted and blocked. Nakon 00:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Community service

You are receiving this notice because you have had previous dealings with the above user, in, so far as I could tell, a less-than-positive fashion. Community service recently emailed another user, User:Tiddly Tom, expressing a desire to return to Wikipedia to constructively contribute. In an effort to assume good faith, but still respect the reasons for the block, I have set Community service a series of tasks for him to complete on his now-unprotected talk page so that he may demonstrate this willingness to contribute to us. These tasks are listed here, and the full discussion of this situation, including an email I sent to Community service just now, may be found on my talk page at User talk:Hersfold#User:Community service. I would encourage you to review these tasks, and offer any advice to the user he may need. Thank you for your time and understanding in this matter. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requiring someone to complete editorial tasks to be unblocked is a poor idea. Nakon 17:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marsden

When was this "recent" speedy keep? I can't find any after 2006. You aren't reading 2006 as 2008 by accident, are you? SuperVideoGameKid (talk) 17:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vegeta sockpuppetry

Now it's Pefiny Sam-Romio (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I have rollbacked this account's edit. Should it be blocked? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caribbean H.Q. has taken care of it, see this. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to User talk:Jimbo Wales, you will be blocked from editing. April fools. w^L^{<speak·check>} 05:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more edit like that and I'll get my developer buddy to delete you from the database. Nakon 05:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And with the new Unified username feature, that may cause the entire Wikimedia Foundation to go down. From en to meta --w^L^{<speak·check>} 05:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

		The Minor Barnstar
		I award you this Barnstar, for making minor edits to improve the quality of Articles. Thanks You! Dwilso 22:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which?

When you said a subpage is better for the discussion, which discussion were you referring to? Equazcion •✗/C • 22:27, 16 Apr 2008 (UTC)

The one that you were re-adding to the main page. Nakon 22:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ĩ was starting to worry about it and this was helpful. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both east and igorburger. I started a thread at the very bottom of ANI regarding this. Regards, NonvocalScream (talk) 22:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on your page

Well, the title pretty much says it all. Basketball 110_{Frankly, I don't give a damn.} 02:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I wouldn't have noticed that. Nakon 02:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD category tag

Thanks, have put it on the talk page now. Fences and windows (talk) 02:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit

I'm sorry that you thought it was nonsense, Nakon. While this may be a touchy subject, Garrett Mayock has indeed written "The Intricacies of Bullshit" and performed these calculations. Everything is true, including the criticism and defense. I will not repost it, but I am dissappointed that you did not attempt to verify this information.

If you continue to add nonsense to the encyclopedia, you will be blocked from editing. Nakon 03:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin.collins

Gavin's been under attack for a while now; deleting his userpage as pure vandalism was above and beyond wrong. I have restored it sans those revisions; please read the history next time. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Karistaa Usko)} 04:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why my edits were undone?

Please stop doing this. I spent a long time researching and making edits. All my edits are based on facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rearwindow (talk • contribs) 05:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This edit was reverted as it added an empty section to the article. Nakon 05:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

that's because i am in the process of adding content. I am not done yet. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rearwindow (talk • contribs) 05:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MSPA - Minnesota School Psychologists Association

Hello Nakon, I created a page that references information about our state association - MSPA Minnesota School Psychologists Association. This association is a state level group similar to NASP - National Association of School Psychologists, which currently has a wikipedia article. Please let me know what I need to do differently to allow this group to get published. We have been active in the state of Minnesota for 50 years (founded 1958) and have played a key role in legislative action for children with special needs. I don't understand why you deleted this article. Additionally, I have checked Wikipedia for other state associations and found many of them listed. What additional information do you need for me to verify the importance of including MSPA as an article on Wikipedia? Thank you, MSPAWebmaster (talk) 14:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]